Home » baby (Page 18)
Category Archives: baby
Find Out What Happens and Why it Matters—This Generation Has a Rendezvous With Destiny!

A jury consist of twelve persons chosen to decide who has the better lawyer. Music is the glue which has kept this generation from falling apart in the face of incredible adult blindness and ignorance and evilness. It is the new educational system for reform and the medium for revolution. Being an entertainer, especially in times like these, is really a public service. I care about life, but, too, I care about Justice. If I cannot have both, then I choose Justice. I care about life, but then are things that I care about more than life. For that reason, I will not seek life improperly. It has seemed to many philosophers, and it appears to be supported by the convictions of common sense, that we distinguish as a matter of principle between the claims of liberty and right on the one had and the desirability of increasing aggregate social welfare on the other; and that we give a certain priority, if not absolute weight, to the former. Each member of society is thought to have an inviolability founded on justice or, as some say, on natural right, which even the welfare of everyone else cannot override. Justice denies that loss of freedom for some is made right by a greater good shared by others. The reasoning which balances the gains and losses of different persons as if they were one person is excluded. #RandolphHarris 1 of 23
Therefore in a just society the basic liberties are taken for granted and the rights secured by justice are not subject to political bargaining or to the calculus of social interests. Justice as fairness attempts to account for these common sense convictions concerning the priority of justice by showing that they are the consequence of principles which would be chosen in the original position. These judgments reflect the rational preferences and the initial equality of the contacting parties. Although the utilitarian recognizes that, strictly speaking, one’s doctrine conflicts with these sentiments of justice, one maintains that common sense precepts of justice and notions of natural right have but a subordinate validity as secondary rules; they arise from the fact that under the conditions of civilized society there is great social utility in following them for the most part and in permitting violations only under exceptional circumstances. Even the excessive zeal which we are apt to affirm these precepts and to appeal to these rights is itself granted a certain usefulness, since it counterbalances a natural human tendency to violate them in ways not sanctioned by utility. Once we understand this, the apparent disparity between the utilitarian principle and the strength of these persuasions of justice is no longer difficult. #RandolphHarris 2 of 23
Thus while the contract doctrine accepts our convictions about the priority of justice as on the whole sound, utilitarianism seeks to account for them as a socially useful illusion. A second contrast is that whereas the utilitarian extends to society the principle of choice for one human, justice as fairness, being a contract view, assumes that the principles of social choice, and so the principles of justice, are themselves the object of an original agreement. There is no reason to suppose that the principles which should regulate an association of humans is simply an extension of the principle of choice for one human. On the contrary: if we assume that the correct regulative principle for anything depends on the nature of that thing, and that the plurality of distinct persons with separate systems of ends is an essential feature of human societies, we should not expect the principles of social choice to be utilitarian. To be sure, it has not been shown by anything said so far that the parties in the original position would not choose the principle of utility to define the terms of social cooperation. This is a difficult question which we shall examine later on. #RandolphHarris 3 of 23
It is perfectly possible, from all that one knows at this point, that some form of the principle of utility would be adopted, and therefore that contract theory leads eventually to a deeper and more roundabout justification of utilitarianism. In fact a derivation of this kind is sometimes suggested by Betham and Edgeworth, although it is not developed by them in any systematic way and to my knowledge it is not found in Sidgwick. For the present I shall simply assume that the persons in the original position would reject the utility principle and that they would adopt instead, for the kinds of reasons previously sketched, the two principles of justice already mentioned. In any case, from the standpoint of contract theory one cannot arrive at a principle of social choice merely by extending the principle of rational prudence to the system of desires constructed by the impartial spectator. To do this is not to take seriously the plurality and distinctness of individuals, nor to recognize as the basic of justice that to which humans would consent. Here we may not a curious anomaly. It is customary to think of utilitarianism as individualistic, and certainly there are good reasons for this. #RandolphHarris 4 of 23
The utilitarians were strong defenders of liberty and freedom of thought, and they held that the good of society is constituted by the advantages enjoyed by individuals. Yet utilitarianism is not individualistic, at least when arrived at by the more natural courses of reflection, in that by conflating all systems of desires, it applies to society the principle of choice for one human. And thus we see that the second contrast is related to the first, since it is this conflation, and the principle based upon it, which subjects the rights secured by justice to the calculus of social interests. The last contrast that I shall mention now is that utilitarianism is a teleological theory whereas justice as fairness is not. By definition, then, the latter is a deontological theory, one that either does not specify the good independently from the right, or does not interpret the right as maximizing the good. (It should be noted that deontological theories are defined as non-teleological ones, not as views that characterize the rightness of institutions and acts independently from their consequences. All ethical doctrines worth our attention take consequences into account in judging rightness. One which did not would simply be irrational, crazy.) #RandolphHarris 5 of 23
Justice as fairness is a deontological theory in the second way. For if it is assumed that the persons in the original position would choose a principle of equal liberty and restrict economic and social inequalities to those in everyone’s interests, there is no reason to think that just institutions will maximize the good. (Here I suppose with utilitarianism that the good is defined as the satisfaction of rational desire.) Of course, it is not impossible that the most good is produced but it would be a coincidence. The question of attaining the greatest new balance of satisfaction never arises in justice as fairness; this maximum principle is not used at all. There is a further point in this connection. In utilitarianism the satisfaction of any desire has some value in itself which must be taken into account in deciding what is right. In calculating the greatest balance of satisfaction it does not matter, expect indirectly, what the desires are for. We are to arrange institutions so as to obtain the greatest sum of satisfactions; we ask no questions about their source or quality but only how their satisfaction would affect the total of well-being. Social welfare depends directly and solely upon the levels of satisfaction or dissatisfaction of the individuals. #RandolphHarris 6 of 23
Thus if humans take a certain pleasure in discriminating against one another, in subjecting others to a lesser liberty as a means of enhancing their self-respect, then the satisfaction of these desires must be weighed in our deliberations according to their intensity, or whatever, along with other desires. If society decides to deny them fulfillment, or to suppress them, it is because they tend to be socially destructive and a greater welfare can be achieved in other ways. In justice as fairness, on the other hand, persons accept in advance a principle of equal liberty and they do this without a knowledge of their more particular ends. They implicitly agree, therefore, to conform their conceptions of their good to what the principles of justice require, or at least not press claims which directly violate them. An individual who finds that one enjoys seeing others in positions of lesser liberty understands that one has no claim whatever to this enjoyment. The pleasure one takes in other’s deprivations is wrong in itself: it is a satisfaction which requires the violation of a principle to which one would agree in the original position. The principles of right, and so of justice, put limits on which satisfactions have value; they impose restrictions on what are reasonable conceptions of one’s good. #RandolphHarris 7 of 23
In drawing up plans and in deciding on aspirations humans are to take these constraints into account. Hence in justice as fairness one does not take human’s propensities and inclinations as given, whatever they are, and then seek the best way to fulfill them. Rather, their desires and aspirations are restricted from the outset by the principles of justice which specify the boundaries that human’s systems of ends must respect. We can express this by saying that in justice as fairness the concept of right is prior to that of good. A just social system defines the scope within which individuals must develop their aims, and it provides a framework of rights and opportunities and the means of satisfaction within and by the use of which these ends maybe equitably pursued. The priority of justice is accounted for, in part, by holding that the interests requiring the violation of justice have no value. Having no merit in the first place, they cannot override its claims. This priority of the right over the good in justice as fairness turns out to be a central feature of the conception. It imposes certain criteria on the design of the basic structure as a whole; these arrangements must not tend to generate propensities and attitudes contrary to the two principles of justice (that is, to certain principles which are given from the first a definite content) and they must ensure that just institutions are stable. #RandolphHarris 8 of 23
Thus certain initial bounds are placed upon what is good and what forms of character are morally worthy, and so upon what kinds of persons people should be. Now any theory of justice will set up some limits of this kind, namely, those that are required if its first principles are to be satisfied given the circumstances. Utilitarianism excludes those desires and propensities which if encouraged or permitted would, in view of the situation, lead to a lesser net balance of satisfaction. However, this restriction is largely formal, and in the absence of fairly detailed knowledge of the circumstances it does not give much indication of what these desires and propensities are. This is not, by itself, an objection to utilitarianism. It is simply a feature of utilitarian doctrines that it relies very heavily upon the natural facts and contingencies of human life in determining what forms of moral character are to be encouraged in a just society. The moral ideal of justice as fairness is more deeply embedded in the first principles of the ethical theory. This is characteristic of natural rights views (the contractarian tradition) in comparison with the theory of utility. #RandolphHarris 9 of 23
In setting forth these contrasts between justice as fairness and utilitarianism, I have had in mind only the classical doctrine. This is the view of Bentham and Sidgwick and of the utilitarian economists Edgeworth and Pigou. The kind of utilitarianism espoused by Hume would not serve my purpose; indeed, it is not strictly speaking utilitarian. In his well-known arguments against Locke’s contract theory, for example, Hume maintains that the principles of fidelity and allegiance both have the same foundation in utility, and therefore that nothing is gained from basing political obligation on an original contract. Locke’s doctrine represents, for Hume, an unnecessary shuffle: one might as well appeal directly to utility. However, all Hume seems to mean by utility is the general interests and necessities of society. The principles of fidelity and allegiance derive from utility in the sense that the maintenance of the social order is impossible unless these principles are generally respected. However, then Hume assumes that each human stands to gain, as judged by one’s long-term advantage, when law and government conform to the precepts founded on utility. No mention is made of the gains of some outweighing the disadvantages of others. #RandolphHarris 10 of 23
For Hume, then, utility seems to be identical with some form of the common good; institutions satisfy its demands when they are to everyone’s interests, at least in the long run. Now if this interpretation of Hume is correct, there is offhand no conflict with the priority of justice and no incompatibility with Locke’s contract doctrine. For the role of equal rights in Locke is precisely to ensure that the only permissible departures from the state of nature are those which respect these rights and serve the common interest. It is clear that all the transformations from the state of nature which Locke approves of satisfy this condition and are such that rational humans concerned to advance their ends could consent to them in a state of equality. Hume nowhere disputes the propriety of these constraints. His critique of Locke’s contract doctrine never denies, or even seems to recognize, its fundamental contention. The merit of the classical view as formulated by Bentham, Edgeworth, and Sidgwick is that it clearly recognizes what is at stake, namely the relative priority of the principles of justice and of the rights derived from these principles. #RandolphHarris 11 of 23
The question is whether the imposition of disadvantages on a few can be outweighed by a greater sum of advantages enjoyed by others; or whether the weight of justice requires an equal liberty for all and permits only those economic and social inequalities which are to each person’s interest. Implicit in the contrasts between classical utilitarianism and justice as fairness is a difference in the underlying conceptions of society. In the one we think of a well-ordered society as a scheme of cooperation for reciprocal advantage regulated by principles which persons would choose in an initial situation that is fair, in the other as the efficient administration of social resources to maximize the satisfaction of the system of desire constructed by the impartial spectator from the many individual systems of desires accepted as given. The comparison with classical utilitarianism in its more natural derivation brings out this contrast. B-values are not needs in the same sense that food, shelter, or companionship are. B-values are “metaneeds” and that indicates that they are the ultimate level of needs. #RandolphHarris 12 of 23
There is a distinction between ordinary need motivation and the motives of self-actualizing people, which is called metamotivation. Metamotivation is characterized by expressive rather than coping behaviour and is associated by B-values. The values of self-actualizing people include truth, goodness, beauty, wholeness or the transcendence of dichotomies, aliveness or spontaneity, uniqueness, perfection, completion, justice and order, simplicity, richness or totality, effortlessness, playfulness or humour, and self-sufficiency or autonomy. B-values are found at the end of so many different investigative roads, that the suspicion arises that there is something in common between these different paths, exempli gratia, education, art, religion, psychotherapy, peak-experiences, science, mathematics, et cetera. If this turns out to be so, we may perhaps add as another road to final values, the “cause,” the mission, the vocation, that is to say, the “work” of self-actualizing people. This introjection means that the self has enlarged to include aspects of the World and that therefore the distinction between self and not-self (outside, other) has been transcended. These B-value or metamotives are not longer only intrapsychic or organismic. They are equally inner and outer. #RandolphHarris 13 of 23
The metaneeds, insofar as they are inner, and the requiredness of all that is outside the person move toward becoming indistinguishable, that is, toward fusion. Certainly simple selfishness is transcended here and has to be defined at higher levels. For instance, we know that it is possible for a person to get more pleasure (selfish? Unselfish?) out of food through having one’s child eat it than through eating it with one’s own mouth. One’s self has enlarged enough to include one’s child. Hurt one’s child and you hurt him. Clearly the self can no loner be identified with the biological entity which is applied with blood from his heart along his blood vessels. They psychological self can obviously be bigger than its own body. There are other important consequences of this incorporation of values into the self. For instance, you can love justice and truth in the World or in a person out there. You can be made happier as your friends move toward truth and justice, and sadder as they move away from it. This is easy to understand. However, supposing you see yourself moving successfully toward truth, justice, beauty, and virtue? Then of course you may find that, in a peculiar kind of detachment and objectivity toward oneself, for which our culture has no place, you will be loving and admiring yourself, in the kind of healthy self-love that many Christians experience. #RandolphHarris 14 of 23
You can respect yourself, admire yourself, take tender care of yourself, reward yourself, feel virtuous, love-worthy, respect-worthy. You may then treat yourself with the responsibility and otherness that, for instance, a pregnant woman does, whose self now has to be defined to include not-self. So also may a person with a great talent protect it and oneself as if one were a carrier of something which is simultaneously oneself and not oneself. One may become one’s own guardian, so to speak. Less evolved persons seems to use their work more often for achieving gratification of lower basic needs, of neurotic needs, as a means to an end, out of habit, or as a response to cultural expectations, et cetera. However, it is probable that these are differences of degree. Perhaps all human beings are (potentially) metamotivated to a degree. The conventional categories of career, profession, or work may serve as channels of many other kinds of motivations, not to mention sheer habit or convention or functional autonomy. They may satisfy or seek vainly to satisfy any or all of the basic needs as well as various neurotic needs. They may be a channel for “acting out” or for “defensive” activities as well as for real gratifications. #RandolphHarris 15 of 23
All these various habits, determinants, motives, and metamotives are acing simultaneously in a very complex pattern which is centered more toward one kind of motivation or determinedness than the others. This is to say that the most highly developed persons we know are metamotivated to a much higher degree, and are basic-need-motivated to a lesser degree than average or diminished people are. Hail to you, mighty One of Heaven from ancient times till now your splendor endures. We, your children, call out to you again; as in the childhood of our race, we acknowledge our debts. God of light and love, we praise you. Not forgetting one, not leaving any out, we send our prayers to all of you. Listen to our words; you will find them sweet. Your children pray to you here. Sitting in anticipation of their coming, I open my mind to make their way smooth. May God hear what I say and answer me, blessing me with His presence. “And it came to pass that they did go forth, and began to preach the word of God unto the people, entering into their synagogues, and into their houses; yea, and even they did preach the word in their streets. And it came to pass that after much labour among them, they began to have success among the poor class of people; for behold, they were cast out of the synagogues because of the coarseness of their apparel. #RandolphHarris 16 of 23
“Therefore they were not permitted to enter into their synagogues to worship God, being esteemed by their brethren as dross; therefore they were poor as to things of the World; and also they were poor in heart. Now, as Alma was teaching and speaking unto the people upon the hill Onidah, here came a great multitude unto him, who were those of whom we have been speaking, of whom were poor in heart, because of their poverty as to the things of the World. And they came unto Alma; and the one who was the foremost among them said unto him; Behold, what shall these my brethren do, for they are despised of all humans because of their poverty, yea, and more especially by our priests; for they have cast us out of our synagogues which we have laboured abundantly to build with our own hands; and they have exceeding poverty; and we have no place to worship our God; and behold, what shall we do? And now when Alma heard this, he turned him about, his face immediately towards him, and he beheld with great joy; for he beheld with great joy; for he beheld that their afflictions had truly humbled them, and that they were in a preparation to hear the word. Therefore he did say no more to the other multitude; but he stretched forth his hand, and cried unto those whom he beheld, who were truly penitent, and said unto them: I behold that ye are lowly in heart; and if so, blessed are ye. #RandolphHarris 17 of 23
“Behold thy brother hath said, What shall we do?—for we are cast out of our synagogues, that we cannot worship our God. Behold I say unto you, do ye suppose that ye cannot worship God save it be in your synagogues only? And moreover, I would ask, do ye suppose that ye must not worship God only once in a week? I say unto you, it is well that ye are cast out of your synagogues, that ye may be humble, and that ye may learn wisdom; for it is necessary that ye should learn wisdom; for it is because that ye are cast out, that ye are despised of your brethren because of your exceeding poverty, that ye are brought to a lowliness of heart; for ye are necessarily brought to be humble. And now, because ye are compelled to be humble blessed are ye; for a human sometimes, if one is compelled to be humble, seeketh repentance; and now surely, whosoever repenteth shall find mercy; and one that findeth mercy and endureth to the end the same shall be saved. And now, as I said unto you, that because ye were compelled to be humble ye were blessed, do ye not suppose that they are more blessed who truly humble themselves because of the word? Yea, one that truly humbleth oneself, and pepenteth of one’s sins, and endureth to the end, the same shall be blessed than they who are compelled to be humble because of their exceeding poverty. #RandolphHarris 18 of 23
“Therefore, blessed are they who humble themselves without being compelled to be humble; or rather, in other words, blessed is one that believeth in the word of God, and is baptized without stubbornness of heart, yea, without being brought to know the word, or even compelled to know, before they will believe. Yea, there are many who do say: If thou wilt show unto us a sign from Heaven, then we shall know of a surety; then we shall believe. Now I ask, is this faith? Behold, I say unto you, Nay; for if a human knoweth a thing one hath no cause to believe, for one knoweth it. And now, how much more cursed is one that knoweth the will of God and doeth it not, than one that only believeth, or only hath cause to believe, and falleth into transgression? Now of his thing ye must judge. Behold, I say unto you, that it is on the one hand even as it is on the other; and it shall be unto every human according to one’s work And now as I said concerning faith—faith is not to have a perfect knowledge of things; therefore if ye have faith ye hope for things which are not seen, which are true. And now, behold, I say unto you, and I would that ye should remember, that God is merciful unto all who believe on his name; therefore he desireth, in the first place, that ye should believe, yea, even on his word. #RandolphHarris 19 of 23
“And now, he imparteth his word by angels unto humans, yea, not only men but women also. Now this is not all; little children do have words given unto them many times, which confound the wise and the learned. And now, my beloved brethren, as ye have desired to know of me what ye shall do because ye are afflicted and cast out—now I do not desire that ye should suppose that I mean to judge you only according to that which is true. For I do no mean that ye all of you have been compelled to humble yourselves; for I verily believe that there are some among you who would humble themselves, let them be in whatsoever circumstances they might. Now, as I said concerning faith—that it was not a perfect knowledge—even so it is with my words. Ye cannot know of their surety at first, unto perfection, any more than faith is a perfect knowledge. However, behold, if ye will awake and arouse your faculties, even to an experiment upon my words, and exercise a particle of faith, yea, even if ye can no more than desire to believe, let this desire work in your, even until ye believe in a manner that ye can give place for a portion of my words. Now, we will compare the word unto a seed. #RandolphHarris 20 of 23
“Now, if ye give place, that a seed may be planted in your heart, behold, if it be a true seed, or a good seed, if ye do not cast it out by your unbelief, that ye will resist the Spirit of the Lord, behold, it will begin to swell within your breasts; and when you feel these swelling motions, ye will begin to say within yourselves—It must needs be that this is a good, for it beginneth to enlarge my soul; yea, it beginneth to enlighten my understanding, yea, it beginneth to be delicious to me. Now behold, would not this increase your faith? I say unto you, Yea; nevertheless it hath not grown up to a perfect knowledge. However, behold, as the seed swelleth, and sprouteth, and beginneth to grow, then you must needs say that the seed is good; for behold it swelleth, and sprouteth, and begineth to grow. And now, behold, will not this strengthen your faith? Yea, it will strengthen your faith: for ye will say I know that this is a good seed; for behold it sprouteth and beginneth to grow. And now, behold, are ye sure that this is a good seed? I say unto you. Yea; for every seed bringeth forth unto its own likeness. Therefore, if a seed growth it is good, but if it growth not, behold it is not good, therefore it is cast away. #RandolphHarris 21 of 23
“And now, behold, because ye have tried the experiment, and planted the seed, and it swelleth and sprouteth, and beginneth to grow, ye must needs know that the seed is good. And now, behold, is your knowledge perfect? Yea, your knowledge is perfect in that thing, and your faith is dormant; ad this is because you know, for ye know that the word hath swelled your souls, and ye also know that it hath sprouted up, that your understanding doth begin to be enlightened, and you, Yea, because it is light; and whatsoever is light, is good, because it is discernible, therefore ye must know that it is good; and now behold, after ye have tasted this light is your knowledge perfect? Behold I say unto you, Nay; neither must ye lay aside your faith, for ye have only exercised your faith to plant the seed that ye might try the experiment to know if the seed was good. And behold, as the tree begineth to grow, ye will say: Let us nourish it with great care, that it may get root, that it may grow up, and bring forth fruit unto us. And now behold, if ye nourish it with much care it will get root, and grow up, ad bring forth fruit. However, if ye neglect the tree, and take no thought for its nourishment, behold it will not get any root; and when the heat of the Sun cometh and scorcheth it, because it hath no root it withers away, and ye pluck it up and cast it out. #RandolphHarris 22 of 23
“Now, this is not because the seed was not good, neither is it because the fruit thereof would not be desirable; but it is because your ground is barren, and ye will not nourish the tree, therefore ye cannot have the fruit thereof. And thus, if ye will not nourish the word, looking forward with an eye of faith to the fruit thereof, ye can never pluck of the fruit of the tree of life. However, if ye will nourish the word, yea, nourish the tree as it beginneth to grow, by your faith with great diligence, and with patience, looking forward to the fruit thereof, it shall take root; and behold it shall be a tree springing up unto everlasting life. And because of your diligence and your faith and your patience with the word in nourishing it, that it may take root in you, behold, by and by ye shall pluck the fruit thereof, which is most precious, which is sweet above all that is sweet, and which is white above all that is white, yea, and pure above all that is pure; and ye shall feast upon this fruit even until ye are filled, that ye hunger not, neither shall ye thirst. Then, my brethren, ye shall reap the rewards of your faith, and your diligence, and patience, and long-suffering, waiting for the tree to bring forth fruit unto you,” reports Alma 32.1-43. #RandolphHarris 23 of 23

Cresleigh Homes

A must-have on every home hunter’s list? Dual vanities. 😄 The homes at #PlumasRanch have Owner’s Suites that come with a spacious bathroom—aka, you will never fight over counter space again.
Please accept my hospitality, Holy Ones; by my guests at this feast. Renew the ancient bonds, continually recreated. As I give, so will you, for that is how true friends act. Great company of God, I welcome you. https://cresleigh.com/cresleigh-riverside-at-plumas-ranch/
A Great City is that which has the Greatest Men and Women!
I can get a better grasp of what is going on in the World from one good Washington dinner party than from all the background information piled on my desk. The concept of a team allows us to think of performances that are given by one or more than one performer; it also covers another case. It has been suggested that a performer may be taken in by one’s own act, convinced at the moment that the impression of reality which one fosters is the one and only reality. In such cases the performer comes to be one’s own audience; one comes to be performer and observer of the same show. Presumably one intracepts or incorporates the standards one attempts to maintain in the presence of others so that one’s conscience requires one to act in a socially proper way. It will have been necessary for the individual in one’s audience capacity the discreditable facts that one has had to learn about the performance; in everyday teams, there will be things one knows, or has known, that one will not be able to tell oneself. This intricate maneuver of self-delusion constantly occurs; psychoanalysts have provided us with the beautiful field data of this kind, under the headings of repressions and dissociation. #RandolphHarris 1 of 26
Individualistic modes of thought tend to treat processes such as self-deception and insincerity as characterological weaknesses generated within the deep recesses of the individual personality. It might be better to start from outside the individual and work inward than to star from inside the individual and work out. We may say that the starting point for all that is to come later consist of the individual performer maintaining a definition of the situation before the audience. The individual automatically becomes insincere when one adheres to the obligation of maintaining a working consensus and participates in different routines or performs a given part before different audiences. Self-deception can be seen as something that results when two different roles, performer and audience, come to be compressed into the same individual. Perhaps here we have a source of what has been called “self-destantiation,” namely, that process by which a person comes to feel estranged from oneself. When a performer guides one’s private activity in accordance with incorporated moral standards, one may associate these standards with a reference group of some kind, thus creating a non-present audience for this activity. This possibility leads us to consider a further one. #RandolphHarris 2 of 26
The individual may privately maintain standards of behaviour which one does not personally believe in, maintaining these standards because of a lively belief that an unseen audience is present who will punish deviation from these standards. In other words, an individual may be one’s own audience or may imagine an audience to be present. (In all of this we see the analytical difference between the concept of a team and that of an individual performer.) This should make us go on to see that a team may stage a performance of an audience that is not present n the flesh to witness the show. Some people live lives of isolation and loneliness in modern society. This loneliness can develop to a tragic point. There are many ways of looking at loneliness. The first is the estrangement of humans from oneself, from one’s experiencing organism. In this fundamental rift, the experiencing organism senses one meaning in experience, but the conscious self clings rigidly to another, since that is the way it has found love and acceptance from others. Thus, we have potentially fatal division, with most behavior being regulated in terms of meanings perceived in awareness, but with other meanings sensed by the physiological organism being denied and ignored because of an inability to communicate freely within oneself. #RandolphHarris 3 of 26
The other element in our loneliness is the lack of any relationship in which we communicate our real experiencing—and hence our real self—to another. When there is no relationship in which we are able to communicate both aspects of our divided self—our conscious façade and our deeper level of experiencing—then we feel the loneliness of not being in real touch with any other human being. Is this loneliness contemporary only? Perhaps. In earlier times, the individual also distrusted or ignored one’s experiencing in order to keep the regard of significant others. However, the façade one adopted, the meaning one now felt one had found in one’s experiences, became a unified and strongly supportive set of beliefs and meanings. One’s whole social group tended to perceive life and experience in the same way, so that while one had unwittingly given up one’s deepest self, at leas one had taken on a consistent, respected, approved self by which one could live. An early Puritan, for example, must have experienced much inward strain as one denied vast areas of one’s organismic experiencing. It is doubtful, however, if one experienced as much isolation and aloneness as our client today. #RandolphHarris 4 of 26
Modern humans, like the members of earlier and more homogeneous groups, deserts one’s own experiencing to take on the way of being that will being love. However, he façade one adopts is taken over only from parents or a few others, and one is continually exposed to the knowledge that although that façade is approved by some, others see life in very different fashions. There is no security in any single façade. Hence, to a degree probably unknow before, modern humans experiences one’s loneliness, one’s cut-off-ness, one’s isolation both from one’s own deeper being and from others. Some people become estranged from themselves, who initially start off as with promise because their parent’s feelings conflict with their own. There was a young lady who was engaged to a young man, but her father wished for her to break the engagement off. There was a lack of protest on her part, probably because she adopted her father’s feelings as if they were her own. If we put this episode in schematic form, her realization would be something like this: “I thought my feelings meant that I was in love. I felt I was doing the beneficial and meaningful thing to get engaged. However, my engagement was not a meaningful commitment. I cannot be guided by what I experience. To do so would be to act wrongly, and to lose my father’s love. #RandolphHarris 5 of 26
Within a few weeks of developing an Electra Complex, the young lady starts eating too much and growing above average weight—the first appearance of what was to become her major symptom. It I perhaps indicative of the beginnings of her lack of trust in herself that she begins to diet only when teased by her companions. She feels an increasing need to live her life in terms of the expectations of others, since her own impulses are unreliable. It is not difficult to see why she begins to despise herself shortly after this time, and even to perceive death as a “glorious woman.” After all, she is an untrustworthy organism, a misleading cluster of experiencings, deserving to be despised. Her diary reports “shadows of doubts and of dread,” which soon translate into dread of getting fat. Nor is it surprising that she is frightened at the “evil spirits” in her—the unaccepted and denied feelings that haunt her. I am sure this was not the first real estrangement between her self and her underlying feelings, but there seems little doubt that it was a deeply significant one. It went a long way in destroying her confidence in herself as a being capable of autonomy. Even though her good spirits return, and she has happy periods, she has given up a part of herself and introjected as her own feelings of her father. #RandolphHarris 6 of 26
During this period she is full of fluctuations. She wants to do something great; she hopes for a social revolution; she works very hard as a student; she established reading rooms for children. However, at times she is “a timid, Earthly worm”; she longs for death and has her tutor reread the sentence, “The good die young.” Occasionally, “life had triumphed again.” She has an “unpleasant affair with a teacher.” She has a “breakdown.” She is very overconcerned with her weight. When she is twenty-four, there is another point at which she even more fully loses confidence in herself. Though she still is unsure enough or herself to need her old governess with her, she is nevertheless happy in her studies. “The diary breathes joy of life and sensuality.” She falls in love with a student. This was evidently a deep commitment, judging by its lasting and pervasive qualities. She becomes engaged, but again her parents insist that her experiencing is erroneous. They demand a temporary separation. So to her it must deem that the relationship is not real, is not wise, is better given up. Once more, she distrusts and disregards her own experience and introjects her parents’ feelings. She gives up the relationship and, with it, any trust in herself as capable of wise self-direction. Only the experience of others can be trusted. At this time, she turns to her doctor for help. #RandolphHarris 7 of 26
Had she rebelled at this point, had she possessed the strength to fight for her own experiencing of her own World, she would have been true to her deeper feelings and would, quite literally, have saved her potentially autonomous self. However, instead of rebellion there is only a terrible depression and a hatred of her body, which is obviously a totally untrustworthy organism for dealing with life. The extent to which she has surrendered her self is indicated by her tragic dieting. As she says later, “Something in me rebels against becoming fat. Rebels against becoming healthy, having plump red cheeks, becoming a simple, robust woman, as corresponds to my true nature.” In other words, if she were to trust her own feelings, desires, experiences, she would become a robust, plump, young woman and marry the student she loves. However, her feelings have been proven completely unreliable, her desires and experiences totally untrustworthy guides. So she must not only deny her feelings for loved one; she also must starve and coerce her body into a form approved by others but completely opposite from her own tendencies. She has lost, completely, her trust in her own experiencing as the basis for living. #RandolphHarris 8 of 26
She finds her employee to be a possible mate, and this choice for her is approved by her family. They plan to marry. However, for more years, until age twenty-eight, she vacillates between her employee and the student she has loved. She goes to see the student and breaks off with him, leaving, in her words, an “open wound.” We know nothing of the content of this most crucial interaction, but I would speculate that her psychological life hung in the balance here. Should she trust her own experiencing and choose the person she loves, or should she choose her employee? Her won feelings are cooler toward the employee, but for him she should feel all the approved feelings she is supposed to feel. I suspect that she realized dimly that is she chose the student, she would be choosing the uncharted path of autonomous selfhood. If she chose her employee, she would be living the life expected of her by others, but it would be a safe and approved pretense. She chooses her employee and married him, thus renouncing still further any trust in herself. By the age of thirty-two, she is totally obsessed with the idea that she must make herself thin. To this end she starves herself and takes sixty laxative pills a day! Not surprisingly, she has little strength. #RandolphHarris 9 of 26
She tires psychoanalysis but she feels she is not helped. She says, “I analyzed with my mind, but everything remained theory”; and, “The analyst can give me discernment, but not healing.” However, when the analysis is broken off by circumstances, she becomes worse. During this period she speaks of her ideal love, the student. She says to her husband in a letter, “At that time you were the life I was ready to accept and to give up my ideal for. But it was…a forced resolve.” She appears to be trying desperately to have the feelings that others want her to have, but she has to force herself. From here on, the estrangement within herself leads to more estrangement and to more and more feelings of isolation from others. It is not surprising that her first attempt at suicide comes at a point when her second analyst, working with her in the hospital to which she was sent, repeats the now familiar pattern. Her husband is not allowed to be by herself because he is deemed to not be helpful, as he would destroy any lingering confidence she might have in herself as a self-directing person. Several analysts and psychiatrist diagnose her and argue over what is a correct diagnosis for her. They consider things like sever obsessive neurosis combined with manic-depressive oscillations, psychopathic constitutions progressively unfolding. While others say she is not schizophrenic, because there is no mental defect. #RandolphHarris 10 of 26
However, two other doctors agree that she is suffering from progressive schizophrenic psychosis (schizophrenia simplex). They see little hope for her and say, “It was clear that a release from the institution meant certain suicide.” The young woman is aware of a number of these discussions, and she became to see herself not as a person, but as some strange abnormal mechanism, completely out of her control, going its own way to destruction. One looks in vain through all these diagnoses for any trance of recognition that the doctors were dealing with a human person! It is not hard to understand her words: “I confronted myself as a strange person. I am afraid of myself.” Or, at another time: “On this one point I am insane—I am perishing in the struggle against my nature. Fate wanted to have me fat and strong, but I want to be thin and delicate.” Indeed, she is perishing in the struggle with her nature. Her organism wants to be healthy and strong, but the introjected “I”—the false self she has taken on to please others—wants to be, as she says at one point, thing and “intellectual.” The wise doctors, in spite of the risk of suicide come to the conclusion: “No definitely reliable therapy is possible. We therefore resolved to give in to the patient’s demand for discharge.” #RandolphHarris 11 of 26
She left the hospital. Three days later, she seemed well and happy, ate well for the first time in years, and then tool a lethal dose of poison. She was thirty-three. Her epitaph might well be her own words: “I feel myself, quite passively, the stage on which two hostile forces are mangling each other.” What went fatally wrong in the life of this young lady? She was made to feel that her own experiencing was invalid, erroneous, wrong, and unsound, and that what she should be feeling was something quite different. Unfortunately for her, her love for her parents, especially her father, was so strong that she surrendered her own capacity for trusting her experience and substituted theirs, or his. She gave up being her self, and is completely dependent on what others think. She has no way of knowing what she feels or what her opinion is. This is the loneliest state of all—an almost complete separation from one’s autonomous organism. The greatest weakness in her treatment was that no one involved seems to have related to her as a person—a person worthy of respect, a person capable of autonomous choice, a person whose inner experiencing is precious resources to be drawn upon and trusted. Rather, she seems to have been dealt with as an object. She is simply following the pattern which has already isolated her—distrusting her own experiencing and trying to believe and feel what she should feel, what the expect tells her she feels. #RandolphHarris 12 of 26
Her parents and the two analysts and the physicians never seem to have respected her enough to hear her deeply. They did not deal with her as a person capable of meeting life, a person whose experiencing is trustworthy, whose inner feelings are worthy of acceptance. How, then could she listen to herself or respect the experiencing going on within her? “I am isolated. I sit in a glass ball, I see people through a glass wall. I scream, but they do not hear me.” What a desperate cry for a relationship between two persons. She never experienced healing through meeting. There was no one who could meet her, accept her, as she was. This was a tragic case. One should feel angry at the tragic waste of a human being. A person needs to be taught that it is okay to experience love and resentment toward family members. They need to discover it is okay to both fear independent living and to be eager for independent living. It is okay to listen to your heart about gender identity, body image, intelligence, and social ideas. And that it is okay to eat, but it is also a good idea to get a fitness trainer and talk to a nutritionist. So many people are afraid of themselves, but they are ways to be the person you want to be and do some of the things you want to do, and achieve your dreams and goals. Little by little, we have to learn to experience our feelings and some of them are frightening indeed. #RandolphHarris 13 of 26
To explore and experience both the risk and the excitement of being an independent person is one of those fearful elements in life. As one experiences these different hidden facets of oneself, one would find oneself changing. This time the changed self that emerged would be based on one’s organismic reactions, one’s inner experiencing, and not on the values and expectations of others. One does not have to struggle against one’s nature, against one’s feelings. Rather, one will find that when one can be open to all one’s experiencing—both one’s inner experiencing, and one’s experiencing of the demands and attitudes of others—one would have a basis by which to live. If one can learn to be open and listen sensitively for life’s meaning, it would provide a constructive guide for one’s behaviour and for one’s life. This is not to say that this process would be smooth or comfortable. To be a person—sometimes opposing one’s parents, sometimes standing against social pressures, often choosing to act even though uncertain of the outcome—this is painful, costly, sometimes even terrifying. However, it is very precious: to be oneself is worth a high price. It also has many other valuable aspects. #RandolphHarris 14 of 26
In a therapeutic relationship, where all of oneself is accepted, one can discover that it is safe to communicate oneself more completely. There is no need to be lonely and isolated, there are others who can understand and share the meaning of one’s experience. During this process is usually when a person makes friends with oneself—and learns that one’s body, feelings, and desires are not enemy aliens but friendly constructive parts of oneself. It is unnecessary to utter, I am perishing in the struggle against my nature.” One will be in a good and communicative relationship with oneself. One will also have found it safe to be oneself full in a relationship. As a consequence, one will find oneself relating with more of oneself to others, and again discovering that it is not dangerously unsafe, but rather far more satisfying, to be one’s real self in relating to others. It is by a process that the glass wall would dissolve. One will go on to find that life is adventurous, often painful. It will be a never ending puzzlement to discover the behaviour that would best harmonize with one’s complex and contradictory feelings. However, one will be vital and real and in relationship to oneself and others. One would have resolved for oneself the great loneliness of contemporary humans. #RandolphHarris 15 of 26
In every respect in which we make an object of the person—whether by diagnosing one, analyzing one, or perceiving one impersonally in a case history—we stand in way of our therapeutic goal. To make an object of a person has been helpful in treating physical ills; it has no been successful in treating psychological ills. We are deeply helpful only when we relate as persons, when we risk ourselves as persons in the relationship, when we experience the other person as a person in one’s own right. Only then is there a meeting at a depth that dissolves the pain of aloneness in both client and therapist. “For the kingdom of God is not eating and drinking, but righteousness and peace and joy in the Holy Spirit,” reports Romans 14.17. Feelings are a primary blessing and a primary problem for human life. We cannot live without them and we can hardly live with them. Hence they are also central for spiritual formation in the Christian tradition. “Those who belong to Christ Jesus have crucified the flesh with its passions and desire,” reports Galatians 5.24. In the restoration of the individual God, feelings too must be renovated: old ones removed in many cases, or at least thoroughly modified, and new ones installed or at least heightened into a new prominence. #RandolphHarris 16 of 26
Our first inquiry as we greet people for the day is likely to be, “How are you feeling today?” Rarely will it be, “how are you thinking?” Feelings live on the front row of our lives like unruly children clamoring for attention. They presume on their justification in being whatever they are—unlike a thought, which by nature is open to challenge and invites the question, “Why?” The term “feeling” indicated a kind of “contact,” a “touch,” that is at once blind and powerful—in allure as well as in revulsion. A “touching” scene is one that evokes feelings, that “touches” us. In feelings we really know that something is “there,” and solidly so. However, it is and why it is remains obscure—though hauntingly present. This aspect of “blind power” has famously led to the description of emotions as “human bondage.” However, the quality of blind power equally extends to mere sensations or desires, which as well as emotions, can be simply overwhelming. The attraction of feeling to human minds is so great that we project it into angels. One of the most common themes found in literary and artistic portrayals of angels is how they desire to feel what human beings feel and, mainly, what they are capable of feeling because they have flesh bodies. #RandolphHarris 17 of 26
Of course, the idea is, angels would have irreversibly given up their angel status to have what they desire, and as the stories go, they sometimes do give it up. However, there is also an element of responsibility at work here. Angels protect of because they know they have more power than we do, and this gives them a certain responsibility. They will help us, because they know it is right for them to do so. And if prayer is a conversation with divine beings, it is only right that we should occasionally let them speak, too. I sit still, that my motion may not hide your presence. I do not speak, that my words may hide your voice. I will still my thoughts, that my thinking might not block your arrival. God of old, long have you waited, seemingly forgotten and outgrown, waiting with patience born of wisdom, for your children to remember you and to come to you with open hearts. Awake, come, that day is here. One more we thank you, once more the old songs rise, once more the dance steps are traced, once more your name is spoken. Never more will the altars be unattended. Never again the time of waiting. Your children look to you once again and pledge to you their faith. The author of the “Cathedral” likes the thoughts which the Sunday Collect brings to, “healthful founts in Elim green, casting a freshness over the week.” #RandolphHarris 18 of 26
Nor is it a small advantage which the Collect-type of prayer secures to any community that adopts it, that it answers the end which, as Hooker, quoting S. Augustine, tells us, the Egyptian monks proposed to themselves—namely, to preserve “that vigilant and erect attention of monks proposed to themselves—namely, to preserve “the vigilant and erect attention of mind, which in prayer is very necessary, from being wasted or dulled through continuance, if their prayers were few or long:” for which the purpose,–or, as Cassin expressed it, “both to solicit God more earnestly by frequent addresses, and to avoid the temptations of Satan drawing them into lassitude and weariness,”—they resolved that their prayers should be man and brief, like darts cast forth with energy. This is doubtless chiefly realized by many. “Now it came to pass that after the end of Korihor, Alma having received tidings that the Zoramites were perverting the ways of the Lord, and that Zorman, who was their leader, was leading the hearts of the people to bow down to dumb idols, his heart again began to sicken because of the iniquity of the people. For it was the cause of great sorrow to Alma to know of iniquity among his people; therefore his heart was exceedingly sorrowful because of the separation of the Zoramites from the Nephites. #RandolphHarris 19 of 26
“Now the Zoramites had gathered themselves together in a land which was east of the land of Zarahemla, which lay nearly bordering upon the seashore, which was south of the land of Jershon, which also bordered upon the wilderness south, which wilderness was full of the Lamanites. Now the Nephites greatly feared that the Zoramites would enter into a correspondence which the Lamanites, and that it would be the means of great loss on the part of the Nephites. And now, as the preaching of the word had a great tendency to lead the people to do that which was just—yea, it had had more powerful effect upon the minds of the people than the sword, or anything else, which had happened unto them—therefore Alma thought it was expedient that they should try the virtue of the word of God. Therefore he took Ammon, and Aaron, and Omner; and Himni he did leave in the church in Zarahemla; but the former three he took with him, and also Amulek and Zeesrom, who were at Melek; and he also took two of his sons. Now the eldest of his sons he took not with him, and his name was Helaman; but the names of those whom he took with him were Shiblon and Corianton; and these are the names of those who went with him among the Zoramites, to preach unto the word. #RandolphHarris 20 of 26
“Now the Zoramites were dissenters from the Nephites; therefore they had had the word of God preached unto them. However, they had fallen into great errors, for they would not observe to keep the commandments of God, and his statutes, according to the law of Moses. Neither would they observe the performances of the church, to continue in prayer and supplication to God daily, that they might not enter into temptation. Yea, in fine, they did pervert the ways of the Lord in very many instances; therefore, for this cause, Alma and his brethren went into the land to preach the word unto them. Now, when they had come into the land, behold, to their astonishment they found that Zoramites had built synagogues, and that they did gather themselves together on one day of the week, which day they did call the day of the Lord; and they did worship after a manner which Alma and his brethren had never beheld. For they had a place built up in the center of their synagogue, a place for standing, which was high above the head; and the top thereof would only admit one person. Therefore, whosoever desired to worship must go forth and stand upon the top thereof, and stretch forth his hands towards Heaven and cry with a loud voice, saying: Holy, holy God; we believe that thou art God, and we believe that thou art holy, and that thou wast a spirit, and that thou art a spirit, and that thou wilt be a spirit forever. #RandolphHarris 21 of 26
Holy God, we believe that thou hast separated us from our brethren; and we do not believe the tradition of our brethren, which was handed down to them by the childishness of their fathers; but we believe that thou hast elected us to be thy holy children; and also thou hast made it known unto us that there shall be no Christ. However, thou art the same yesterday, today, and forever; and thou hast elected us that we shall be saved, whilst all around us are elected to be cast by thy wrath down to hell; for the which holiness, O God, we thank thee; and we also thank thee that thou hast elected us, that we may no be led away after the foolish traditions of our brethren, which doth bind them down to a belief of Christ, which doth lead their heart to wander far from thee, our God. And again we thank thee, O God, that we are a chosen and a holy people. Amen. Now it came to pass that after Alma and his brethren and his sons had heard these prayers, they were astonished beyond all measure. For behold, every human did go forth and offer up these same prayers. Now the place was called by them Rameumptom, which, being interpreted, is the holy stand. #RandolphHarris 22 of 26
“Now, from this stand they did offer up, every human, the selfsame prayer unto God, thanking their God that they were chosen of him, and that he did not lead them away after the tradition of their brethren, and that their hearts were not stolen away to believe in things to come, which they knew nothing about. Now, after the people had all offered-up thanks after this manner, they returned to their homes, never speaking of their God again until they had assembled themselves together again to the holy stand, to offer up thanks after their manner. Now when Alma saw this his heart was grieved; for he saw that they were a wicked and a perverse people; yea, he saw that their hearts were set upon gold, and upon silver, and upon all manner of fine goods. Yea, and he also saw that their hearts were lifted up unto great boasting, in their pride. And he lifted up his voice to Heaven, and cried, saying: O, how long, O Lord, wilt thou suffer that thy servants shall dwell here below in the flesh, to behold such gross wickedness among the children of human? Behold, O God, they cry unto thee, and yet their hearts are swallowed up in their pride. Behold, O God, they cry unto thee with their mouths, while they are puffed up, even to greatness, with the vain things of the World. #RandolphHarris 23 of 26
“Behold, O my God, their costly apparel, and their ringlets, and their bracelets, and their ornaments of gold, and all their precious things which they are ornamented with; and behold, their hearts are set upon them, and yet they cry unto thee and say—We thank thee, O God, for we are a chosen people unto thee, while others shall perish. Yea, and they say that thou hast made it known unto them that there shall be no Christ. O Lord God, how long wilt thou suffer that such wickedness and infidelity shall be among this people? O Lord, wilt thou give me strength, that I may bear with mine infirmities. For I am infirm, and such wickedness among this people doth pain my soul. O Lord, my heart is exceedingly sorrowful; wilt thou comfort my soul in Christ. O Lord, wilt thou grant unto me that I may strength, that thy servants shall dwell here below in the flesh, to behold such gross wickedness among the children of humans? Behold, O God, they cry unto thee, and yet their hearts are swallowed up in their pride. Behold, O God, they cry unto thee with their mouths, while they are puffed up, even to greatness, with the vain things of the World. #RandolphHarris 24 of 26
“Behold, O my God, their costly apparel, and their ringlets, and their bracelets, and their ornaments of gold, and all their precious things which they are ornamented with; and behold, their hearts are set upon them, and yet they cry unto thee and say—We thank thee, O God, for we are a chosen people unto thee, while others shall perish. Yea, and they say that thou hast made it known unto them that there shall be no Christ. O Lord God, how long wilt thou suffer that such wickedness and infidelity shall be among this people? O Lord, wilt thou give me strength, that I may bear with mine infirmities. For I am infirm, and such wickedness among this people doth pain my soul. O Lord, my heart is exceedingly sorrowful; wilt thou comfort my soul in Christ. O Lord, wilt thou grant unto me that I may have strength, that I may suffer with patience these afflictions which shall come upon me, because of the iniquity of this people. O Lord, wilt thou comfort my soul, and give unto me success, and also my fellow labourers who are with me—yea, Ammon, and Aaron, and Omner, and also Amulek and Zeezrom, and also my two sons—yea, even all these wilt thou comfort, O Lord. Yea, wilt thou comfort their souls in Christ. Wilt thou grant unto them that they may have strength, that they may bear their afflictions which shall come upon them because of the iniquities of this people. #RandolphHarris 25 of 26
“O Lord, wilt thou grant unto us that we may have success in bringing them again unto thee in Christ. Behold, O Lord, their souls are precious, and many of them are our brethren; therefore, give unto us, O Lord, power and wisdom that we may bring these, our brethren, again unto thee. Now it came to pass that when Alma had said these words, that he clapped his hands upon all them who were with him. And behold, as he clapped his hands upon them, they were filled with the Holy Spirit. And after that they did separate themselves one from another, taking no thought for themselves what they should eat, or what they should drink, or what they should put on. And the Lord provided for them that they should hunger not, neither should they thirst; yea, and he also gave them strength, that they should suffer no manner of affliction, save it were swallowed up in joy of Christ. Now this was according to the prayer of Alma; and this because he prayed in faith,” reports Alma 31.1-38. Love is more important than what we can take. Please say with me, three times—Love! Love! Love! There exists in the World today a gigantic reservoir of good will toward us, the American people. Business underlies everything in our national life, including our spiritual life. Witness the fact that the Lord’s Prayer, the first petition is for daily bread. No one can worship God or love one’s neighbour on an empty stomach. #RandolphHarris 26 of 26
Cresleigh Homes
What is on the menu today? How about this #MillsStation Residence 2 home, complete with a large center work island, stainless steel appliances, and an open floor plan as the cherry on top. 🍒
We have a video walkthrough of this plan available on our website. Link in bio. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1Rpm_C0hXkY&feature=youtu.be
#CresleighRanch
#CresleighHomes
Blood, Toil, Tears, and Sweat—God Moves in a Mysterious Way, Survival of the Fittest!
Half of the reporters in town are looking on you as a Pulitzer Prize waiting to be won. The word norm means an authoritative standard, and correspondingly, normal means abiding by such a standard. It follows that a normal personality is one whose conduct conforms to an authoritative standard, and an abnormal personality is one whose conduct does not do so. However, having said this much we immediately discover that there are two entirely different kinds of standards that may be applied to divide the normal from the abnormal: the one statistical, the other ethical. The one pertains to the average or usual, and the other to the desirable or valuable. These two standards are not only different, but in many ways they stand in flat contradiction to one another. It is, for example, usual for people to have some noxious trends in their natures, some pathology of tissues or organs, some evidences of nervousness and some self-defeating habits; but though usual or avege, such trends are not healthy. Or again, society’s authoritative standard for a wholesome love life may be achieved by only a minority of American males. Here too the usual is not the desirable; what is normal in one sense is not normal in the other sense. #RandolphHarris 1 of 24
Certainly, unless they are taught what is legal, ethical, moral and Godly, no system of ethics in the civilized World holds up as a model for its children becoming productive members of society. It is not the actualities, but rather the potentialities, of human nature that somehow provide us with a standard for a sound and healthy personality. One hundred years ago this double meaning of norm and normal did not trouble psychology so much as it does today. In those days psychology was deeply involved in discovering average norms for every conceivable type of mental function. Means, modes, and sigmas were in the saddle, and differential psychology was riding high. Intoxicated with the new-found beauty of the normal distribution curve, psychologists were content to declare its slender tails as the one and only sensible measure of “abnormality.” Departures from the means were abnormal and for this reason slightly unsavory. In this era there grew up the concept of mental adjustment, and this concept held sway well into the decade of the 1920s. While not all psychologists adjustment with average behaviour, this implication was pretty generally present. It was, for example, frequently pointed out that an animal who does not adjust to the norm for one’s species usually dies. It was not yet pointed out that a human being who does so adjust is a bore and a mediocrity. #RandolphHarris 2 of 24
Now time have changed. Our concern for the improvement of average human behaviour is deep, for we now seriously doubt that the merely mediocre human can survive. As social anomie spreads, as society itself becomes more and more sick, we doubt that the mediocre human will escape mental disease and delinquency, or that one will keep oneself out of the clutch of dictators or succeed in preventing atomic or biological warfare. The normal distribution curve, we see, holds out no hope of salvation. We need citizens who are in a more beneficial and optimistic sense of normal, healthy and sound. And the World needs them more urgently than it ever did before. It is for this reason, I think, that psychologists are now seeking a fresh definition of what is normal and what is abnormal. They are asking questions concerning the valuable, the right, and the good as they have never asked them before. At the same time psychologists know that in seeking for a criterion of normality in this new sense they are trespassing on the traditional domain of moral philosophy. They also know that, by and large, philosophers have failed to establish authoritative standards for what constitutes the sound life—the life that educators, parents, and therapist should seek to mold. #RandolphHarris 3 of 24
And so psychologist, for the most part, wish to pursue the search in a fresh way and if they can, avoid the traditional traps of axiology. During the past few months two proposals have been published that merit serious attention. Both are by social scientists, one a psychologist in the United States of America, the other a sociologist in England. Their aim is to derive a concept of normality (in the value sense) from the condition of humans (in the naturalistic sense). Both seek their ethical imperatives from biology and psychology, not from value-theory directly. In short, they boldly seek the ought (the goal to which teachers, counsellors, therapists should strive) from the is of human nature. Many philosophers tell us that this is an impossible undertaking. However, before we pass judgment let us see what success they have had. Humans are expected to maximize those attributes that are distinctively human. The first is human’s capacity for the use of propositional language (symbolization). From this particular superiority over animals derives several specific guidelines for normality. With the assistance of symbolic language, for example, humans can delay their gratifications, holding in mind a distant goal, a remote reward, an objective to be reached perhaps only at the end of one’s life or perhaps never. #RandolphHarris 4 of 24
With the assistance of symbolic language, one can imagine a future for oneself that is far better than the present. One can also develop an intricate system of social concepts that leads one to all manner of possible relations with other human beings, far exceeding the rigid symbiotic rituals of, say, the social insects. A second distinctive human quality is related to the prolonged childhood in the human species. Dependence, basic trust, sympathy and altruism are absolutely essential to human survival, in a sense and to a degree that is maybe not always true for animals. The conception of normality has to do with a model of integrative adjustment. It follows that a sense of personal responsibility marks the normal human, for responsibility is a distinctive capacity derived from holding in mind a symbolic image of the future, delaying gratification, and being able to strive in accordance with one’s conception of the best principles of conduct for oneself. Similarly social responsibility is normal; for all these symbolic capacities can interact with the unique factor of trust or altruism. Closely related is the criterion of democratic social interest which derives from both symbolization and trust. Similarly, the possession of ideals and the necessity for self–control follow from the same naturalistic analysis. #RandolphHarris 5 of 24
A sense of guilt is an inevitable consequence of human’s failure to live according to the distinctive human pattern, and so in our concept of normality we must include both guilt and devices for expiation. Every psychologist who wishes to make minimum assumptions and who wishes to keep close to empirical evidence, and who inclines toward the naturalism of biological science prefers fact-based evidence that has not been manipulated. Manipulated and prejudice science is worthless junk. It is must like fake news and has no value other than propaganda. Nonetheless, our philosopher friends will arise to confound us with some uncomfortable questions. Is it not a distinctively human capacity, they will ask, for a possessive mother to keep her child permanently tied to her apron strings? Does any lower animal engage in this destructive behaviour? Likewise, is it not distinctively human to develop fierce in-group loyalties that lead to prejudice, contempt, and war? Is it not possible that the burden of symbolization, social responsibility, and guilt may lead a person to depression and suicide? Suicide, along with all the other destructive patterns I have mentioned, is distinctly human. #RandolphHarris 6 of 24
A philosopher who raises these questions would conclude, “No, you cannot derive the ought from the is of human nature. What is distinctively human is not necessarily distinctively good.” What are the minimum conditions for survival? When we know these minimum conditions we can declare that any situations falling below this level will lead to abnormality, and tend toward death and destruction, which COVID-19 could be symbolic of—humanity falling below minimum conditions needed to sustain a developing nation like America, and others around the World. This criterion is called the abnorm and we can define it, even if we cannot define normality, because people in general agree more readily on what is bad for humans than on what is good for them. They agree on the bad because all mortals are subject to the basic imperative of survival. The need for survival is connected to our need for growth and the need for social cohesion. These two principles are the universal conditions of all life, not merely of human life. Growth means autonomy and the process of individuation. Cohesion is the basic fact of social interdependence, involving, at least for human beings, initial trust, heteronomy, mating and the founding of family. #RandolphHarris 7 of 24
By taking an inventory of conditions deleterious to growth and cohesion we may establish the “abnorm.” As a start, the first and foremost disorders of child training is the continued or repeated interruption of physical proximity between mother and child and emotional rejection of the child by the mother are conditions that harm survival of the individual and the group. In the first criterion of abnormality lies in a rupture in the transmutation of cohesion into love. Most of what is abnormal can be traced to failures in the principle of cohesion, so that the child becomes excessively demanding and compulsive. It is abnormal (inimical to survival) if repetition of conduct occurs irrespective of the situation and unmodified by its consequences; also when one’s accomplishments constantly fall short of one’s potentialities; likewise when one’s psychosexual frustrations prevent both growth and cohesion. Normality requires a balance between individuation and socialization, between autonomy and heteronomy. When an individual identifies oneself to an extreme degree with a group, the effect is that one loses one’s value. On the other hand, a complete inability to identify has the effect that the environment loses its value for the individual. #RandolphHarris 8 of 24
In both extreme cases the dynamic relationship between individual and environment is distorted. An individual behaving in such a way is called neurotic. In a normal group each member preserves one’s individuality but accepts one’s role as participator also. While there is much agreement that the normal personality must strike a serviceable balance between growth as an individual and cohesion with society, we do not yet have a clear criterion for determining when these factors are in serviceable balance and when they are not. However, Philosophers, I fear, would shake their heads at us and ask us, “How do you know that survival is a good thing?” Further, “Why should all people enjoy equal rights to the benefits of growth and cohesion?” And, “How are we to define the optimum balance between cohesion and growth within the single personality?” We also have to worry about the relationship between abnormality and creativity. It was Nietzsche who declared, “I say unto you: a human must have chaos yet within one to be able to give birth to a dancing star.” Have not many meritorious works of music, literature, and even of science draw their inspiration not from balance but from some kind of psychic chaos? In effect that creativity and normality are not identical values. #RandolphHarris 9 of 24
On the whole the normal person will be creative, but if valuable creations come likewise from people who are slipping away from the norm of survival, this fact can only be accepted and valued on the scale of creativity, but not properly on the scale of normality. In this day of existentialism I sense that psychologist are becoming less and less content with the concept of adjustment, and correspondingly with the concepts of tension reduction, restoration of equilibrium, and homeostasis. We wonder if a human who enjoys these beatific conditions is truly human. Growth we know is not due to homeostasis but to a kind of “transiistasis.” And cohesion is a matter of keeping our human relationships moving and not in mere stationary equilibrium. Stability cannot be a criterion of normality since stability brings evolution to a standstill, negating both growth and cohesion. Dr. Freud once wrote to Dr. Fliess that he finds “moderate misery necessary for intensive work.” When people have a zero correlation between self and ideal self, it is too low for normality; it leads to such anguish that the sufferer seeks therapy. At the same time normal people are by no means perfectly adjusted to themselves. There is always a wholesome gap between self and ideal self, between present existence and aspiration. On the other hand, too high a satisfaction indicates pathology. #RandolphHarris 10 of 24
When individuals reach an extremely high coefficient for self-satisfaction, it is clear that one is pathological. Perfect correlations we might expect only from smug psychotics, particularly paranoid schizophrenics. And whatever our definition of normality turns out to be it must allow for serviceable imbalances within personality, and between person and society. There is an approach dear to the psychologist’s heart. The established criterion of normality or otherwise known as soundness, leads us to identify people who are “sound.” Teachers of graduate students in the University of California nominated a large number of people whom they considered sound, and some of the opposite trend. In testing and experimenting with these two groups, whose identities were unknow to the investigators, certain significant difference appeared. For one thing the sounder human had more realistic perceptions; they were not thrown off by distortions or by surrounding context in the sensory field. Further, on adjective check-lists they stood high on such traits as integrated pursuit of goals, persistence, adaptability, good nature. On the Minnesota Personality Inventory they were high in equanimity, self-confidence, objectivity and virility. Their self-insight was superior, as was their physical health. Finally, they came from homes where there was little or not affective rupture. #RandolphHarris 11 of 24
A healthy person will be able to “love” and to “work.” On the schedule of other qualities a healthy person possesses include among others: efficient perception of reality, philosophical humour, spontaneity, detachment, and acceptance of self and others. A normal person has a strong ego, an abnormal person has a weak ego. Whether one is normal or abnormal depends on the degree to which one can manage one’s relationships successfully. Furthermore, the earlier enthusiasm of psychologist for the normal distribution curve helps to entrench the theory of continuum. Extreme withdrawal and escape constitute psychosis. However, you may ask, do no we all do some escaping? Yes, we do, and what is more, escapism may provide not only recreation but may sometimes have a certain constructive utility, as it has in mild daydreaming. Only if the dominant process is confrontation, the process of escape can still be harmless. Left to itself escapism spells disaster. In the psychotic this process has the upper hand; in the normal person, on the contrary, confrontation has the upper hand. Following this line of reasoning we can list other processes that intrinsically generate abnormality, and those that generate normality. #RandolphHarris 12 of 24
The first list deals with catabolic (energy used to break down) functions. I would mention: Escape or withdrawal (including fantasy), repression or dissociation, other “ego defences,” including rationalization, reaction formation, projection, displacement, impulsivity (uncontrolled), restriction of thinking to concrete level, fixation of personality at a juvenile level, all forms of rigidification. The list is not complete, but the process in question, I submit, are intrinsically catabolic. They are as much so as are the disease mechanisms responsible for diabetes, tuberculosis, hyperthyroidism, or cancer. A person suffering only a small dose of these mechanisms may appear to be normal, but only if anabolic (requires energy to grow and build) mechanisms predominate. Among the latter I would list: Confrontation (or, if you prefer, reality testing) availability of knowledge to consciousness, self-insight, with its attendant humour, integrative action of the nervous system, ability to think abstractly, continuous individuation (without arrested or fixated development), functional autonomy of motives, frustration of tolerance. I realize that what I have called processes, or mechanisms, are not in all cases logically parallel. However, they serve to make my point, that normality depends on the dominance of one set of principles, abnormality upon the dominance of another. #RandolphHarris 13 of 24
The fact that all normal people are occasionally afflicted with catabolic processes does not alter the point. The normal life is marked by a preponderance of the anabolic functions; the abnormal by a preponderance of the catabolic. Investigations have told us much concerning the nature of human needs and motives, both conscious and unconscious. Much is known concerning the pathologies that result from frustration and imbalance of these needs. We know much about childhood conditions that predispose toward delinquency, prejudice, and mental disorder. A moralist might do well to cast one’s imperatives in terms of standards for child training. I can suggest, for example, that the abstract imperative “respect for persons” should be tested and formulated from the point of view for child training. The distinction between the anabolic and catabolic processes in the formation of personality represents a fact of importance. Instead of judging merely the end-product of action, perhaps the moralist would do well to focus one’s attention upon the process by which various ends are achieved. Conceivably, the moral law could be written in terms of strengthening anabolic functions in oneself and in others whilst fighting against catabolic functions. #RandolphHarris 14 of 24
Apriorism, belief in a priori principles or reasoning specifically: the doctrine that knowledge rests upon principles that are self-evident to reason or are presupposed by experience in general, is a legitimate tool of philosophy. Up to now this method as yielded a wide array of moral imperatives, including the following: so act that maxim of thy action can become a universal law; be a respecter of persons; seek to reduce your desires; harmonize your interests with the interest of others; thou art nothing, thy folk is everything; thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind…and thy neighbour as thyself. Psychologists who in their teaching and counselling follow the lines now laid down will not go far wrong in guiding personalities toward normality. “Do not speak evil against one another, brethren,” reports James 4.11. God forbids any speech (whether true or false) which runs down another person. Certainly no Christian should ever be a party to slander—making false charges against another’s reputation. Yet some do. However, even more penetrating is the challenge to refrain from any speech intends to run down someone else, even if it is totally true. Personally I can think of few commands that go against commonly accepted conventions more than this, for most people think it is okay to convey negative information if it is true. #RandolphHarris 15 of 24
Some people have had to defend themselves because no one else would. Still, no innocent person should be physically attacked and terrorized by a violent mob and forced to defend themselves. We understand that lying is immoral. However, is passing along damaging truth immoral? It seems almost a moral responsibility! By such reasoning, criticism behind another’s back is thought to be all right as long as it is based on fact. Likewise, denigrating gossip (of course it is never called gossip!) is seen as okay if the information is true. Thus many believers use truth as a license to righteously diminish others’ reputations. Related to this, some reject running down another behind one’s back, but believe it is okay if done face to face. These persons are driven by a “moral” compulsion to make others aware of their shortcomings. Fault-finding is, to them, a spiritual gift – a license to conduct spiritual search-and-destroy missions. What people like this do not know is that most people are painfully aware of their own faults – and would like to overcome them – and are trying very hard to do so. Then someone mercilessly assaults them believing they are doing their spiritual duty – and, oh, the hurt! This destructive speaking down against others can also manifest itself in the subtle art of minimizing another’s virtues, and accomplishments. #RandolphHarris 16 of 24
After being with such people, your mental abilities, athletic accomplishments, musical skills, and domestic virtues seem not to be quite as good as they were a few minutes earlier. Some of this feeling came perhaps from their words about your Ultimate Driving Machine—“what a nice little BMW”—or from surprised exclamations about what you did not know. It was also the tone of the voice, the cast of the eye, and the surgical silences. There are many sinful reasons why humans in Christ talk down to one another. Revenge over some slight, real or imagined, may be the motivation of “Christian” slander. Others imagine that their spirituality and sensitivity equips them to pull others from their ivory towers and unmask their hypocrisies. Gideon once rightly cried, “A sword for the Lord and for Gideon!” (Judges 7.20), and we may do the same, but in our case it is too often a sword of self-righteousness. Condescending words and actions may also come from the need to elevate oneself – like the Pharisee who thanked God he was not like other sinners “or even like this tax collector” (Luke 18.11). We thus enjoy the dubious elevation of walking on the bruised head of others, and coming down on innocent heads. #RandolphHarris 17 of 24
Sometimes this diminishing of others simply comes from too much empty talk. People do not have much to talk about, so they fuel the fires of conversation with the flesh of others. The abilities and motivations of the Body of Christ to run itself down could fill a library. We are all skillful in rationalizing such talk, but God’s Word still speaks: “Christians do not speak against one another.” Verbal cyanide comes in many forms. Gossip, innuendo, flattery, criticism, diminishment, are only a few of the venoms with which Christians inject each other. And the results are universal: toxic gastric juices a Devil’s feast – the swill of souls. Dear Lord in Heaven, please eat what is offered to you and transform it, as food is transformed, into blessings for me, and for all my household. The fire that burns on my hearth is the very heart of my Cresleigh Home. By feeding the fire with wood and with air, I am feeding my Cresleigh Home with what it needs most. I give you these things, fire on my hearth and more gifts will follow as we live our lives together. I light a fire on my family’s hearth and praise the God of our home. I pray to the Most High and praise the Ancestors. Hear my words, see me as I perform the rites, receive the gifts I offer you. Threshold Spirit, guardian and protector of my Cresleigh Home’s entrance, I honour you as I pass through the beautiful door. #RandolphHarris 18 of 24
God of doorways, bless my goings out, bless my comings in. Lord of the threshold, of doors and gates Lord, place where inside and outside meet: God is my threshold. Please Guard my doors, God, keeper of the keys. Watch it with care, please keep my Cresleigh Homes safe. May the blessings of God guard this door. God it is who guards our doors. The Lord commands Ammon to lead the people of Anti-Nephi-Lehi to safety—upon meeting Alma, Ammon’s joy exhausts his strength—the Nephites give the Anti-Nephi-Lehies the land of Jershon—they are called the people of Amon. About 90-77 Before Christ. “Now it came to pass that when those Lamanites who had gone to war against the Nephites had found, after their many struggles to destroy them, that it was in vain to seek their destruction, they returned again to the land of Nephi. And it came to pass that the Amalekites, because of their loss, were exceedingly angry. And when they saw that they could not seek revenge from the Nephites, they began to stir up the people in anger against their brethren, the people of Anti-Nephi-Lehi; therefore they began again to destroy them. Now this people again refused to take their arms, and they suffered themselves to be slain according to the desires of their enemies. #RandolphHarris 19 of 24
“Now when Amon and his brethren saw this work of destruction among those whom they so dearly beloved, and among those who had so dearly beloved them—for hey were treated as though they were angels sent from God to save them from everlasting destruction—therefore, when Amon and his brethren saw this great work of destruction, they were moved with compassion, and they said unto the king: Let us gather together this people of the Lord, and let us go down to the land of Zarahemla to our brethren the Nephites, and flee out of the hands of our enemies, that we be not destroyed. However, the king said unto them: Behold, the Nephites will destroy us, because of the many murders and sins we have committed against them. And Ammon said: I will go and inquire of the Lord, and if he say unto us, go down unto our brethren, will ye go? And the king said unto him: Yea, if the Lord saith unto us go, we will go down unto our brethren, and we will be any slaves among them; therefore let us go down and rely upon the mercies of our brethren. However, the king said unto him: Inquire of the Lord, and if he saith unto us go, we will go; otherwise we will perish in the land. #RandolphHarris 20 of 24
“And it came to pass that Ammon went and inquired of the Lord and the Lord aid unto him: Get this people out of this land, that they perish not; for Satan has great hold on the hearts of the Amalekites, who do stir up the Lamanites to anger against their brethren to slay them; therefore get thee out of this land; and blessed are this people in this generation, for I will preserve them. And now it came to pass that Ammon went and told the king all the words which the Lord had said unto him. And they gathered together all their people, yea, all the people of the Lord, and did gather together all their flocks and herds, and departed out of the land, and came into the wilderness which divided the land of Nephi from the land of Zarahemla, and came over near the borders of the land. And it came to pass that Ammon said unto them: Behold, I and my brethren will go forth into the land of Zarahemla, and ye shall remain here until we return; and we will try the hearts of our brethren, whether they will that ye shall come into their land. And it came to pass that as Ammon was going forth into the land, that he and his brethren met Alma, over in the place of which has been spoken; and behold, this was a joyful meeting. #RandolphHarris 21 of 24
“Now the joy of Ammon was so great even that he was full; yea, he was swallowed up in the joy of his God, even to the exhausting of his strength; and he fell again to the Earth. Now was not this exceeding joy? Behold, this is joy which none receiveth save it be the truly penitent and humble seeker of happiness. Now the joy of Alma in meeting his brethren was truly great, and also the joy of Aaron, of Omner, and Himni; but behold their joy was not that to exceed their strength. And now it came to pass that Alma conducted his brethren back to the land of Zarahemla; even to his own house. And they went and told the chief judge all the things that that happened unto them in the land of Nephi, among their brethren, the Lamanites. And it came to pass that the chief judge sent a proclamation throughout all the land, desiring the voice of the people concerning the admitting their brethren, who were the people of Anti-Nephi-Lehi. And it came to pass that the voice of the people came, saying: Behold, we will give up the land of Jershon, which is on the east by the sea, which joins the land Bountiful, which is on the south of the land Bountiful; and this land Jershon is the land which we will give unto our brethren for an inheritance. #RandolphHarris 22 of 24
“And behold, we will set our armies between the land Jershon and the land Nephi, that we may protect our brethren in the land of Jershon; and this we do for our brethren lest they should commit sin; and this their great fear came because of their sore repentance which they had, on account of their many murders and their awful wickedness. And now behold, this will we do unto our brethren, that they may inherit the land Jershon; and we will guard them from their enemies with our armies, on condition that they will give us a portion of their substance to assist us that we may maintain our armies. Now, it came to pass that when Ammon had heard this, he returned to the people of Anti0Nephi-Lehi, and also Alma with him, into the wilderness, where they had pitched their tents, and made known unto them all these things. And Alma also related unto them his conversion, with Ammon and Aaron, and his brethren. And it came to pass that it did cause great joy among them. And they went down into the land of Jershon, and took possession of the land of Jershon; and they were called by the Nephites the people of Ammon; therefore they were distinguished by that name ever after. #RandolphHarris 23 of 24
“And they were among the people of Nephi, and also numbered among the people who were of the church of God. And they were also distinguished for their zeal towards God, and also towards humans; for they were perfectly honest and upright in all things; and they were firm in the faith of Christ, even unto the end. And they did look upon shedding the blood of their brethren with the greatest abhorrence; and they never could be prevailed upon to take up arms against their brethren; and they never did look upon death with any degree of terror, for their hope and views of Christ and the resurrection; therefore, death was swallowed up to them by the victory of Christ over it. Therefore, they would suffer death in the most aggravating and distressing manner which could be inflicted by their brethren, before they would take the sword or cimeter to smite them. And thus they were a zealous and beloved people, a highly favoured people of the Lord,” reports Alma 27.1-30. O God, Whose will it runs down the order of all the ages; come to me, please look favorably on your servant’s sake. I try to live up to the order of Godly people and promote the messages in the scripture. You are the one and only God, and I approve of dedicating my service to you, Lord. Thank you for your gifts and take pity of me. #RandolphHarris 24 of 24
Cresleigh Homes

We might have found the coziest reading spot in #PlumasRanch. 😍📚
Visit our website to take a virtual tour of our homes at Plumas Ranch. Link in bio! https://cresleigh.com/cresleigh-riverside-at-plumas-ranch/
#CresleighHomes
Look down from Heaven, O Christ, on Thy flock and lambs, and bless their bodies and souls. Grant those who have received Thy sign, O Christ, on their foreheads, to be Thine own in the day of judgment.
Love Never Demands—Love is Unconditional Acceptance of One and One’s Feelings!
One that wrestles with us strengthens our nerves, and sharpens our skill. Our antagonist is our helper. We are indeed much more than what we eat, but what we eat can nevertheless help us to be much more than what we are. We have built an imaginative account of how the World may come to be represented in the nervous system of the organism. Because of this, it becomes possible to extend the imagination toward an idea of the self as also represented there, in the nervous system of the organism. We can put the self on the map. Some self-imagery is on the map to start with; we are born with it. The cortex carries mapped representations of our bodies, often called homunculi (little persons). One set of nerve-endings, when traced into the brain, maps out the endings of the nerves which activate movement: these nerve-endings sketch out the motor-homunclus. Another set of nerve-endings delineates the nerves which transmit sensations from our skin: the sensory homunculus. The homunculi are ourselves as experienced in our muscles, our bones, our skins, our glands. Their cortical mappings look weird because motor and sensory nerve-endings do not arrive in the cortex in the same proportions as our optical nerve-endings do when we look in the mirror. #RandolphHarris 1 of 24
The homunculi is the basis of the concern of the self as a place where things happen. This can be contrasted with the more personal self as an object, which refers to those regions which carry the memories of all the messages that ever reached us about what is happening to us. We are not only recipients of experience, however. Also mapped are records of what we have done, and of the impulses to action which we have experienced. This kind of self-imagery is also built into the map-imagery, of our selves as agents. Our self is on the map. It is usually also represented in the model of the situation in which we find ourselves. The model, it will be remembered, is that active part of the map which at each moment accounts for where we are in relation to our World as it is, and in relation to our World as we expect it to be, and in relation to good placed and bad places, allowing feedback processes to act gyroscopically. Thus our current sense of self (the model) is closely linked with the self on the map, giving a sense of identity and continuity, direction and value. The “model” self stands out in relation to the “map” self: “This is myself now,” “Here I am now” in relation to “This is the sort of person I am in general, with these experiences behind me, and with these hopes and fears about my well-being in general.” #RandolphHarris 2 of 24
Thus self-imagery can have an evaluative, controlling function. Our image of ourselves in the situation, and our favourite self-imagery, influence what we do. I think of myself— “I am a person who gets up early” or “I am a person who runs towards trouble and not away from it.” This is continually confirmed when I behave “like myself.” The more I can do so, the more pleased I am to think of myself in particular ways. Whenever there is incongruity between what I am doing (which is represented in my model f my self in the situation) and the person I imagine myself to be, or the person I would prefer to be (represented on the map), I am under tension to reduce the incongruity. So now we have a map, with imagery about the self as well as about the World. When there is too great an incongruity between the self on the map and the running-ahead anticipating model self, feedback processes bring about a situation in which the model self and the self-imagery on the map may correspond more closely. To put this in everyday language, I steer myself by a sense of what is “me” and I avoid behaviour which is “not me.” #RandolphHarris 3 of 24
This gives us a picture of a person with all one’s experiences stored, including experiences of the self, meeting new events either by adapting to them or by taking steps to change the environment to suit the self. Here is a self that is active, has a memory, and has direction. Once such a continuous reproduction of the environment is maintained in the highest centers, it becomes the main function of the sensory impulses to keep this apparatus of orientation up to date and capable of determining the responses to particular stimuli in the light of the whole situation. How integrated is the self? One of the tings wrong with this picture, which is quite like the common-sense idea we have of ourselves as human beings, is that it may be too unified. For a description of the process by which linkages will gradually produce a map of the relations between the stimuli acting on the organism, the smile of the map soon becomes inadequate…The classifications with which we are concerned will occur on many successive levels. We have to think of the whole system of connexions as consisting of many superimposed sub-systems which in some respects may operate independently of each other. #RandolphHarris 4 of 24
Every subsystem of this kind constitutes a partial map of the environment Such partial maps at any level serve for the guidance of a relatively more limited set of information which could be on its way to other and perhaps “higher” centers. These are called “partial selves.” Geography books helps us to a useful analogy. In an atlas there will be a master-map of Europe. However, also filed away are partial maps which show only Britain, or only France – partial selves: myself as a student, myself as an uncle. And each of these partial maps can itself be substructured further: France in Europe, Paris in France, the Louvre in Paris. There are also other kinds of partial maps, whereby partial features are abstracted from the total information on other spatial principles. Instead of abstracting France from Europe, we can abstract annual rainfall from all areas in Europe, or proneness to earthquakes, or density of population or intensity of industrial output. From my map of myself, I can abstract not only partial selves but also the number of towns I have lived in, the illness I am prone to, the sort of people I am attracted to – all kinds of subsystems. It will become important to keep in mind that there may be several subsystems, each to do with a partial view of the self, and each able to give an account of what is going on, from the perspective of that particular partial map. #RandolphHarris 5 of 24
If there is little intercommunication between these subsystems, the result would be that a person has several “partial selves,” moods, one might say, or roles. The concept of subsystems is also important when we think of psychical systems as not necessarily hierarchical, but as parts of a system in the making—of parts of the personality with some organization but not (yet) integrated with other parts. We must not think of the personality as more integrated than it is. Nor must we think of the personality as more widely conscious than it is. While the full and detailed classification of sensory impulses, corresponding to the order of sensory qualities which we know from conscious experience, is effected mainly at the highest centers, we must assume a more limited classification on somewhat similar principles to take place already at the lower levels, where certainly no conscious experience is associated with it. When we consider the development of consciousness in the mental order, we must ask ourselves what might be the criteria of consciousness. What are those special attributes of conscious behaviour by which we distinguish it from behaviour which also appears to be co-ordinated and purposive but of which the person is not “aware?” #RandolphHarris 6 of 24
In conscious behaviour a person will be able to gibe an account of what one is doing, be able to take account in one’s actions of other simultaneous experiences of which one is also conscious, and, be guided to a large extent not only by one’s current perceptions but also by images which might be evoked by the existing situation. This is very attractive and easily understood idea, that we are conscious when we can tell the story of what is happening to us. When we say that a person is able to give an account of one’s mental processes, we mean by this tat one is able to communicate them to other people by means of symbols. Symbols are concepts that can stand for other concepts. The symbols we mostly learn to use to communicate with are words, and most ordinary states of consciousness depend on words for symbol-formation and symbol use, though there are (in my view enviable) people who can also communicate to others in painting or music or dance, and there are also (in my view pitiable) people who can communicate only in these ways. To express in symbol-form what I experience myself to be can be a lifetime’s occupation. However, to sum it up simply, our sense of identity comes from the imagery of ourselves that we have on our maps—selves as objects, selves as agents, selves as seen in the mirror, and so on. #RandolphHarris 7 of 24
And we have to be able to say something about ourselves to give an account of ourselves’ to be self-conscious. So the sense of identity, at least the way I shall think of it, requires self-consciousness, an ability to use symbols, and an ability to stand back from phenomena to some extent and see them in some way as separate from one’s own stream of existence. It is, incidentally, with the latter achievement, that most of the present narrative is concerned. We are considering processes which take place long before verbal concepts have evolved. Still, his is the point at which it may be salutary to consider the place of words in the development of the personality. Because considering is a process which is done in words, and for many related reasons, it is easy to have a rather simple unquestioning belief in the validity of the words we use. A reminder is needed that words not only symbolize but also falsify our inner experiences. The use of words drastically affects our capacity to give an account of ourselves, our consciousness, and our self-consciousness. For better, and for worse, it sets the growing child a number of problems to surmount. #RandolphHarris 8 of 24
Consider, for instance, how a child learns to use sentences in which “I” is used correctly to refer to itself, and “you” to refer to others; and consider the difficulties caused by the fact that the child is addressed by others as “you” and therefore has perhaps at first learnt to think of itself as “you.” Objects, such as tables, chairs, and cars, are much more easily correctly labelled. Words are given by people who mean something to the child; this has a strong effect on the concept to which it will be attaching their verbal label. The concepts the child has constructed from experience now acquire all sorts of additional elements, based on how others use the word-labels. Moreover, once people really start talking to the child in words, concepts ca also be acquired just from what other people say—the child is no longer dependent only on experience, as animals are. The child learns “Drinking all your milk is good” and “Getting your feet wet is bad.” Who know what moral ideas it gathers from this? Someone in a song is “mighty like a rose.” What does that mean to a child? With much useful and accurate information, all kinds of nonsense enters a child’s mind. #RandolphHarris 9 of 24
We must keep remembering that the child’s concepts are not always in all respects what we think they are, though we use the same words. There must have been a time, for instance, when the child did not as yet have verbal concepts for “milk” and for “drinking.” In the very early days, messages directly to do with milk may come to be so inevitably associated with messages about comfort, warmth, arms, mouth, and so on, that the concept “milk,” which singles out the liquid bit, may not begin to be attained until the child has experienced of it in bottle or cup. We, the observers, know that the child is “drinking milk,” but the child does not, and is indeed not doing what we unthinkingly imagine it to be doing when we say “the child is drinking milk.” The general culture in which the child is brought up plays an important role in our learning to use the right words for our experiences. This particularly so when what the words refer to is not visible. The culture plays an important part in our learning to label emotional states so that they have meaning for ourselves and for others. For instance, the experience of distress is, at the beginning of life, a very undifferentiated one: not enough has happened yet for differentiation into more refined concepts. #RandolphHarris 10 of 24
More experience (including verbal learning) has happen before distress become differentiated into anger, or rage, or fight, or aggression, or assertion, or fear, or flight, or panic, or anxiety, or worry, or embarrassment, or boredom, or hurt, and so on. Using such words correctly is not just a matter of increased skill in identifying feelings and in naming them correctly is not just a matter of increased skill in identifying feelings and in naming them correctly so that others understand us. It is not just the process by which “horsey” differentiates into “horse,” “cow,” and “donkey.” Feelings are private. We cannot point at them, the way we can point to donkeys. If we wish, we can certainly consent to a set of rigorous criteria which we have agreed shall determine the proper use of each disputed word. However, what are we in touch with at the end of that process? The effect which language has on the way we organize our experience is most easily seen when we compare cultures, even cultures as closely similar as the various European ones. This gives a very convincing demonstration of the extent to which our emotional experiences are organized by the words we use, which we have been taught by the grown-ups in the culture. #RandolphHarris 11 of 24
Take a German word like fleissig, very frequently used, and compare it with its nearest English translation “industrious” – hardly ever met. Who ever speaks of an “industrious child?” (There must be some!) In Holland, many people are driftig, a state of mind frequently met and accepted among the Dutch. The nearest English translation, “hot-tempered,” is very rare and seems to me (Dutch by origin) to carry a tinge of disapproval. So early in my argument I would not wish to antagonize any potential reader by turning my eye to such technical words as “psychotic,” “narcissistic,” or “schizoid.” Though there be no such thing as Chance in the World; our ignorance of the real cause of any event has the same influence on the understanding, and begets a like species of belief or opinion. There is certainly a probability, which arises from a superiority of chances on any side; and according as this superiority increases, ad surpasses the opposite chances, the probability receives a proportionable increase, and begets still a higher degree of belief or assent to that side, in which we discover the superiority. If a die were marked with one figure or number of spots on four sides, and with another figure or number of sports on the two remaining sides, it would be more probable, that the former would turn up than the latter. #RandolphHarris 12 of 24
Though, if the die had a thousand sides marked in the same manner, and only one side different, the probability would be much higher, and our belief or expectation of the event more steady and secure. This process of the thought or reasoning may seem trivial and obvious; but to those who consider it more narrowly, it may, perhaps, afford matter for curious speculation. It seems evident, that, when the mind looks forward to discover the event, which may result from the throw of such a die, it consider the turning up of each particular side as alike probable; and this is the very nature of chance, to render all the particular events, comprehended in it, entirely equal. However, finding a greater number of sides concur in the one event than in the other, the mind is carried more frequently to that event, and meets it oftener, in revolving the various possibilities or chances, on which the ultimate result depends. This concurrence of several views in one particular event begets immediately, by an inexplicable contrivance of nature, the sentiment of belief, and gives that event the advantage over its antagonist, which is supported by a smaller number of views, and recurs less frequently to the mind. If we allow, that belief is nothing but a firmer and stronger conception of an object than what attends the mere fictions of the imagination, this operation may, perhaps, in some measure, be accounted for. #RandolphHarris 13 of 24
The concurrence of these several views or glimpses imprints the idea more strongly on the imagination; gives it superior force and vigour; renders its influence on the passions and affections more sensible; and in a word, begets that reliance or security, which constitutes the nature of belief and opinion. The case is the same with the probability of cases, as with that of chance. There are some causes, which are entirely uniform and constant in producing a particular effect; and no instance has ever yet been found of any failure or irregularity in their operation. Fire has always burned, and water suffocated every human creature: The production motion by impulse and gravity is an universal law, which has hitherto admitted of no exception. However, there are other causes, which has always been found more irregular and uncertain; nor has rhubarb always proved a purge, or opium a soporific to every one, who has taken these medicines. It is true, when any cause fails of producing its usual effect, philosophers ascribe not this to any irregularity in nature; but supposed, that some secret causes, in the particular structure of parts, have prevented the operation. Our reasonings, however, and conclusions concerning the event are the same as if this principle had no place. #RandolphHarris 14 of 24
Being determined by custom to transfer the past to the future, in all our inferences; whereas the past has been entirely regular and uniform, we expect the event with the greatest assurance, and leave no room for any contrary supposition. However, where different effects have been found to follow from causes, which are to appearance exactly similar, all these various effects must occur to the mind in transferring the past to the future, and enter into our consideration, when we determine the probability of the event. Though we give the preference to that which has been found most usual, and believe that this effect will exist, we must not overlook the other effects, but must assign to each of them a particular weight and authority, in proportion as we have fond it to be more or less frequent. It is more probable, in almost every country of EUROPE, that there will be frost sometime in JANUARY, than that the weather will continue open throughout that whole month; though this probability varies according to the different climates, and approaches to a certainty in the more northern kingdoms. Here then it seems evident, that, when we transfer the past to future, in order to determine the effect, which will result from any cause, we transfer all the different events, in the same proportion as they have appeared in the past, and conceive one to have exited a hundred times, for instance, another ten times, and another once. #RandolphHarris 15 of 24
As a great number of views do here concur in one event, they fortify and confirm it to the imagination, beget that sentiment which we call belief, and give its object the preference above the contrary event, which is not supported by an equal number of experiments, and recurs not so frequently to the thought in transferring the past to the future. Let any one try to account for this operation of the mind upon any of the received systems of philosophy, and one will be sensible of the difficulty. For my part, I shall think it sufficient, if the present hints excite the curiosity of philosophers, and make them sensible how defective all common theories are in treating of such curious and such sublime subjects. A sensation is a state of awareness or sentience, a mode of consciousness, for example, a conscious awareness of sound, colour, or pain. A visual sensation, like an experience of a tree, is a state of the soul, not a state of the eyeballs. The eyes do not see. I (my soul) see with or by means of the eyes. The eyes, and the body in general, are instruments, tools the soul uses to experience the external World. Some sensations are experiences of things outside me like a tree or a table. Others are awarenesses of other states within me like pains or itches. Emotions are a subclass of sensations and, as such, forms of awareness of things. I can be aware of something angrily or lovingly or fearful. #RandolphHarris 16 of 24
A thought is a mental content that can be expressed in an entire sentence and that only exists while it is being thought. Some thoughts logically imply other thoughts. For example, “All dogs are mammals” entails “This dog is a mammal.” If the former is true, the latter must be true. Some thoughts do not entail but merely provide evidence for other thoughts. For example, certain thoughts about evidence in a court case provide evidence for the thought that a person is guilty. A belief is a person’s view, accepted to varying degrees of strength, of how things really are. If a person has a belief (for example, that it is raining), then that belief serves as the basis for the person’s tendency or readiness to act as if the thing believed were really so (for example, the person gets an umbrella). At any given time, one can have many beliefs that are not currently being contemplated. A desire is a certain felt inclination to do, have, or experience certain things. Desires are either conscious or such that they can be made conscious through certain activities, for example, through therapy. An act of will is a volition or choice, an exercise of power, and endeavouring to do a certain thing. Remember that you pray with deeds as well as words. God likes to be remembered, even when we are not in conscious prayer. #RandolphHarris 17 of 24
Light softly glowing in the heart of my home, God of the hearth, life of my dwelling, keep my family free from discord, free from want, free from fear, free from all that would disturb us and that would disturb your perfect peace. The light from the water is here. The light from the land is here. The light from the sky is here. From below, from about, from above, light has come here to my hearth: shine there, God of Clear Sight. A celestial light you are, God. A center point are you, God. A place of warmth are you, God. The heart of our home are you, God. To you, God, I dedicated my soul in your honour. The home’s central point is a glowing light, the heart of our home is shining brightly. God, created of the Universe, please bless all of your people, all who dwell in this house. Almighty and merciful God, we beseech Thy boundless loving-kindness, that at Thy humble servants’ entrance Thou wouldest be pleased to visit with Thy salvation this Thy servants on Earth who are laying, worn with uneasiness, on this Earth. “And now, these are the words of Ammon to his brethren, which say thus: My brothers and my brethren, behold I say unto you, how great reason have we to rejoice; for could we have supposed when we started from the and of Zarahemla that God would have granted into us such great blessings? And now, I ask, what great blessings has he bestowed upon us? Can ye tell? #RandolphHarris 18 of 24
“Behold, I answer for you; for our brethren, the Lamanites, were in darkness, yea, even in the darkest abyss, but behold, how many of them are brought to behold the marvelous light of God! And this is the blessing which hath been bestowed upon us, that we have been made instrument in the hands of God t bring about this great work. Behold, thousands of them do rejoice, and have been brought into the fold of God. Behold, the field was ripe, and blessed are ye, for ye did thrust in the sickle, and did reap with your might, yea, all the day long did ye labour; and behold the number of your sheaves! And they shall be gathered into the garners, that they are not wasted. Yea, they shall not be beaten down by the storm at the last day; yea, neither shall they be harrowed up by the whirlwinds; but when the storm cometh they shall be gathered together in their place, that the storm cannot penetrate to them; yea, neither shall they be driven with fierce winds whithersoever the enemy listeth to carry them. However, behold, they are in the hands of the Lord of the harvest, and they are his; and he will raise them up at the last day. Blessed be the name of our God; let us sing to his praise, yea, let us give thanks to his holy name, for he doth work righteousness forever. #RandolphHarris 19 of 24
“Behold, how many thousands of our brethren has he loosed from the pains of hell; and they are brought to sing redeeming love, and this because of the power of his word which is in us, therefore have we not great reason to rejoice? Yes, we have reason to praise him forever, for he is the Most High God, and has loosed our brethren from the chains of hell. Yea, they were encircled about with everlasting darkness and destruction; but behold, he has brought them into his everlasting light, yea, into everlasting salvation; and they are encircled about with the matchless bounty of his love; yea, and we have been instruments in his hands of doing this great and marvelous work. Therefore, let us glory, yea, we will glory in the Lord; yea, we will rejoice, for our joy is full; yea, we will praise our God forever. Behold, who can glory too much in the Lord? Yea, who can say too much of his great power, and of his mercy, and of his long-suffering towards the children of human? Behold, I say unto you, I cannot say the smallest part which I feel. Who could have supposed that our God would have been so merciful as to have snatched us from our awful, sinful, and polluted state? Behold, we went for the even in wrath, with mighty threatenings to destroy his church. #RandolphHarris 20 of 24
“Oh then, why did he not consign us to an awful destruction, yea, why did he not let the sword of his justice fall upon us, and doom us to eternal despair? Oh, my soul, almost as it were, fleeth at the thought. Behold, he did not exercise his justice upon us, but in his great mercy hath brought us over that everlasting gulf of death and misery, even to the salvation of our souls. Nd now behold, my brethren, what natural human is there that knoweth these things? I say unto you, there is none that knowth these things, save it be the penitent. Yea, one that repeneth and exerciseth faith, and bringeth forth good works, and prayeth continually without ceasing—unto such it is given t know the mysteries of God; yea, unto such it shall be given to reveal things which never have been revealed; yea, and it shall be given unto such to bring thousands of souls to repentance, even as it has been given unto us to bring these our brethren to repentance. Now do ye remember, my brethren, that we said unto our brethren in the land of Zarahemla, we go up to the land of Nephi, to preach unto our brethren, the Lamanites, and they laughed us to scorn? For they said unto us: Do ye suppose that ye can bring the Lamanites to the knowledge of the truth? #RandolphHarris 21 of 24
“Do ye suppose that ye can convince the Lamanites of the incorrectness of the traditions of their fathers, as stiffnecked a people as they are; whose hearts delight in the shedding of blood; whose days have been spent in the grossest iniquity; whose ways have been the ways of a transgressor from the beginning? Now my brethren, ye remember that this was their language. And moreover they did say: Let us take up arms against them, that we destroy them and their iniquity out of the land, lest they overrun us and destroy us. However, behold, my beloved brethren, we came into the wilderness with the intent to destroy our brethren, but with the intent that perhaps we might save come few of their souls. Now when our hearts were depressed, and we were about to turn back, behold, the Lord comforted us, and said: Go amongst thy brethren, the Lamanites, and bear with patience thine afflictions, and I will give unto you success. And now behold, we have come, and been forth amongst them; and we have been patient in our sufferings, and we have suffered every privation; yea, we have traveled from house to house, relying upon the mercies of the World—not upon the mercies of the World alone but upon the mercies of God. #RandolphHarris 22 of 24
“And we have entered into their houses and taught them, and we have taught them in their streets; yea, and we have taught them upon their hills; and we have also entered into their temples and their synagogues and taught them; and we have been cast out, and mocked, and spit upon, and smote upon our cheeks; and we have been stoned and taken and bound with strong cords, and cast into prison; and through the power and wisdom of God we have been delivered again. And we have suffered all manner of afflictions, and all this, that perhaps we might be the means of saving some soul; and we supposed that our joy would be full if perhaps we could be the means of saving some. Now behold, we can look forth and see the fruits of our labours; and are they few? I say unto you, Nay, they are many; yea, and we can witness of their sincerity, because of their love towards their brethren and also towards us. For behold, they had rather sacrifice their lives than even to take the life of their enemy; and they have buried their weapons of war deep in the Earth, because of their love towards their brethren. And now behold I say unto you, has there been so great love in all the land? Behold, I say unto you, Nay, there has not, even among the Nephites. For behold, they would take up arms against their brethren; they would not suffer themselves to be slain. #RandolphHarris 23 of 24
“However, behold how many of these have laid down their lives; and we know that they have gone to their God, because of their love and of their hatred to sin. Now have we not reason to rejoice? Yea, I say unto you, there never were humans that had so great reason to rejoice as we, since the World began; yea, and my joy is carried away, even unto boasting in my God; for he has all power, all wisdom, and all the understanding; he comprehendeth all things, and he is a merciful Being, even unto salvation, to those who will repent and believe on his name. Now if this is boasting, even so will I boast; for this is my life and my light, my joy and my salvation, and my redemption for everlasting wo. Yea, blessed is the name of my God, who has been mindful of this people, who are a branch of the three of Israel, and has been lost from its body in a strange land; yea, I say, blessed be the name of my God, who has been mindful of us, wanderers in a strange land. Now my brethren, we see that God is mindful of every people, whatsoever land they may be in; yea, he numbereth his people, and his bowels of mercy are over all the Earth. Now this is my joy, and my great thanksgiving; yea, and I will give thanks unto my God forever. Amen,” reports Alma 26.1-37. #RandolphHarris 24 of 24
Cresleigh Homes
We are opting to call this #BrightonStation Residence 3 island an ‘ice cap’ after the hot weekend we Have had. 🥵 Do not worry, it still comes equipped with the undermount sink and quartz countertops you know and love. 😉
Watch a video walkthrough of this and other #CresleighRanch homes on our website. Link in bio! https://cresleigh.com/brighton-station/residence-3/
May the Father bless thee, Who created all things in the beginning; May the Son of God heal thee; May the Holy Ghost enlighten thee, guard thy body, save thy soul, direct thy thoughts, and bring thee safe to the Heavenly country; Who liveth and reigneth God, in a perfect Trinity, throughout all ages. #CresleighHomes
Music, When Soft Voices Die, Vibrates in the Memory—If Music be the Food of Love, Play on!
There is a young and impressionable mind out there that is very hungry for information…It has latched on to an electronic tube as its main source of nourishment. As a whole, the Democratic Republic of the Congo contains 615,942 square miles of forest. and it is known for its high levels of biodiversity, including more than 600 tree species and 10,000 animal species. Some of its most famous residents include forest elephant, gorillas, chimpanzees, okapi, leopards, hippos, and lions. Researchers has found that Central African forests generally have taller trees but lower density of small tress than forest in the Amazon or Borneo. That is because Elephants, gorillas, and large herbivores keep the density of small trees very low through predation, reducing competition for large trees. However, in areas where these animals have been depleted by hunting, forests tend to be shorter and denser with small trees. However, between 2000 and 2010, the country lost 14,331 square miles of forest. It risks being left in a fragmented and severely degraded state due to the growing threat of deforestation carried out to clear the illegal logging. If the current trend continues, the entire forest will be gone by the end of this century, 2100 A.D. #RandolphHarris 1 of 20
Understanding tropical deforestation is important because forests store vast amounts of carbon. Deforestation releases carbon to the atmosphere and prevents the forest from taking up more carbon, and this increases global temperatures and poor air quality. Deforestation also leads to the death of animals and makes it hard for the native to find much needed food. Also, the natives are not allowed to cut down trees because every tree that cut down costs them a fine that is ten times the minimum wages, and a jail sentence. However, since this country is poor, big corporations cannot be stopped from logging trees, and cut them down to plunder. The first inhabitants of these lands, the indigenous, are left forgotten in a corner, while the looters grow and become stronger. The natives have their history and try to defend themselves and their homes so they will not die. The threat to the rainforest seems like a joke because it is a single county, the country of money, put itself above all flags. When they utter, “Globalization,” many think it is absurd because it is an order in which money is the only country served and the borders are erased, not our of fraternity but because of the bleeding that fattens the powerful without nationality. #RandolphHarris 2 of 20
The lie of globalization became a universal coin, and for a few in the Congo, it wove a dream of prosperity above everyone else’s nightmare. Corruption and falsehoods are used to deceive the masses. Being poor, the people are dressed in the wealth of their scarcities, and because the lie is so deep and so broad, they end up mistaking it for truth. The people prepared for the great international forums and, by the will of the government, poverty was declared an illusion that faded before the development proclaimed by economic statistics. The people of the land became even more forgotten, and their history was not enough to keep the from dying, forgotten and humiliated. However, death did not hurt them as much as being forgotten did. They discovered that they no longer existed, and those who govern had forgotten about them in their euphoria of statistics and growth. A similar phenomenon is happening in the City of Sacramento with the hundreds of millions of dollars being spent on sports complexes and theater expansions, which cannot even be used, due to the COVID-19 pandemic, but nothing being done to make sure people have affordable housing. #RandolphHarris 3 of 20
A country that forgets itself is a sad country. A country that forgets its past cannot have a future. I have said that the original position is the appropriate initial status quo which ensures that the fundamental agreements reached in it are fair. This fact yields that name “justice as fairness.” It is clear, then, that I want to say that one conception of justice is more reasonable than another, or justifiable with respect to it, if rational persons in the initial situation would choose its principles over those of the other for the role of justice. Conceptions of justice are to be ranked by their acceptability to persons so circumstanced. Understood in this way the question of justification is settled by working out a problem of deliberation: we have to ascertain which principles it would be rational to adopt given the contractual situation. This connects the theory of justice with the theory of rational choice. If this view of the problem of justification is to succeed, we must, of course, describe in some detail the nature of this choice problem. A problem of rational decision has a definite answer only if we know the beliefs and interests of the parties, their relations with respect to one another, the alternatives between which they are to choose, the procedure whereby they make up their minds, and so on. #RandolphHarris 4 of 20
As the circumstances are presented in different ways, correspondingly different principles are accepted. The concept of the original position, as I shall refer to it, is that of the most philosophically favoured interpretation of this initial choice situation for the purposes of a theory of justice. However, how are we to decide what is the most favoured interpretation? I assume, for one thing, that there is a broad measure of agreement that principles of justice should be chosen under certain conditions. To justify a particular description of the initial situation one shows that is incorporates these commonly shared presumptions. One argues from widely accepted but weak premises to more specific conclusions. Each of the presumptions should by itself be natural and plausible; some of them may seem innocuous or even trivial. The aim of the contract approach is to establish that taken together they impose significant bounds on acceptable principles of justice. The ideal outcome would be that these conditions determine a unique set of principles; but I shall be satisfied if they suffice to rank the main traditional conceptions of social justice. One should not be misled, then, by the somewhat unusual conditions which characterize the original position. The idea here is simply to make vivid to ourselves the restrictions that it seems reasonable to impose on arguments for principles of justice, and therefore on these principles themselves. #RandolphHarris 5 of 20
Thus it seems reasonable and generally acceptable that no one should be advantaged or disadvantaged by natural fortune or social circumstances in the choice of principles. It also seems widely agreed that it should be impossible to tailor principles to the circumstances of one’s own case. We should ensure further that particular inclinations and aspirations, and persons’ conceptions of their good do not affect the principles adopted. The aim is to rule out those principles that it would be rational to propose for acceptance, however little the chance of success, only if one knew certain things that are irrelevant from the standpoint of justice. For example, if a one knew that one was wealthy, one might find it rational to advance the principle that various taxes for welfare measures be counted unjust; if one knew that one was poor, one would most likely propose the contrary principle. To represent the desired restrictions one imagines a situation in which everyone is deprived of this sort of information. One excludes the knowledge of those contingencies which sets humans at odds and allows the to be guided by their prejudices. In this manner the veil of ignorance is arrived at in a natural way. If we keep in mind the constraints on arguments that it is meant to express, this concept should cause no difficulty. #RandolphHarris 6 of 20
At any time we can enter the original position, so to speak, simply by following a certain procedure, namely, by arguing for principles of justice in accordance with these restrictions. It seems reasonable to suppose that the parties in the original positions are equal. That is, all have the same rights in the procedure for choosing principles; each can make proposals, submit reasons for their acceptance, and so on. Obviously the purpose of these conditions is to represent equality between human beings as moral persons, as creatures having a conception of their good and capable of a sense of justice. The basis of equality is taken to be similarity in these two respects. Systems of ends are not ranked in value; and each human is presumed to have the requisite ability to understand and to act upon whatever principles are adopted. Together with the veil of ignorance, these conditions define the principles of justice as those which rational persons concerned to advance their interests would consent to as equals when none are known to be advantaged or disadvantage by social and natural contingencies. There is, however, another side to justifying a particular description of the original position. This is to see if the principles which would be chosen match our considered convictions of justice or extend them in an acceptable way. #RandolphHarris 7 of 20
We can note whether applying these principles would lead us to make the same judgments about the basic structure of society which we now make intuitively and in which we have the greatest confidence; or whether, in cases where our present judgements are in doubt and given with hesitation, these principles offer a resolution which we can affirm on reflection. There are questions which we feel sure must be answered in a certain way. For example, we are confident that religious intolerance and racial discrimination are unjust. We think that we have examined these things with care and have reached what we believe is an impartial judgment not likely to be distorted by an excessive attention to our own interests. These convictions are provisional fixed points which we presume any conception of justice must fit. However, we have much less assurance as to what is the correct distribution of wealth and authority. Here we may be looking for a way to remove our doubts. We can check an interpretation of the initial situation, then, by the capacity of its principles to accommodate our firmest convictions and to provide guidance where guided is needed. In searching for the most favoured description of this situation we work from both ends. We begin by describing it so that it represents generally shared and preferably weak conditions. #RandolphHarris 8 of 20
We then see if these conditions are strong enough to yield a significant set of principles. If not, we look for further premises equally reasonable. However, if so, and these principles match our considered convictions of justice, then so far well and good. However, presumably there will be discrepancies. In this case we have a choice. We can either modify the account of the initial situation or we can revise our existing judgments, for even the judgments we take provisionally as fixed points are liable to revision. By going back and forth, sometimes altering the conditions of the contractual circumstances, at others withdrawing our judgments and conforming them to principle, I assume that eventually we shall find a description of the initial situation that both expresses reasonable conditions and yields principles which match our considered judgments duly pruned and adjusted. This state of affairs I refer to as reflective equilibrium. It is an equilibrium because at last our principles and judgments coincide; and it is reflective since we known to what principles our judgments conform and the premises of their derivation. At the moment everything is in order. However, this equilibrium is not necessarily stable. It is liable to be upset by further examination of the conditions which should be imposed on the contractual situation and by particular cases which may lead us to revise our judgments. #RandolphHarris 9 of 20
Yet for the time being we have done what we can to render coherent and to justify our convictions of social justice. We have reached a conception of the original position. I shall not, of course, actually work through this process. Still, we may think of the interpretation of the original position that I shall present as the result of such a hypothetical course of reflection. It represents the attempt to accommodate within one scheme both reasonable philosophical conditions on principles as well as our considered judgments of justice. In arriving at the favoured interpretation of the initial situation there is no point at which an appeal is made to self-evidence in the traditional sense either or general conceptions or particular convictions. I do not claim for the principles of justice proposed that they are necessary truths or derivable from such truths. A conception of justice cannot be deduced from self-evident premises or conditions on principles; instead, its justification is a matter of the mutual support of many considerations, of everything fitting together into one coherent view. We shall want to say that certain principles of justice are justified because they would be agreed to in an initial situation of equality. I have emphasized that this original position is purely hypothetical. #RandolphHarris 10 of 20
It is natural to ask why, if this agreement is never actually entered into, we should take any interest in these principles, moral or otherwise. The conditions embodied in the description of the original position are ones that we do in fact accept. Or if we do not, then perhaps we can be persuaded to do so by philosophical reflection. Each aspect of the contractual situation can be given supporting grounds. Thus what we shall do is to collect together into one conception a number of conditions on principles that we are ready upon due consideration to recognize as reasonable. These constraints express what we are prepared to regard as limits on fair terms of social cooperation. One way to look at the idea of the original position, therefore, is to see it as an expository device which sums up the meaning of these conditions and helps us to extract their consequences. On the other hand, this conception is also an intuitive notion that suggests its own elaboration, so that led on by it we are drawn to define more clearly the standpoint from which we can best interpret moral relationship We need a conception that enables us to envision our objective from afar: the intuitive notion of the original position is to do this for us. When I am your president, I hope you will come see me. Please do not leave me up there in the White House all by myself. I grew up watching PBS, and still watch it. For enlightened news coverage, tune in to PBS. #RandolphHarris 11 of 20
Love must be aggressively translated into simple justice. “Each one should use whatever gift one has received to serve others, faithfully administering God’s grace in its various forms,” reports 1 Peter 4.10. Peter and Paul are saying the same thing. The spiritual gifts we have, and the ministries we perform are gifts of God’s grace. None of us deserves the gifts one has been given. They are given to us by God’s undeserved favour to us through Christ. This means the most “worthy” and the most “unworthy” of all Christians both receive their gifts and their ministries on the same basis. The “unworthy” person surely does not deserve one’s gift, but neither does the most “worthy.” They both receive them as unmerited favours from God. There are quotations marks around worthy and unworthy in above because in reality there is no such distinction in God’s sight. In His sight, we are all totally and permanently bankrupt spiritually. Paul’s statement, “There is no difference, for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God” (Romans 3.22-23), is just as true for believers as for unbelievers. We never earn our privileges of ministry because of our heard work or faithfulness in previous service to God. I taught adult Saturday school for many years in a small church before God launched me into a much wider sphere of ministry. #RandolphHarris 12 of 20
However, I did not earn an enlarged ministry through my “faithful” teaching; rather, it was a gift of God’s grace. We are so accustomed to thinking of spiritual gifts in terms of abilities to minister that we lose sight of the ordinary meaning of the word. A gift is something given to us; something we do not earn. However, even our ordinary meaning fails to adequately convey the biblical sense. We tend to give gifts to people who, even though they have not earned them, in some sense deserve them because of their relationship to us or because they have done us a favour of some kind. However, God gives spiritual gifts to people who do not deserve them. None of us deserves to be in God’s service on some far away mission field. It is an awesome thing to attempt to speak on behalf of God. Yet that is exactly what we do when we teach, or preach, or write. It matters not whether our audience is one person or fifty thousand, whether they are kindergarten pupils or graduate theological students. Any time we say or write something that we hold out to be biblical truth, we are putting ourselves in the position of being God’s spokes-person. Peter said, “If anyone speaks, one should do it as one peaking the very words of God,” reports 1 Peter 4.11. I suspect that most people who these essays do teach the Scriptures occasionally if not regularly. #RandolphHarris 13 of 20
Do we appreciate the awesomeness of our responsibility, to be speaking on behalf of God? Do we consider the accountability that comes with being entrusted with the divine message? Paul himself was keenly conscious of his immense responsibility when he said, “Unlike so many, we do not peddle the word of God for profit. On the contrary, in Christ we speak before God with sincerity, like humans sent from God,” reports 2 Corinthians 2.17. He said he spoke like a human sent from God, but he also said he spoke before God, or in the sight of God. That is, God not only sent him, but observed him. One Saturday as I stood up to teach my adult Saturday school class, to my dismay, I realized the president of our denominational seminary was sitting in the class. To make matters more intense, he also happened to be the professor of homiletics (the art of preaching). I was sure he was critiquing everything I said, both in content and delivery. Now if the presence of a seminary president in my class was an awesome experience, how much more awed should I be when I realize I speak, or write, in the very presence of God and on His behalf. #RandolphHarris 14 of 20
What, then, will gives us the courage to undertake or continue to teach the Scriptures or, for that matter, to exercise any other spiritual gift? The heartfelt conviction that we have our ministry by God’s grace. Again, as Paul said, “Therefore, since through God’s mercy we have this ministry, we do not lose heart,” reports 2 Corinthians 4.1. It was a sense of God’s mercy that gave Paul courage or, as he expressed it, caused him not to lose heart. Mercy is God’s grace expressed specifically toward people who are viewed by Him as guilty, condemned, and helpless. It is generally expressed in terms of relieving the misery due to their sin. However, God not only relieved Paul’s misery, He elevated him to the office of apostle and gave him the ministry of proclaiming the richest of Christ. However, Paul never lost sight of his own unworthiness, even when exercising his office of apostleship. He never forgot he held that office by God’s mercy. Here we see the biblical relationship between a sense of one’s utter unworthiness on the one hand, and the courage to undertake a ministry for God on the other. To lose sight of our unworthiness is to risk exercising our gifts and fulfilling our ministries in a spirit of presumptuous pride, as if God were fortunate to have us on His team. #RandolphHarris 15 of 20
However, to focus too much on our unworthiness, to the neglect of God’s grace, will effectively immobilize us for His service. That attitude is also an expression of pride because we are still focusing on ourselves and our worthiness or unworthiness, as if God were dependent on some innate quality within us to equip us for His service. Remember we did not declare temporary spiritual bankruptcy. Our bankruptcy is total and permanent. The only worthiness we have with which to come before God is in Christ. And the only worthiness we have to qualify us for ministry is in Christ. If we are to progress in any aspect of the Christian life, we must look outside ourselves and only to Christ. It is in Him that the grace of God is so abundantly poured out on us. God may be generous enough to accept us as we are, with our weaknesses and mistakes, but the law of Karma is above all human emotions, whether they be generous or ingenerous. It demands full payment and distributes to them the consequences of their actions. There is a strong similarity between this and law, irrevocably decreed in Heaven before the foundations of this World, upon which all blessings are predicated. We believe we are born where we should be, but that a just and loving Father in Heaven has decided where we can best perform in this mortal sphere of activity. #RandolphHarris 16 of 20
We believe we reap the rewards of our actions, but we also believe in the atonement of Jesus. Were it not for this merciful provision, we would be left with nearly the same doctrine as others who believe that karma cannot change. That is, we would be left to eternally pay the price of our sins. Christians are taught to be involved in the actions of others through doing good deeds and teaching the gospel. This is the doctrine of loving your neighbour as yourself. Spiritual insights surpass our mere powers of reason. We realize, however, that these moments of enlightenment are given to us by God through the power of the Holy Ghost and that we must study some things out for ourselves and then seek a spiritual confirmation. The gospel also teaches us to follow a wise, God-revealed health law. Physical care and conditioning have been taught since the early days of the Church. “Behold, now it came to pass that the king of the Lamanites sent a proclamation among all this people, that they should not lay their hands on Ammon, or Aaron, or Mmner, or Himni, nor either of their brethren who should go forth preaching the word of God, in whatsoever place they should be, in any part of their land. Yea, he sent a decree among them, that they should not lay their hands on them to bind them, or to cast them into prison. #RandolphHarris 17 of 20
“Neither should they spit upon them, nor smite them, nor cast them out of their synagogues, nor scourge them; neither should they cast stones at them, but that they should have free access to their houses, and also their temples, and their sanctuaries. And thus they might go forth and preach the word according to their desires, for the king as been converted unto the Lord, and all his household; therefore he sent his proclamation throughout the land unto his people, that the word of God might have no obstruction, but that it might go forth throughout the land unto his people, that the word of God might have no obstruction, but that it might go forth throughout all the land, that his people might be convinced concerning the wicked traditions of their fathers, and that they might be convinced that they might be convinced that they were all brethren and that they ought not to murder, nor to plunder, nor to steal, nor to commit adultery, nor commit any manner of wickedness. And now it came to pass that when the kind had sent forth this proclamation, that Aaron and his brethren went forth from city to city, and from one house of worship to another, establishing churches, and consecrating priests and teachers throughout the land among the Lamanites, to preach and to teach the word of God among them; and thus they began to have great success. #RandolphHarris 18 of 20
“And thousands were brought to the knowledge of the Lord, yea, thousands were brought to believe in the traditions of the Nephites; and they were taught the records and prophecies which were handed down even to the present time. And as sure as the Lord liveth, so sure as many as believed, or as many as were brought to the knowledge of the truth, through the preaching of Ammon and his brethren, according to the spirit of revelation and of prophecy, and the power of God working miracles in them—yea, I say unto you, as the Lord liveth, as many of the Lamanites as believed in their preaching, and were converted unto the Lord, never did fall away. For they became a righteous people; they did lay down the weapons of their rebellion, that they did not fight against God any more, neither against any of their brethren. Now, these are they who were converted unto the Lord: The people of the Lamanites who were in the land of Ishmael; and also of the people of the Lamanites who were in the land of Middoni; and also of the people of the Lamanites who were in the city of Nephi; and also of the people of the Lamanites who were in the land of Shemlon, and in the city of Lemuel, and in the city of Shimnilom. And these are the names of cities of the Lamanites which were converted unto the Lord; and these are they that laid down the weapons of their rebellion, yea, all their weapons of war; and they were all Lamanites. #RandolphHarris 19 of 20
“And the Amalekites were not converted, save only one; neither were any of the Amulonites; but they did harden their heart, and also the hearts of the Lamanites in that part of the land wheresoever they dwelt, yea and all their villages and all their cities. Therefore, we have named all the cities of the Lamanites in which they did repent and come to the knowledge of truth, and were converted. And now it came to pass that the king and those who were converted were desirous that they might be distinguished from their brethren; therefore the king consulted with Aaron and many of their priests, concerning the name that they should take upon them, that they might be distinguished. And it came to pass that they called their names Anti-Nephi-Lehies; and they were called by this name and were no more called Lamanites. And they began to be a very industrious people; yea, and they were friendly with the Nephite; therefore, they did open a correspondence with them, and the curse of God did no more follow them,” Alma 23.1-18. Our Lord Jesus Christ be near thee to defend thee, within thee to refresh thee, around thee to preserve thee, before three to guide thee, behind thee to justify thee, above thee to bless thee; Who liveth and reigneth, thank you for bestowing us with your grace. #RandolphHarris 20 of 20
Today’s blog features some inspiring houseplant ideas from plant and interior stylist @hiltoncarter! We are loving the unique decor hacks he has been featuring on his profile lately. Check it out at the link in bio! https://cresleigh.com/blog/
Bless us, O Lord, we welcome you in our house, and may you bless all that dwell in it, as we are graciously pleased to bless the house of Abraham, to Isaac, and to Jacob; we dwell in the walls of an angel of light. As people enter our atmosphere, they feel the abundance of Jesus Christ residing. God gives us the dew of heaven, and the richness of Earth. Be glad for the peacemakers, and through the indulgence of grace bless the Earth with your presence.
God of the hearth, beat strong and pure in the heart of my home. Lord of the threshold, keep vigilant guard over the entrance of my home. Spirits of the land, keep watch throughout the yard of my home. God of the borders, stand ready to repulse all disorder from my home. #CresleighHomes
God is in His Heaven—All is Right with the World! Grow Old with Me Because the Best if Yet to Be!
The Christian life is not a way “out” but a way “through” life. Paul freely acknowledged that he received his apostleship purely as a result of God’s undeserved favour. God then used Paul’s testimony to encourage me at a time when I most keenly felt my complete unworthiness to write on the subject of personal holiness. The question, however, is this: To what extent can we use Paul’s very personal testimony and my own experience to establish a scriptural principle regarding Christian ministry? Is all ministry, where it be teaching a children’s Sunday school class, or witnessing individual to students at the local private school or preaching to thousands of people each Sunday, performed by the grace of God by people who are unworthy to be doing it? Harry Blamires had an incisive answer to that question: In the upshot there is only one answer for the preacher who wonders whether one is worthy to preach the sermon one has composed or for the writer who wonders whether one is worthy to write the religious book one is working on. The answer is: Of course not. To ask yourself: Am I worthy to perform this Christian task? is really the peak of pride and presumption. For the very question carries the implication that we spend most of our time doing things we are worthy to do. We simply do not have that kind of worth. #RandolphHarris 1 of 21
Of course, it matters little what Harry Blamires or Jerry Bridges think unless our thinking accords with Scripture. So what does the Bible say to this question? In Romans 12.6 Paul said, “We have different gifts according to the grace given us.” Paul was referring to spiritual gifts given to every believer enables us to fulfill the ministry or service God has appointed for us in the Body of Christ. However, not that Paul said these spiritual gifts are give accord to the grace of God, not according to what we deserve. The Greek word for a spiritual gift is charisma, which means “a gift of God’s grace,” whether it is the gift of eternal life as in Romans 6.23 or the gift of a spiritual ability for use in the Body. Here are somethings to consider on the connection of grace and gifts. “I always thank God for you because of his grace given you in Christ Jesus,” reports 1 Corinthians 1.4. The specific basis of Paul’s thanksgiving in their case is God’s “grace given you in Christ Jesus.” Commonly this is viewed as a thanksgiving for grace as such, id est, the gracious outpouring of God’s mercy in Christ toward the undeserving. However, for Paul charis (“grace”) very often is closely associated with charisma/charismata (“gift/gifts”) and in such instance refers to concrete expressions of God’s gracious activity in his people. Indeed, the word “grace” itself sometimes denoted these concrete manifestations, the “graces” (gifts), of God’s grace. #RandolphHarris 2 of 21
In our Systematic Theology, the main concern is, precisely, to build a “system,” this is, to work out the implications of our central perception of the Protestant principle along the mainlines of theological thought. Yet even though we are primarily concerned with the symbols of faith and their transcendent meaning, or with the historical relevance of the Christ, we unavoidably run into traditional Christian doctrines. These we reinterpret in order to assume them into our system. Whether our reinterpretations are orthodox or not is obviously an important question, but it is not the question to which we primarily address because we do not exclusively maintain a theology of revelation (as the neo-orthodox theologians have done). The terms “dogma” and “dogmatic,” are not terms we like to use because they came to be used at a time when the Church was engaged in self-defence. The Creeds were adopted as a protective formulation against heresies. Their acceptance became a matter of life and death for Christianity. This was a necessary step in the development of the Church, for heresies were demonic attempts to distort the Christian message. In this sense, a theology is always dogmatic: the word “dogmatics” emphasizes the importance of the formulated and officially acknowledged dogma for work of the systematic theologian. #RandolphHarris 3 of 21
Yet we shun the word as much as possible, for we believe that the significance of dogmas became distorted after the first centuries. Instead of reaming protective formulations of the core of the Christian message, dogma is identified with the laws of the Christian state. Heresy became a social crime. State and Churches that condone this confusion have become themselves demonic. There arose a demonic use of dogma, a reversal of values, by which dogmas were used, by Catholic as well as Protestant, against theological honesty and scientific autonomy. This unfortunate situation has discredited the words “dogmas” and “dogmatics” to such a degree that it is hardly possible to re-establish their genuine meaning. Our reluctance to use a vocabulary to which large sections of the intellectual World are allergic makes sense, for our purpose is precisely to build a bridge between the Christian faith and the secularized intellect. No antagonism to any specific dogma is implied. This does not reduce the significance of the formulated dogmata…but it makes the use of the term “dogmatics” impossible. The Christian is ultimately concerned about Christology, not only as symbol and as history, but also as dogma. The ultimate source of Christian belief can only be the revelatory situation in which Jesus is perceived as the Christ. #RandolphHarris 4 of 21
There are no “revealed dogmas” properly speaking, no depositum that was communicated to the Apostles and handed down through the life of the Church, to be infallibly taught to the faithful. Our attitude is well epitomized as there are no revealed doctrines, but there are revelatory events and situations which can be describe in doctrinal terms. “Then Paul stood in the midst of Mars’ hill, and said, Ye men of Athens, I perceive that in all things ye are too superstitious. For as I passed by, and beheld your devotions, I found on an altar with this inscription, TO THE UNKNOWN GOD. Whom therefore ye ignorantly worship, him declare I unto you. God that made the World and all things therein, seeing that he is Lord of Heaven and Earth, dwelleth not in temples made with hands; neither is worshipped with human’s hands, as though he needed anything, seeing he needed anything, seeing he giveth to all life, and breath, and all things; and hath made of one blood all nations of humans for to dwell on all things; and hath made of one blood all nations of humans for to dwell on all the face of the Earth, and hath determined the times before appointed, and the bounds of their habitation; that they should seek the Lord, if haply they might feel after him, and find him, though he be not far from every one of us: for in him we live, and move, and have our being; as certain also of your own poets have said, For we are also his offspring. #RandolphHarris 5 of 21
“Forasmuch then as we are the offspring of God, we ought not to think that the God-head is like unto gold, or sliver, or stone, graven by art and human’s device. And the times of this ignorance God winked at; but now commandeth all humans everywhere to repent: because he hath appointed a day, in the which he will judge the World in righteousness by that human who one hath ordained; whereof one hat given assurance unto all humans, in that one hath raised one from the dead. And when they heard of the resurrection of the dead, some mocked; and others said, We will hear thee again of this matter,” reports Acts 17.22-32. The first time I spoke of our existence as theologians, I indicated that the foundation of this existence lay in the power of the Divine Spirit and in the reality of the Church. It was the believing theologian—believing in spite of all one’s doubts and despairs—that I tried to describe. The second time that we considered our existence as theologians, we looked at the self-surrendering theologians who, though the power of love, becomes “all things to all humans,” that theologian who seems to lose oneself through the understanding of everything and everyone. This time let us think about the answering theologian who, in spite of one’s participation in the weakness and error of all humans, is able to answer their questions through the power of one’s foundation, the New Being in Christ. #RandolphHarris 6 of 21
The famous scene in which Paul speaks from the central place of Greek wisdom shows us a man who is the prototype of the answering theologian. Paul has been asked about his message, partly because they knew that they did not know the truth, and seriously desired to know it. There are three stages in Paul’s answer, which reveal the three tasks of answering theologian. The first stage of Paul’s answer consists in the assertion that those who ask him the ultimate question are not unconscious of the answer: these humans adore an unknown God and thus witness to their religious knowledge in spite of their religious ignorance. That knowledge is not astounding, because God is close to each one of us; it is in Him that we live and move and exist; these also belong to His race. The first answer, then, that we must give to those who ask us about such a question is that they themselves are already aware of the answer We must show to them that neither they nor we are outside of God, that even the atheists stand in God-namely, that power out of which they live, the truth for which they grope, and the ultimate meaning of life in which they believe. It is bad theology and religious cowardice ever to think that there may be a place where we could look at God, as though He were something outside of us to be argued for or against. Genuine atheism is not humanly possible, for God is nearer to a human than humans are to themselves. #RandolphHarris 7 of 21
A God can only be denied in the name of name of another God; and God appearing in one form can be denied only by God appearing in another form. That is the first answer that we must give to ourselves and to those who question us, not as an abstract statement, but rather as a continuous interpretation of our human existence, in all its hidden motions and abuses and certainties. God is nearer to us than we ourselves. We cannot find a place outside of Him; but we can try to find such a place. The second part of Paul’s answer is that we can be in the condition of continuous flight from God. We can imagine one way of escape after another; we can replace God by the products of our imagination; and we do. Although humankind is never without God, it perverts the picture of God. Although humankind is never without knowledge of God, it is ignorant of God. Humankind is separated from its origin; it lives under a law of wrath and frustration, of tragedy and self-destruction, because it produces one distorted image of God after another, and adores those images. The answering theologian must discover the false gods in the individual souls and in society. One must probe into their most secret hiding-places. One must challenge them through the power of the Divine Logos, which makes one a theologian. #RandolphHarris 8 of 21
Theological polemic is not merely a theoretical discussion, but rather a spiritual judgement against the gods which are not God, against those structures of evil, those distortions of God in thought and action. No compromise or adaptation or theological self-surrender is permitted on this level. For the first Commandment is the rock upon which theology stands. There is no synthesis possible between God and the idols. In spite of the dangers inherent in so judging, the theologian must become an instrument of the Divine Judgement against a distorted World. So far as they can grasp it in the light of their own questions, Paul’s listeners are willing to accept two-fold answer. However, Paul then speaks of a third thing which they are not able to bear. They either reject it immediately, or they postpone the decision to reject or accept it. He speaks of a Man Whom God has destined to the Judgement and Life of the World. That is the third and final part of the theological answer. For we are real theologians when we state that Jesus is the Christ, and that it is in Him that the Logos of theology is manifest. However, we are only theologians when we interpret this paradox, this stumbling-block for idealism and realism, for the weak and the strong, for both pagans and Jews. As theologians, we must interpret that paradox, and not throw paradoxical phrases at the minds of the people. #RandolphHarris 9 of 21
We must not preserve or produce artificial stumbling-blocks, miracle-stories, legends, myths, and other sophisticated paradoxical talk. We must not distort, by ecclesiastical and theological arrogance, that great cosmic paradox that there is victory over death within the World of death itself. We must not impose the heavy burden of wrong stumbling-blocks upon those who ask us questions. However, neither must we empty the true paradox of its power. For true theological existence is the witnessing to Him Whose yoke is easy and Whose burden is light, to Him Who is the true paradox. There is also a question regarding the distribution of educational opportunities. Before humans can contribute according to their abilities, their abilities must be developed. However, in whom should society develop which abilities? It is clear that all humans require some early training to make them viable social beings; further, all humans require certain general skills necessary for performing work. We all have the right to receive the goods and resources necessary for preserving ourselves. Human beings have the right, rather, not to be killed, attacked, and deprived of their property—by persons in or outside of government. No human is good enough to govern another human, without that other’s consent. #RandolphHarris 10 of 21
However, there are some very rare instances in which some citizens could find themselves in circumstances which require disregarding rights altogether. This would be in situations that cannot be characterizes to be “where peace is possible.” Nonetheless, under normal conditions, the enforceable right of every person not to be coerced by other persons. Humans have a right to life, a right not to be killed unjustly and a right to property, a right to acquire goods and resources either by initial acquisition or voluntary agreement. However, these rights do not entitle one to receive from others the goods and resources necessary for preserving one’s life. To possess any basic right to receive the goods and resources necessary for preserving one’s life conflict with possessing the right not to be killed, assaulted, or stolen from. The latter rights are considered to be held by all individual human beings. Rights are the link between the moral code of a human and the legal code of a society, between ethics and politics. Individual rights are the means of subordinating society to moral law. Nonetheless, in a system that legally protects and preserves property right there will be cases where a rich person prevents a poor person from taking what belongs to her (the rich person)—for example, a chicken that the poor person might use to feed herself. #RandolphHarris 11 of 21
When people defend their property, what are they doing? They are protecting themselves against the intrusive acts of some other person, acts that would normally deprive them of something to which they have a right, and the other has no right. As such, these acts of protectiveness make it possible for men and women in society to retain their own sphere of jurisdiction intact, protect their own moral space. They want to be sovereigns and govern their own lives, including their own productive decisions and actions. Those who mount the attack, in turn, fail or refuse to refrain from encroaching upon the moral space of their victims. They are treating the victim’s life and its productive results as though these were unowned resources for them to do with as they choose. This system is developed for a human community in which peace is possible. It is a system that is developed for individual rights, which guide men and women in such an adequately hospitable environment to act without thwarting the flourishing of others, are thus suitable bases for the legal foundations of a human society. It is possible for people in the World to pursue their proper goals without thwarting a similar pursuit by others. The typical conflict situation in society involves people who wish to take shortcuts to earning their living (and a lot more) by attacking others, not those who lack any other alternative to attacking others so as to reach that same goal. #RandolphHarris 12 of 21
If the government entered areas that required it to make very particular judgments and depart from serving the interest of public as such, the integrity of law would be seriously endangered. We have already noted that the idea of satisfying basic needs can involve the difficulty of distinguishing those whose actions are properly to be so characterized. Rich persons are indeed satisfying their basic needs as they protect and preserve their property rights. Private property rights are necessary for a morally decent society. Normally persons do not lack the opportunities and resources to satisfy their own basic needs. Even if we grant that some helpless, physically disabled, those with intellectual disabilities, or destitute persons could offer nothing to anyone that would merit wages enabling the to carry on their loves and perhaps even flourish, there is still the other possibility for most actual, known hard cases, namely seeking help. I am not speaking here of the cases we know: people who drop out of school, get a skilled job, marry and have kids, only to find that their need more adequate preparation to survive life in these expensive communities all across American. Some have even considered migrating to Mexico, but prices for real estate there are also quite high. In fact, you may get more for your money in America. #RandolphHarris 13 of 21
We have no justification for assuming that the rich are all callous, though this caricature is regularly painted by communists and in folklore. Supporting and gaining advantage from the institution of private property by no means implies that one lacks the virtue of generosity. The rich are no more immure to virtue than the poor are to vice. The contrary view is probably a legacy of the idea that only those concerned with spiritual or intellectual matters can be trusted to know virtue—those concerned with seeking material prosperity are too base. The destitute typically have options other than to violate the rights of the well-off. “’Ought’ implies ‘can”’ is satisfiable by the moral imperative that the poor ought to seek help, not loot. There is then no injustice in the rich preventing the poor from seeking such loot by violating the right to private property “”Ought implies ‘can”’ is fully satisfied if the poor can take the kind of action that could gain them the satisfaction of their basic needs, and this action could well be asking for help. There are people who are helplessly poor, who through no fault of their own, nor again through any rights violation by others, are destitute. However, those cases are by no means typical. They are extremely rare. And even rarer are those cases in which all avenues regarded as legitimate from the American point of view have been exhausted, including appealing for help. #RandolphHarris 14 of 21
The bulk of poverty in the World is not the result of natural disaster or illness. Rather it is political oppression, whereby people throughout many of the World’s countries are not legally permitted to look out for themselves in the production of trade. Of course, it would be immoral if people failed to help out when this was clearly no sacrifice for them. However, charity or generosity is not a categorical imperative, even for the rich. There are more basic moral principles that might require the rich to refuse to be charitable—for example, if they are using most of their wealth for the protection of freedom or a just society. Courage can be more important than charity or benevolence or compassion. Human behaviour is taken to be determined by a person’s economic circumstances, so one is bound by one’s situation and cannot make choices that would overcome them. More generally, in modern political philosophy there as been a strong tendency to view human beings as passive, unable to initiate their own conduct and moved by innate drives or environmental stimuli. Thus, those who are well-off could not have achieved this through only their own initiative, nor could those who are badly off have failed in significant ways. Accordingly, all the poor or badly off, be they victims of others’ oppression, casualties of misfortune, or products of their own misconduct are regarded alike. #RandolphHarris 15 of 21
The right to free association, freedom of trade, freedom of wealth accumulation, freedom of contact, freedom of entrepreneurship, freedom of speech, freedom of thought—that provides the most hospitable social climate for the creation of wealth. Socialism can do no more than to socialize poverty, exempli gratia, make everyone poor through socialized medicine, free higher education and so forth. As to the historical evidence, it is hard to argue that other tan substantially capitalist economic systems, which tend in the direction of libertarianism (as least as far as the legal respect for and protection of private property or the right to it are concerned) have fared much better in reducing poverty than have others, without also causing massive political and other social failures (such as dysfunction of civil liberties, institutions of forced labour and involuntary servitude, regimentation of the bulk of social relations, arresting scientific and technological progress, or censorship of the arts and other intellectual endeavours). Thus, America is still the freest of societies, with many of its legal principles giving expression to classical liberal, near-libertarian ideas, and it is, at the same tie, the most generally productive (creative and culturally rich) of all societies, with its wealth assisting in the support of hundreds of other societies across the globe. #RandolphHarris 16 of 21
There is another point to be stressed. This is that there can be people in the American society—indeed, in any society—for whom a lack of wealth, even extreme poverty relative to the mean, may not be a great liability. Not everyone wants to, or even ought to, live prosperously. For some individuals a life of ostensible poverty could be of substantial benefit. Some people elect not to seek economic prosperity. There are some who are poor but who are not, therefore, worse off than the rich, provided we do not confine ourselves to counting economic prosperity as the prime source of well-being. Furthermore, some artist whoa re poor are happier than some merchants who are rich. There is no justification for feeling compassion for such artists, despite their poverty. In short, being poor in and of itself does not justify special consideration. Being in need of what it takes to attain one’s well-being warrants, if the need is a matter of natural misfortune or injury for others, feelings and conduct amounting to care, generosity, and charity. Poverty does not always constitute such neediness. Nonetheless, all humans have the right to live in a community of other human individual with equal protection under the law. Justice requires only an equal liberty. Players in the game do not protest to their being other positions such as batter, pitcher, catcher and the like just because they cannot win. #RandolphHarris 17 of 21
Hear us, holy Lord, Father Almighty, everlasting God, and join the grace of Thine own visitation to our humble services; that Thou mayest makes Thyself a mansion in the hearts of those whose dewing we approach; through Jesus Christ our Lord, we know that all things are possible. “Now when Ammon and his brethren separated themselves in the borders of the land of the Lamanites, behold Aaron took his journey towards the and which was called by the Lamanites, Jerusalem, calling it after the land of their fathers’ nativity; and it was away joining the borders of Mormon. Now the Lamanites and the Amalekites and the people of Amulon had built a great city, which was called Jerusalem. Now the Lamanites of themselves were sufficiently hardened, but the Amalekites and the Amulonites were still harder; therefore they did cause the Lamanites that they should harden their hearts, that they should wax strong in wickedness and their abominations. And it came to pass that Aaron came to the city of Jerusalem, and first began to preach to the Amalekites. And he began to preach to them in their synagogues, for they had built synagogues, for they had built synagogues after the order of the Nehors; for many of the Amalekites and the Amulonities were after the order of the Nehors. #RandolphHarris 18 of 21
“Therefore, as Aaron entered into one of their synagogues to preach unto the people, and as he was speaking unto them, behold there arose an Amalekite and began to contend with him, saying: What is that thou hast testified? Hast thou seen an angel? Why do not angels appear unto us? Behold are not this people as good as thy people? Thou also sayest, expect we repent we shall perish. How knowest thou the thought and intent of our heart? How knowest thou that we have cause to repent? How knowest thou that we are not a righteous people? Behold, we have built sanctuaries, and we do assemble ourselves together to worship God. We do believe that God will save all humans. Now Aaron said unto him: Believest thou that the Son of God shall come to redeem humankind from their sins? And the man said unto him: We do not believe that thou knowest any such thing. We do not believe in these foolish traditions. We do not believe that thou knowest of things to come, neither do we believe that thy fathers and also that our fathers did know concerning the things which they spake, of that which is to come. Now Aaron began to open the scriptures unto them concerning the coming of Christ, and also concerning the resurrection of the dead, and that there could be no redemption for humankind save it were through the death and sufferings of Christ, and the atonement of his blood. #RandolphHarris 19 of 21
“And it came to pass as he began to expound these things unto them they were angry with him, and began to mock him; and they would not hear the words which he spake. Therefore, when he saw that they would not hear his words, he departed out of their synagogue, and came over to a village which was called Ani-Anti and there he found Muloki preaching the word unto them; and also Ammah and his brethren. And they contended with many about the word. And it came to pass that the people would harden their hearts, therefore they departed and came over into the land of Middoni. And they did preach the word unto many, and few believed on the words which they taught. Nevertheless, Aaron and a certain number of his brethren were taken and cast into prison, and the remainder of them fled out of the land of Middoni unto the regions round about. And those who were cast into prison suffered many things, and they were delivered by the hand of Lamoni and Ammon, and they were fed and clothed. And they went forth again to declare the word, and thus they were delivered for the first time out of prison; and thus they had suffered. And they went forth whitersoever they were led by the Spirit of the Lord, preaching the word of God in every synagogue of the Amalekites, or in every assembly of the Lamanites where they could be admitted. #RandolphHarris 20 of 21
“And it came to pass that the Lord began to bless them, insomuch that they brought many to the knowledge of the truth; yea, they did convince many of their sins, and of the traditions of their fathers, which were not correct. And it came to pass that Ammon and Lamoni returned from the land of Middoni to the land of Ishmael, which was the land of their inheritance. And king Lamoni would not suffer that Ammon should serve him, or be his servant. However, he caused that there should be synagogues built in the land of Ishmael; and he caused that his people, or the people who were under his reign, should assemble themselves together. And he did rejoice over them, and he did teach them many things. And he did also declare unto them that they were a people who were a free people, that they were free from the oppressions of the king, his father; for that his father had granted unto him that he might reign over the people who were in the land of Ishmael, and in all the land round about. And he also declared unto them that they might have the liberty of worshipping the Lord their God according to their desires, in whatsoever place they were in, if it were in the land which was under the reign of King Lamoni. And Ammon did preach unto the people of king Lamoni; and it came to pass that he did teach them all things concerning things pertaining to righteousness. And he did exhort them in daily, with all diligence; and they gave heed unto his word, and they were zealous for keeping the commandments of God,” reports Alma 21.1-23. #RandolphHarris 21 of 21
Pro-tip 💡: Your #MillsStation Residence 4 dining room is the perfect spot for some succulents to call home. 🤩
In early 1948, Emanuel D’amico rented a brownstone storefront at number 309 Court Street in the Brooklyn neighborhood of Carroll Gardens. Emanuel, a sea merchant from Palermo, Sicily, left his home some twenty years prior — one of the over 4 million Italians who immigrated to America seeking their fortune in the New World. He’d lost all he had in a failed Pasta Company endeavor and New York seemed his last chance to make things right. For a number of years he worked odd jobs and began a number of side ventures, but none were too successful. A number of years later, after sending for his wife under a U.S. sponsored amnesty program, the two reunited in Brooklyn and shortly after opened the doors to D’amico Foods.
D’amico Foods originally set their sights on coffee. In 1948, there were few cafes and most coffee consumed was mass produced, undrinkable swill. With an AJ Deer Royal Roaster, Emanuel became one of the first small batch, roast to order Brooklyn roasters. The max capacity of the machine was a mere 10 pounds, ensuring that all coffee which left D’amico Foods was fresh. He was revolutionary in his approach and developed quite a following amongst the Italian immigrant population in Carroll Gardens. With each batch Emanuel pulled, the rich aroma of fresh roasted coffee spilled out into the neighborhood.
Three generations and over 60 years later, D’Amico is still a staple of the Carroll Gardens neighborhood. The storefront has become a Brooklyn legacy. That’s why we established D’amico Coffee in an effort to share this longstanding tradition of delicious Brooklyn roasted coffee with the nation. We’ve expanded our facilities and now offer wholesale but continue to use the same techniques and approach to roasting Emanuel did back in 1948. Because at the end of the day, we’re a family owned business and we’re your neighborhood roaster. For the best coffee in the World: https://damicocoffee.com/
Without Love Intelligence is Dangerous; Without Intelligence Love is Not Enough!
Science cannot bear the thought that there is an important natural phenomenon which it cannot hope to explain even with unlimited time and money. “For though I be free from all human, yet have I made myself servant unto all, that I might gain the more. And unto the Jews I became as a Jew, that I might gain the Jews; to them that are under the law, as under the law, that I might gain the, that are under the under the law; to them that are without law, as without law (being not without law to God, but under the law to Christ), that I might gain them that are without law. To the weak became I as weak, that I might gain the weak: I am made all things to all humans, that I might by all means save some. And this I do for the gospel’s sake, that I might be partaker thereof with you,” reports 1 Corinthians 9.19-23. We have all seen in the first sermon that the foundation of our theological existence is that the Divine Spirit keeps us in its power, and makes it impossible for us ever to escape the theological question, the question of our ultimate concern, the question of God. We considered the theologian as a believer in spite of his doubt and despair, and as a member of the Church, in whose power all theological work is done, in spite of one’s lack of certainty. Now, some words of Paul about his ministry shall lead us to the understanding of another side of our theological existence. #RandolphHarris 1 of 23
An apostle is certainly more than a theologian; and a minister exercises more functions than a theological scholar. However, an apostle is also a theologian; and a minister cannot work without theology. Therefore, the words that Paul says about his ministry as a whole are also true of theological part of his ministry: “To all humans I have become all things.” Theological existence demands the same attitude. The theologian, in his theology, must become all things to all humans. We must consider the meaning of those words. “To those under the Law I have become as one of themselves, to win those under the Law, although I am not under the Law myself.” Let us replace the word “Law” by “idealism,” not only because idealists are usually legalistic, but also because idealism is a noble attitude, which elevates us above the lower strata of our existence, and produces faith and devotion, just as the Law does. “To the idealists I have become as one of themselves, to win those who are idealists, although I am not an idealist myself.” How is such an act possible? How can the theologian, not being an idealist, become an idealist to the idealists? One can become an idealist in exactly the same way as the apostle of Christ can become a Jew to the Jews. Paul says that the Law is good, and that it is not abolished, but rather fulfilled, in Christ. #RandolphHarris 2 of 23
Likewise, the theologian who is not an idealist (and who could never be an idealist) does not destroy idealism. One utilizes it and states that it contains some truth which creates a continuous temptation for the theologian to become an idealist oneself, and to deny the Cross which is the judgment over idealism. The theologian uses idealism, its concepts and methods. One becomes a Platonist to the Platonists, a Stoic to the Stoics, an Hegelian to the Hegelians, a progressivist to the progressivists. However, one cannot confuse any of these forms of idealism with the Christian message. One adheres more to some than to others. However, one never imposes one’s preferred form upon others in the name of Christianity. One is aware of the despair that idealism, as well as the Law, can bring upon us. And one knows that in Christ there is a new Being in which all ideals are embodied and have become visible, no longer as ideals, but as realities. “To those outside the Law I have become as one of them (although I am under Christ’s law, and not outside God’s Law), in order to triumph over those outside the Law.” Let us replace the phrase “outside the Law” by “realism,” not because the realists have no Law (for neither they nor the pagans are without some Law), but because they have no abstract principles to impose upon reality. Their greatness lies in their humble acceptance of things as they are. “The piety of realism is humility.” “To the realists I have become as one of themselves, in order to win them, although I am not a realist myself.” #RandolphHarris 3 of 23
The theologian who is not a realist (and who could never become a realist) does not destroy realism. He recognizes the truth of realism, and is continually tempted to become a realist himself, and thus to deny the eternal life which is the judgment over realism. The theologian uses realism and becomes a positivist to the positivists, a pragmatist to the pragmatists, and a tragic interpreter of life to the tragic interpreters of life. However, one does not say that realism is the Christian message. One does not fight for it in the name of Christianity. He knows the despair of mere realism, and he knows that there is a new Being which overcomes the self-destruction of reality. “To the weak I have become weak myself in order to gain the weak.” This is the most profound of the three statements that Paul makes about himself, and the most important one for our existence as theologians. We must become as though weak, although, grasped by the Divine Spirit, the basis of all theology, we are not weak. How can we become weak by having the strength to acknowledge our weakness, by restraining ourselves from all fanaticism and theological self-certainty, and by participating—not from the outside, but from the inside—in the weakness of all those to whom we speak as theologians. #RandolphHarris 4 of 23
Our strength is our weakness; our strength is not our strength. We are strong, therefore, only in so far as we point, for our own sake and for the sake of others, to the truth which possesses us, but which we do not possess. Nothing is more disastrous for the theologian himself and more despicable to those whom one wants to convince than a theology of self-certainty. The real theologian is one who has the strength to perceive and to confess one’s weakness, and who, therefore, has the strength to become as weak to the weak, so that one’s is the victory. We are concerned with what is now, since Bultmann popularized the term, called demythologization. As we understand it, to demythologize is not a negative process by which the truth of a myth is negated. Let us remember that myth is, for us, a system of symbols derive their truth from the fact that they share the power and meaning of what they point to. In this sense, mythical does not mean untrue; it means “symbolical of the eternal.” To demythologize, therefore, is not to debunk a myth, but to grasp its relation to the eternal. On the one hand, literalism distorts myths by viewing them in their material elements and not in their transcendent meaning. On the other, philosophy may distort religion by myths: The myth, if interpreted as the symbolic expression of ultimate concern, is the fundamental creation of every religious community. It cannot be replaced by philosophy. #RandolphHarris 5 of 23
In the picture of Jesus contained in the New Testament, one should distinguish faith (the faith that the Christ has appeared), myth (symbolic creations of the religious concern of the first Christians, whereby they expressed their faith in imaginative form), and history (if at least we can separate probable historical facts from mythical creations). Thus there are two successive steps in demythologizing: first, separation, if possible, of myth from the substance of faith and from facts; second, interpretation of the symbolic purport of myth. When this is done, the myth is “broken.” This is the only way to deal intelligently with a myth. Without abandoning or denying the myth, this method seeks to understand its meaning. In this perspective, Christianity has all the characteristics of a myth couched in historical language: “If the Christ—a transcendent, divine being—appears in the fullness of times, lives, dies and is resurrected, this is an historical myth. Christianity speaks the mythological language like every other religion. It is a broken myth, but it is a myth; otherwise Christianity would not be an expression of ultimate concern. The task of theology is always to proceed to a racial criticism of myth. For there is a recurring tendency to unbreak the myth and to read it literally again. #RandolphHarris 6 of 23
Our scepticism concerning our historical knowledge of Jesus must be seen against this background. We are afraid lest the attempts of historians to reconstruct the historical Jesus should actually replace the meaningful myths of Christian tradition with flimsy constructions, which would themselves, eventually, acquire symbolic status, if only through their association with the name “Jesus.” The new myths would not be a true Christology but a devalued Jesusology. They would not point to the New Being in Christ, simply because symbols and myths of the New Being must grow out of a revelatory experience and cannot be invented in a laboratory. Demythologization is a necessary theological process. In particular, it protects faith against historians. Demythologization, however, cannot taken seriously unless it takes historians seriously. It leaves all necessary elbow-room to the higher critics. If these establish that a certain biblical report is untrue to facts, this report may still be treated as a symbol but should no longer be asserted as a fact. We have been chary of asserting anything concerning Jesus as a fact. Yet we maintain the religious value of the New Testament as a historical myth. The negative conclusions of historians cannot harm the symbolic meaning of a myth. We are just sceptical of the historians’ efforts to re-write the story of Jesus. #RandolphHarris 7 of 23
Historians cannot re-write the story because it is already written: the historical value of the New Testament is plain enough. Historians have not been able to make its reliability improbable. Historians who doubt the value of the records have failed to establish their point. This leads us to the New Being; but through what apotheoses or catastrophes we do not know. Our age has not yet unfolded its secret message. Many different kinds of things are said to be just and unjust: not only laws, institutions, and social systems, but also particular actions of many kinds, including decisions, judgments, and imputations. We also call the attitudes and dispositions of persons, and persons themselves, just and unjust. Our topic, however, is that of social justice. For us the primary subject of justice is the basic structure of society, or more exactly, the way in which the major social institutions distribute fundamental rights and duties and determine the division of advantages from social cooperation. By major institutions I understand the political constitution and the principal economic and social arrangements. Thus the legal protection of freedom of thought and liberty of conscience, competitive markets, private property in the means of production, and the monogamous family are examples of major social institutions. #RandolphHarris 8 of 23
Taken together as one scheme, the major institutions define human’s rights and duties and influence their life-prospects, what they can expect to be and how well they can hope to do. The basic structure is the primary subject of justice because its effects are so profound and present from the start. The intuitive notion here is that this structure contains various social positions and that humans born into different positions have different expectations of life determined, in part, by the political system as well as by economic and social circumstances. In this way the institutions of society favour certain starting places over others. These are especially deep inequalities. Not only are they pervasive, but they affect men’s initial chances in life; yet they cannot possibly be justified by an appeal to the notions of merit or desert. It is these inequalities, presumably inevitable in the basic structure of any society, to which the principles, then, regulate the choice of a political constitution and the main elements of the economic and social system. The justice of a social scheme depends essentially on how fundamental rights and duties are assigned and on the economic opportunities and social conditions in the various sectors of society. #RandolphHarris 9 of 23
The scope of our inquiry is limited in two ways. First of all, I am concerned with a special case of the problem of justice. I shall not consider the justice of institutions and social practices generally, nor except in passing the justice of the law of nation and of relations between states. Therefore, if one supposed that concept of justice applies whenever there is an allotment of something rationally regarded as advantageous or disadvantageous, then we are interested in only one instance of its application. There is no reason to suppose ahead of time that the principles satisfactory for the basic structure hold for all cases. These principles may not work for the rules and practices of private associations or for those of less comprehensive social groups. They may be irrelevant for the various informal conventions and customs of everyday life; they may not elucidate the justice, or perhaps better, the fairness of voluntary cooperative arrangements or procedures for making contractual agreements. The conditions for the law of nations may require different principles arrived at in a somewhat different way. I shall be satisfied if it is possible to formulate a reasonable conception of justice for the basic structure of society conceived for the time being as a closed system isolated from other societies. #RandolphHarris 10 of 23
The significance of this special case is obvious and needs to explanation. It is natural to conjecture that once we have a sound theory for this case, the remaining problems of justice will prove more tractable in the light of it. With suitable modifications such a theory should provide the key for some of these other questions. The other limitation on our discussion is that for the most part I examine the principles of justice that would regulate a well-ordered society. Everyone is presumed to act justly and to do one’s part in upholding just institutions. Though justice maybe the cautious, jealous virtue, we can still ask what a perfectly just society would be like. Thus I consider primarily what I call strict compliance as opposed to partial compliance theory. The latter studies the principles that govern how we are to deal with injustice. It comprises such topics as the theory of punishment, the doctrine of just war, and the justification of the various ways of opposing unjust regimes, ranging from civil disobedience and militant resistance to revolution and rebellion. Also included here are questions of compensatory justice and of weighing one form of institutional injustice against another. #RandolphHarris 11 of 23
Obviously the problems of partial compliance theory are the pressing and urgent matters. These are the things that we are faced with in everyday life. The reason for beginning with ideal theory is that it provides, I believe, the only basis for the systematic grasp of these more pressing problems. The discussion of civil disobedience, for example, depends upon it. At least, I shall assume that a deeper understanding can be gained in no other way, and that the nature and aims of a perfectly just society is the fundamental part of the theory of justice. Now admittedly the concept of the basic structure is somewhat vague. It is not always clear which institutions or features thereof should be included. However, it would be premature to worry about this matter here. I shall proceed by discussing principles which do apply to what is certainly a part of the basic structure as intuitively understood; I shall then try to extend the application of these principles so that they cover what would appear to be the main elements of this structure. Perhaps these principles will turn out to be perfectly general, although this is unlikely. It is sufficient that they apply to the most important cases of social justice. The point to keep in mind is that a conception of justice for the basic structure is worthy having for its own sake. It should not be dismissed because its principles are not everywhere satisfactory. #RandolphHarris 12 of 23
A conception of social justice, then, is to be regarded as providing in the first instance a standard whereby the distributive aspects of the basic structure of society are to be assessed. This standard, however, is not to be confused with the principles defining the other virtues, for the basic structure, and social arrangements generally, may be efficient or inefficient, liberal or illiberal, and many other things, as well as just or unjust. A complete conception defining principles for all the virtues of basic structure together with their respective weighs when they conflict, is more than a conception of justice; it is a social ideal. The principles of justice are but a part, although perhaps the most important part, of such a conception. A social ideal in turn is connected with a conception of society, a vision of the way in which the aims and purposes of social cooperation are to be understood. The various conceptions of justice are the outgrowth of different notions of society against the background of opposing views of the natural necessities and opportunities of human life. Fully to understand a conception of justice we must make explicit the conception of social cooperation from which it derives. However, in doing this we should not lose sight of the special role of the principles of justice or of the primary subject to which they apply. #RandolphHarris 13 of 23
In these preliminary remarks I have distinguished the concept of justice as meaning a proper balance between competing claims from a conception of justice as a set of related principles for identifying the relevant considerations which determine this balance. I have also characterized justice as but one part of a social ideal, although the theory I shall propose no doubt extends its everyday sense. This theory is not offered as a description of ordinary meanings but as an account of certain distributive principles for the basic structure of society. I assume that any reasonably complete ethical theory must include principles for this fundamental problem and that these principles, whatever they are, constitute its doctrine of justice. The concept of justice I take to be defined, then, by the role of its principles in assigning rights and duties and in defining the appropriate division of social advantages. A conception of justice is an interpretation of this role. Now this approach may not seem to tally with tradition. I believe, though, that it does. The more specific sense that Aristotle gives to justice, and from which the most familiar formulations derive, is that of refraining from pleonexia, that is, from gaining some advantage for oneself by seizing what belongs to another, one’s property, one’s reward, one’s office, and the like, by denying a person that which is due to one, the fulfillment of a promise, the repayment of a debt, the showing of proper respect, and so on. #RandolphHarris 14 of 23
Aristotle’s definition clearly presupposes, however, an account of what properly belongs to a person and of what is due to one. Now such entitlements are, I believe, very often derived from social institutions and the legitimate expectations to which they give rise. There is no reason to think that Aristotle would disagree with this, and certainly he has a conception of social justice to account for these claims. The definition I adopt is designed to apply directly to the most important case, the justice of the basic structure. There is no conflict with the tradition notion. We need to be in the presence of images, both visual and auditory (good sayings, poetry, and songs). These can constantly direct and redirect our minds toward God, Jesus Christ, the Spirit, and the church (people of God). “Icons” have a millennia-long track record with the people of God and can be a powerful way of keeping entire stories and teachings effortlessly before the mind. We might arrange to have them tastefully present in each of our living and work spaces, so that they are always present in our visual field. We can thoughtfully use them to dispel destructive imagery and thoughts and to see ourselves as before God in all levels of our being. Not long ago, people in the Untied States of America commonly had edifying sayings on their walls. #RandolphHarris 15 of 23
I recall from my childhood one that said, “Only one life. It will soon be past. Only what is done for Christ will last.” This and other good sayings were constantly before the minds of all who lived in the house. They were powerfully effective because they became, through mere habit, an enduring presence and influence within the minds of those who constantly saw them. What is now constantly before the minds of those who live where we do? Today we as a culture are schizophrenic on such matters. We want to say it does not make any difference what we look to hear. This, no doubt, is because we want to be “free” to show anything and to see anything—no matter how evil and revolting. However, business still pays millions of dollars to show us something for thirty seconds on television. They do that because they know what we repeatedly see and hear affects what we do. Otherwise they would go out of business. This may be a hint at what you are about to ask for; perhaps there is some obstruction in your life that you would like removed. If you are praying to praise God, it becomes something for which He should be honoured. If you are praying out of gratitude, it expresses in a metaphor the kind of thing you are thanking Him for. Lamoni receives the light of everlasting life and sees the Redeemer—his household falls into a trance, and many see angels—Ammon is preserved miraculously—he baptizes many and establishes a church among them. About 90 Before Christ. #RandolphHarris 16 of 23
“And it came to pass that after two days and two nights they were about to take his body and lay it in a sepulcher, which they had made for the purpose of burying their dead. Now the queen having heard of the fame of Ammon, therefore she sent and desired that he should come in unto her. And it came to pass that Ammon did as he was commanded, and went in unto the queen, and desired to know what she would that he should do. And she said unto him: The servants of my husband have made it known uno me that thou art a prophet of a holy God, and that thou hast power to do many might works in his name; therefore, if this is the case, I would that ye should go in and see my husband, for he had been laid upon his bed for the space of two days and two nights; and some say that he is not dead, but others say that he is dead and that he stinketh, and that he ought to be placed in the sepulcher; but as for myself, to me he doth not stink. Now, this was what Ammon desired, for he knew that king Lamoni was under the power of God; he knew that the dark veil of unbelief was being cast away from his mind, and the light which was a marvelous light of his goodness—yea, this light had infused such joy into his soul, the cloud of darkness having been dispelled, and that the light of everlasting life was lit up in his soul, yea, he knew that this had overcome his natural frame, and he was carried away in God. #RandolphHarris 17 of 23
“Therefore, what the queen desired of him was his only desire. Therefore, he went in to see the king according as the queen had desired him; and he saw the king, and he knew that he was not dead. And he said unto the queen: He is not dead, but he sleepth in God, and on the morrow he shall rise again; therefore bury him not. And Ammon said unto her: Believest thou this? And she said unto him: I have had no witness save thy word, and the word of our servants; nevertheless I believe that it shall be according as thou hast said. And Ammon said unto her: Blessed art thou because of thy exceeding faith; I say unto thee, woman, there has not been such great faith among all the people of the Nephites. And it came to pass that she watched over the bed of her husband, from that time even until that time on the morrow which Ammon had appointed that he should rise. And it came to pass that he arose, according to the words of Ammon; and as he arose, he stretched forth his hand unto the woman, and said: Blessed be the name of God, and blessed art thou. For as sure as thou livest, behold, I have seen my Redeemer; and he shall come forth, and be born of woman, and he shall redeem all humankind who believe on his name. Now, when he had said these words, his heart was swollen within him, and he sun again with joy; and the queen also sunk down, being overpowered by the Spirit. #RandolphHarris 18 of 23
“Now Ammon seeing the Spirit of the Lord poured out according to his prayers upon the Lamanites, his brethren, who had been the cause of so much mourning among the Nephites, or among all the people of God because of their iniquities and their traditions, he fell upon his knees, and began to pour out his soul in prayer and thanksgiving to God for what he had done for his brethren; and he was also overpowered with joy; and this they all three had sunk to the Earth. Now, when the servants of the king had seen that they had fallen, they also began to cry unto God, for the fear of the Lord had come upon them also, for it was they who had stood before the king and testified unto him concerning the great power of Ammon. And it came to pass that they did call on the name of the Lord, in their might, even until they had all fallen to Earth, save it were one of the Lamanitish women, whose name was Abish, she having been converted unto the Lord for many year, on account of a remarkable vision of her father—thus, having been converted to the Lord, and never having made it known, therefore, when she saw that all the servants of Lamoni had fallen to the Earth, ad also her mistress, the queen, and the king, and Ammon lay prostrate upon the Earth, she knew that it was the power of God. #RandolphHarris 19 of 23
“And supposing that this opportunity, by making known unto the people what had happened among them, that by beholding this scene it would cause them to believe in the power of God, therefore she ran forth from house to house, making it known unto the people. And they began to assemble themselves together unto the house of the king. And there came a multitude, and to their astonishment, they beheld the king, and the queen, and their servants prostrate upon the Earth, and they all lay there as though they were dead; and they also saw Ammon, and behold, he was Nephite. And now the people began to murmur among themselves; some saying that it was a great evil that had come upon them, or upon the king and his house, because he had suffered that the Nephite should remain in the land. However, others rebuked them, saying: The king hath brought this evil upon his house, because he slew his servants who had their flocks scattered at the waters of Sebus. And they were also rebuked by those men who had stood at the waters of Sebus and scattered the flocks which belonged to the king, for they were angry with Ammon because of the number which he hath slain of their brethren at the waters of Sebus, while defending the flocks of the king. Now, one of them, whose brother had been slain with the sword of Ammon, being exceedingly angry with Ammon, drew his sword and went forth that he might let it fall upon Ammon, to slay him; and as he lifted the sword to smite him, behold, he fell dead. #RandolphHarris 20 of 23
“Now we see that Ammon could no be slain, for the Lord had said unto Mosiah, his father: I will spare him, and it shall be unto him according to thy faith—therefore, Mosiah trusted him unto the Lord. And it came to pass that when the multitude beheld that the man had fallen dead, who lifted the sword to slay Ammon, fear came upon them all, and they durst not put forth their hands to touch him or any of those who had fallen; and they began to marvel again among themselves what could be the cause of this great power, or what all these things could mean. And it came to pass that there were many among them who said that Ammon was the Great Spirit, and others said he was sent by the Great Spirit; but others rebuked them all, saying that he was a monster, who had been sent from the Nephites to torment them. And there were some who said that Ammon was sent by the Great Spirit to afflict them because of their iniquities; and that it was the Great Spirit that had always attended the Nephites, who has ever delivered them out of their hands; and they said that it was this Great Spirit that had always attended the Nephites, who had ever delivered them out of their hands; and they said that it was this Great Spirit who had destroyed so many of their brethren, the Lamanites. And thus the contention began to be exceedingly sharp among them. #RandolphHarris 21 of 23
“And while they were thus contending, the woman servant who had caused the multitude to be gathered together came, and when she saw the contention which was among the multitude she was exceedingly sorrowful, even unto tears. And it came to pass that she went and took the queen by the hand, that perhaps she might raise her from the ground; and as soon as she touched her hand she arose and stood upon her feet, and cried with a loud voice, saying: O blessed Jesus, who has saved me from an awful hell! O blessed God, have mercy on this people! And when she had said this, she clasped her hands, being filled with joy, speaking many words which were not understood; and when she had done this, she took the king, Lamoni, by the hand, and behold he arose and stood upon his feet. And he, immediately, seeing the contention among his people, went forth and began to rebuke them, and to teach them the words which he had heard from the mouth of Ammon; and as many as heard his words believed, and were converted unto the Lord. However, there were many among them who would not hear his word; and therefore they went their way. #RandolphHarris 22 of 23
“And it came to pass that when Ammon arose he also administered unto them, and also did all the servants of Lamoni; and they did all declare unto the people the selfsame thing—that their hearts had been changed; that they had no more desire to do evil. And behold, many did declare unto the people that they had seen angels and had conversed with them; and thus they had told them things of God, and of his righteousness. And it came to pass that there were many that did believe in their words; and as many as did believe were baptized; and they became a righteous people, and they did establish a church among them. And thus the work of the Lord did commence among the Lamanites; thus the Lord did begin to pour out his Spirit upon them; and we see that his arm extended to all people who will repent and believe on his name,” reports Alma 19.1-36. Please be present, O Lord, to our supplications; and graciously hearken unto me, who am the first to need Thy mercy; and as Thou hast made me the minister of this work, not by choosing me on account of merit, but by the gift of Thy grace, please give me confidence to perform Thine office, and do Thou Thyself by our ministration carry out the act of Thine own loving-kindness; through our Lord, God in Heaven, with your grace, make this blessing come true. #RandolphHarris 23 of 23
Residence Three at Brighton Station boasts 2,757 square feet in this expansive two story home. There are four bedrooms, three and a half bathrooms, and a three car garage! The Owner’s Suite in your #BrightonStation Residence 3 home is the perfect escape. Use all that space to set up a TV lounge, reading nook, or a coffee bar!
The kitchen comes fully equipped with a large eat-in island, stainless steel appliances, quartz counters, and large walk in pantry. The openness in the design allows the Great Room and kitchen to interact with each other seamlessly. This home comes with an en suite bedroom on the first floor making it ideal for guests, or multi-generational living.
Best of all, each Cresleigh home comes fully equipped with an All Ready connected home! This smart home package comes included with your home and features great tools including: video door bell and digital deadbolt for the front door, connect home hub so you can set scenes and routines to make life just a little easier. Two smart switches and USB outlets are also included, plus we’ll gift you a Google Home Hub and Google Mini to help connect everything together! https://cresleigh.com/brighton-station/residence-3/
From Heaven, our Lord is so merciful, so much so that He is bestowing us with blessings on Earth. #CresleighHomes
A Merry Heart Maketh a Cheerful Countenance–We are Caught in the Power of their Revelatory Ecstasy!
The genius of our ruling class is that is has kept a majority of the people from every questioning the inequity of a system where most people drudge along, paying heavy taxes for which they get nothing in return. Nothing is more free than the imagination of a human; and though it cannot exceed that original stock of ideas, furnished by the internal and external senses, it has unlimited power of mixing, compounding, separating, and dividing these ideas, in all the varieties of fiction and vision. It can feign a train of events, with all the appearance of reality, ascribe to them a particular time and place, conceive them as existent, and paint them out to itself with every circumstance, that belongs to any historical fact, which it believes with the greatest certainty. Wherein, therefore, consists the difference between such a fiction and belief? It lies not merely in any peculiar idea, which is annexed to such a conception as commands our assent, and which is wanting to every known fiction. For as the mind has authority over all its ideas, it could voluntarily annex this particular idea to any function, and consequently be able to believe whatever it pleases; contrary to what we find by daily experience. We can, in our conception, join the head of a human to the body of a horse; but it is not in our power to believe, that such an animal has ever really existed. #RandolphHarris 1 of 25
It follows, therefore, that the difference between fiction and belief lies in some sentiment or feeling, which is annexed to the latter, not to the former, and which depends not on the will, no can be commanded at pleasure. It must be excited by nature, like all other sentiments; and must arise from the particular situation, in which the mind is placed at any particular juncture. Whenever any object is presented to the memory or sense, it immediately, by force of custom, carries the imagination to conceive that object, which is usually conjoined to it; and this conception is attended with a feeling or sentiment, different from the loose reveries of the fancy. In this consists the whole nature of belief. For as there is no matter of fact which we believe so firmly, that we cannot conceive the contrary, there would be no difference between the conception assented to, and that which is rejected, were it not for some sentiment, which distinguishes the one from the other. If I see a billiard ball moving towards another, on a smooth table, I can easily conceive it to stop upon contact. This conception implies no contradiction; but still it feels very differently from that conception, by which I represent to myself the impulse, and the communication of motion from one ball to another. #RandolphHarris 2 of 25
Where we to attempt a definition of this sentiment, we should, perhaps, find it a very difficult, if not an impossible task; in the same manner as if we should endeavour to define the feeling of cold or passion of anger, to a creature who never had any experience of these sentiments. BELIEF is the true and proper name of this feeling; and no one is ever at a loss to know the meaning of that term; because every human is every moment conscious of the sentiment represented by it. It may not, however, be improper to attempt a description of this sentiment; in hopes we may, by that means, arrive at some analogies, which may afford a more perfect explication of it. I say then, that belief is nothing but a more vivid, lively, forcible, firm, steady conception of an object, than what the imagination alone is ever able to attain. This variety of terms, which may seem so unphilosophical, is intended only to express that act of the mind, which renders realities, or what is taken for such, more present to us than fictions, cases them to weigh more in the thought, and gives them a superior influence on the passions and imagination. Provided we agree about the thing, it is needless to dispute about the terms. The imagination has the command over all its idea, and can join and mix them, in all ways possible. #RandolphHarris 3 of 25
It may conceive fictitious objects with all the circumstances of place and time. It may set them, in a manner, before our eyes, in their true colours, just as they might have existed. However, as it is impossible, that this faculty of imagination can ever, of itself, reach belief, it is evident, that belief consists not in the peculiar nature or order of ideas, but in the manner of their conception, and in their feeling to the mind. I confess, that it is impossible perfectly to explain this feeling or manner of conception. We may make use of words, which express something near it. However, its true and proper name, as we observed before, is belief; which is a term, that every one sufficiently understands in common life. And in philosophy, we can go no farther than assert, that belief is something felt by the mind, which distinguishes the ideas of the judgment from the fictions of the imagination. It gives them more weight and influence; makes them appear of greater importance; enforces them in the mind; and renders them the governing principle of our actions. I hear at present, for instance, person’s voice, with whim I am acquainted; and the sound comes as from the next room. This impression of my senses immediately conveys my thought to the person, together with all the surrounding objects. #RandolphHarris 4 of 25
I paint them out to myself as existing at present, with the same qualities and relations, of which I formerly knew them possessed. These ideas take faster hold of my mind, than ideas of an enchanted castle. They are very different to the feeling, and have a much greater influence of every kind, either to give pleasure or pain, joy or sorrow. Let us, then, take in the whole compass of this doctrines, and allow, that the sentiment of belief is nothing but a conception more intense and steady than what attends the mere fictions of the imagination, and that this manner of conception arises from a customary conjunction of the object with something present to the memory or senses: I believe that it will not be difficult, upon these suppositions, to find other operations of the mind analogous to it, and to trace up these phenomena to principles still more general. We have already observed, that nature has established connexions among particular ideas, and that no sooner one idea occurs to our thoughts than it introduces its correlative, and carries out attention towards it, by a gentle and insensible movement. These principles of connexion or association we have reduced to three, namely, Resemblance, Contiguity, and Causation; which are the bonds, that unite our thoughts together, and beget that regular train of reflection or discourse, which, in a greater or less degree, takes place among all humankind. #RandolphHarris 5 of 25
Now here arises a question, on which the solution of the present difficulty will depend. Does it happen, in all these relations, that, when one of the objects is presented to the senses or memory, the mind is not only carried to the conception of the correlative, but reaches a steadier and stronger conception of it than what otherwise it would have been able to attain? This seems to be the case with that belief, which arises from the relation of cause and effect. And if the case be the same with the other relations or principles of association, this may be established as a general law, which takes place in all the operations of the mind. We may, therefore, observe, as the first experiment to our present purpose, that, upon the appearance of the picture of an absent friend, our idea of one is evidently enlivened by the resemblance, and that every passion, which that idea occasions, whether of joy or sorrow, acquires new force and vigour. In producing this effect, there concur both a relation and a present impression. Where the picture bears one no resemblance, at least was not intended for one, it never so much as conveys our thought to one: And where it is absent, as well as the person; though the mind may pass from the thought of the one to that of the other; it feels its idea to be rather weakened than enlivened by that transition. #RandolphHarris 6 of 25
We take a pleasure in viewing the picture of a friend, when it is set before us; but when it is removed, rather choose to consider one directly, than by reflection in an image, which is equally distant and obscure. Science cannot contradict faith; it can show that faith is not absurd, that what is believed is corroborated by documents. However, the important problem is not to investigate the sources of Christian faith scientifically. It is to determine the relation of Christ to human history. This is more than ever true in our century. We may well agree that the historical relevance of the Christological affirmation drives home more effectively than any other today. When this has been granted, other problems remain to be considered. At the age of twenty-five, I presented some theses to a group of theological friends, in which I raised and attempted to answer the question, how the Christian doctrine might be understood, if the non-existence of the historical Jesus should become historically probable. One might view this theological escapade into the impossible as a pardonable youthful adventure—radical, but not to be taken seriously. Yet, even today, I maintain the radicalism of this question. A to historical inquiry into the facts behind the rise of the biblical picture of Christ, the exposition of those facts can only lend to probability. #RandolphHarris 7 of 25
The historical Jesus not only did not appear, but receded farther and farther with every new step. None of the innumerable sketches of a historical Jesus can claim to be a profitable picture. The attempt pf historical criticism to find the empirical truth about Jesus of Nazareth was a failure. This attitude towards historical investigation is more complex than appears at face-value, and it should be neither endorsed nor dismissed rapidly. One should distinguish several elements. We must admit that the positive knowledge of Jesus given by history is only probable knowledge. This is not because documents are unavailable or deficient, but simply because historical study as such never gives more than a probable knowledge. Catholic theologians commonly call such knowledge a “moral certainty.” Terms and words are not especially important. Whether we speak, in this case, of probability or of moral certainty, we imply that historical truth has characteristics of its own, distinguishing it from the truth of mathematics, of physics, or, in another domain, of metaphysic. Historical truth is never more than a probability. If we call it a certainty, we must qualify it as “moral.” To say this is to recognize the element of validity in the position here. #RandolphHarris 8 of 25
The probability is very faint, which does not take out knowledge of the life and times of Jesus seriously enough. In the present sate of historical studies there is not the ghost of a chance that “the non-existence” of Jesus should become historically probable. The liberal theologians attempted to base Christianity on historical research. However, we condemn the role of liberal theology, along which Christ was drawn into the realm of universal or highest humanity. He became the highest expression of humankind’s possibilities, a wave (the largest perhaps) in the stream of time, subjected to its arbitrariness and ambiguity. This was bound to happen once biblical critical exegesis was erected into the norm of Christian faith. Christ was no longer the center of history, no longer the Christ. He was the historical Jesus, or whatever vague knowledge we had of him. We stand unimpeachable when we object to this as a matter of principle: The foundation of Christian belief is not the historical Jesus, but the biblical picture of the Christ. The criterion of human thought and action is not the constantly changing and artificial product of historical research, but the picture of Christ as it is rooted in ecclesiastical belief and human experience. Our opposition to strict and rigid liberal doctrines and covenants, which replace the crucified Christ by the historical Jesus, is the only sound attitude. #RandolphHarris 9 of 25
Christology must be the norm of history. Instead, liberal Protestantism made historical tools the norm of Christology. It is perfectly true to say that the historical records of Jesus are themselves the products of faith; it is something else to conclude that they are historically reliable, an assertion to which forms the gist of the sections of systematic theology on the research for the historical Jesus and its failure, and on faith and historical scepticism. There is actually no logical link between the two propositions. To admit a logical link would be to admit that faith distorts facts. However, faith never distorts; it interprets. This is quite different. What was wrong with the liberal theologians who were seeking for the historical Jesus was not their interest in history (though they often fell into historicism), but that their search was not guided by the religious picture of the Christ which was that of the early Church. They became bad historians, excessively negative in their conclusions, because they had first been bad theologians. It is easy to see why we made the aforementioned propositions. The implied contrast between the evanescent historical Jesus and the Christ of faith corresponds too well to our own theological distinction between Jesus as Jesus and Jesus as Christ. It is not the man from Nazareth that matters, but our witness to the New Being in ourselves. #RandolphHarris 10 of 25
Outside of the, Jesus has no place in theology. Christology is not Jesusology. It is not interested in whatever happened to the man Jesus. It is interested in the fact that the disciples perceived the Christ in Him. We insist that Jesus Christ means Jesus who is said to be the Christ. In our self-consciousness, Jesus may not always have known that he was the Christ. On the Cross at least he despaired. Looking at history in the light of this distinction between Jesus and the Christ in him, between a man and the New Being which manifested itself through him, we even imagine that maybe Jesus was not the Christ. There was a Christ: this is a matter of revelatory experiences. The Apostles experienced it directly, and we still experience it, though indirectly. We are caught in the power of their revelatory ecstasy, and so we cannot deny that there was, that there is, a Christ. However, the identity of the Christ and of Jesus is no a matter of faith. It is a point of history; and it is very questionable. Participation, not historical argument, guarantees the reality of the event on which Christianity is based. It guarantees a personal life in which the New Being has conquered the old being. However, it does not guarantee his name to be Jesus of Nazareth. #RandolphHarris 11 of 25
Faith does not guarantee history. However, this is not because we misread the nature of historical inquiry. It is a result of the peculiar content of our Christology. If the New Being in the Christ is simply a form of the Protestant principle, it does not absolutely need a human bearer. Jesus is not necessary to the Christ. Yet this runs contrary to the meaning of Christianity. Of course, the Catholic faith does guarantee the identity of Jesus and the Christ, as did the Protestant faith before liberal Protestantism. One should carefully distinguish those historical elements that are essential to the meaning of the Christ for those the are not; blindness towards the historical groundwork of Christianity to say that the identity of Jesus and the Christ is not part of the kerygma (a Greek word used in the New Testament for “proclamation”). It is not enough to state that the original fact is the Apostles’ interpretation of Jesus. For how can we accept an interpretation if we do not know what is to be interpreted? How can we share the Apostles’ interpretation if we choose to doubt the identity of whom and what they interpreted? “Now concerning the spiritual gifts, brethren, I would not have you ignorant. Ye know that ye were Gentiles, carried away unto these dumb idols, even as ye were led. #RandolphHarris 12 of 25
“Wherefore I give you to understand, that no human speaking by the Spirit of God calleth Jesus accursed: and that no man can say that Jesus is the Lord, but by the Holy Ghost. Now there are diversities of gifts, but the same Spirit. And there are differences of administrations, but the same Lord. And there are diversities of operations, but it is the same God which worketh all in all. However, the manifestation of the Spirit is given to every human to profit withal. For to one is given by the Spirit of the word of wisdom; to another the word of knowledge by the same Spirit; to another faith by the same Spirit; to another the working of miracles; to another prophecy; to another discerning of spirits; to another divers kinds of tongues; to another the interpretation of tongues: but all these worketh that one and the selfsame Spirit, dividing to envy humans severally as one will,” 1 Corinthians 12.1-11. Most of us are students of theology, whether we teach or learn, whether we be missionaries or educators, ministers or social workers, administrators or political leaders. However, in this particular community, we are theologians, persons who ask the question of our ultimate concern, the question of God and Hs manifestation. Whatever else we may be, we are first of all theologians. #RandolphHarris 13 of 25
Therefore, it is most natural—although not most usual—for us to consider our existence as theologians. On what is this existence bases? What makes a human a theologian? What is one’s relation to other forms of existence? What is the significance of our existence as a whole? Paul makes very clear what he thinks is the foundation of all theology: the Divine Spirit. And the word of wisdom and knowledge, theology, according to the witness of the whole Christian Church, is basically a gift of the Spirit. It is one of the gifts, besides others. It is a special gift, besides other special gifts. However, it is a gift of the Spirit, and not a natural capacity. The word of knowledge—theology—is spoken to us before we can say it to others, or even to ourselves. To be a theologian means first of all to be able to receive spiritual knowledge. However, on the basis of this criterion, can we call ourselves theologians? Can we say that our theological thought is a gift of the Spirit? Are we certain that our theological existence transcends our human capacities, or that we have the word of knowledge, the word of spiritual wisdom? Paul gives a very concrete criterion for theological existence, which is also the criterion of all spiritual existence. #RandolphHarris 14 of 25
Paul says: One who cries “Cursed be Jesus” does not speak in the Spirit of God; and no one can say “Jesus is Lord” except in the Holy Spirit. One who accepts Jesus as the Christ proves by that very acceptance that one has received the Spirit of God. For the spirit of humans alone is not capable of making the statement: “I accept Jesus as the Christ.” That statement is the mystery and the foundation of the Christian Church, the paradox and the stumbling-block, which produce curses against Christianity. It is the depth and the power which create a New Being in the World, in history, and in humans. Therefore, one who joins in the Church’s confession that Jesus is the Christ participates in the Divine Spirit. It is one who can receive the Spirit of wisdom and knowledge; it is one who can become a theologian. Theology does not exist outside the community of those who affirm that Jesus is the Christ, outside the Church, precisely because it is a gift of the Divine Spirit. Theological existence is an element of the existence of the Church. It is not simply a matter of “free” thinking, of scientific research, or of general philosophical analysis. Theology expressed the faith of the Church. It restates the paradoxical statement, Jesus is the Christ, and considers all is presuppositions and implication. Theological existence indicates the existence of one who is grasped, within the Church, by the Divine Spirit, and who has received the word of wisdom and knowledge. #RandolphHarris 15 of 25
However, we must ask another question. If that be theological existence, which one of us can call oneself a theologian? Who can decide to become a theologian? And who can dare to remain a theologian? Do we really belong to the assembly of God? Can we seriously accept the paradox upon which the Church is built, the paradox that Jesus is the Christ? Are we grasped by the Divine Spirit, and have we received the word of knowledge as a gift? If somebody were to come and tell us that one certainly belongs to the Church, that one does not doubt that Jesus is the Christ any longer, that one continuously experiences the grip of the Divine Spirit and gift of spiritual knowledge, what should be our answer to one? We certainly should tell one that one does not fulfill even the first condition of theological existence, which is the realization that one does not know whether one have experienced the Divine Spirit, or spirits which are not divine. We would not accept one as a theologian. On the other hand, if someone were to come and tell us that one is estranged from the Christian Church and its foundations, that one does not feel the presence of the power of the Spirit, that one is empty of spiritual knowledge, but that one asks again and again the theological question, the question of an ultimate concern and its manifestations in Jesus as the Christ, we would accept one as a theologian. #RandolphHarris 16 of 25
There are many amongst us who believe within themselves that they can never become good theologians, that they could do better in almost any other realm. Yet they cannot imagine that their existence could be anything other than theological existence. Even if they had to give up theology as their vocational work, they would never cease to ask the theological question. It would pursue them into every realm. They would be bund to it, actually, if not vocationally. They could not be sure that they could fulfill its demands, but they would be sure that they were in its bondage. They who believe those things in their hearts belong to the assembly of God. They are grasped by the Divine Spirit. They have received he gift of knowledge. They are theologians. Even if your prayer is not a request for anything, you will be given benefits—an increased sense of knowing your place in the Universe, a stronger awareness of the presence of God, a development of your spiritual discipline. When praying, try to make a full-fledged ritual out of your prayer whenever possible. The benefits are real, and well worth the trouble. At their simplest, prayers are just like talking to God. You think about the Lord and talk. Talking to God is, therefore, a different form of talking to people. #RandolphHarris 17 of 25
You can show that you are talking to God by using a different style of speech. Just as you have set aside time and space for this sacred conversation, you set aside your normal ways of speech to make your prayers special. Because prayer is communication with a divine being, prayers must always be addressed to God, His son, and the Holy Ghost. Whether the divine trinity needs it or not is not the question. If you reach out to deities, like the Virgin Mary, it is only polite to call them by name. No sense starting out on the wrong foot. “And now it came to pass that as Alma was journeying from the land of Gideon southward, away to the land of Manti, behold, to his astonishment, he met with the sons of Mosiah journeying towards the land of Zarahemla. Now these sons of Mosiah were with Alma at the time the angel first appeared unto him; therefore Alma did rejoice exceedingly to see his brethren; and what added more to his joy, they were still his brethren in the Lord; yea, and they had waxed strong in the knowledge of truth; for they were humans of a sound understanding and they had searched the scriptures diligently, that they might know the word of God. However, this is not all; they had given themselves to much prayer, and fasting; therefore they had the spirit of prophecy, and the spirit of revelation, and when they taught, they taught with power and authority of God. #RandolphHarris 18 of 25
“And they had been teaching the word of God for the space of fourteen years among the Lamanites, having had much success in bringing many to the knowledge of the truth; yea, by the power of their words many were brought before the altar of God, to call on his name and confess their sins before him. Now these are the circumstances which attended them in their journeyings, for they had many afflictions; they did suffer much, both in body and in mind, such as hunger, thirst and fatigue, and also much labour in the spirit. Now these were their journeyings: Having taken leave of their father, Mosiah, in the first year of the judges; having refused the kingdom which their father was desirous to confer upon them, and also this was the minds of the people; nevertheless they departed out of their swords, and their arrows, and the slings; and this they did that they might provide food for themselves while in the wilderness. And thus they departed into the wilderness with their numbers which they had selected, to go up to the land of Nephi, to preach the word of God unto Lamanites. And it came to pass that they journeyed many days in the wilderness, and they fasted much and prayed much that the Lord would grant unto them a portion of his Spirit to go with them, and abide with them, that they might be an instrument in the hands of God to bring, if it were possible, their brethren, the Lamanites, to the knowledge of truth, to the knowledge of the baseness of the traditions of their father, which were not correct. #RandolphHarris 19 of 25
“And it came to pass that the Lord did visit them with his Spirit, and said unto them: Be comforted. And they were comforted. And the Lord said unto them also: Go forth among the Lamanites, thy brethren, and establish my word; yet ye shall be patient in long-suffering and afflictions, that ye may show forth good examples unto them in me, and I will make an instrument of thee in my hands unto the salvation of many souls. And it came to pass that the hearts of the sons of Mosiah, and also those who were with them, took courage to go forth unto the Lamanites to declare unto them the word of God. And it came to pass when they had arrived in the borders of the land of the Lamanites, that they separated themselves and departed one from another, trusting in the Lord that they should meet again at the close of their harvest; for they supposed that great was the work which they had undertaken. And assuredly it was great, for they had undertaken. And assuredly it was great, for they had undertaken to preach the word of God to a wild and hardened and ferocious people; a people who delighted in murdering the Nephites, and robbing and plundering them; and their hearts were set upon riches, or upon gold and silver, and precious stones; yet they sought to obtain these things by murdering and plundering, that they might not labour for them with their own hands. #RandolphHarris 20 of 25
“Thus they were a very indolent people, many of whom did worship idols, and the curse of God had fallen upon them because of the traditions of their fathers; notwithstanding the promises of the Lord were extended unto them on the conditions of repentance. Therefore, this was he cause for which the sons of Mosiah had undertaken the work, that perhaps they might bring them unto repentance; that perhaps they might bring them to know of the plan of redemption. Therefore they separated themselves one from another, and went forth among them, every human alone, according to the word and power of God which was given unto one. Now Ammon being the chief among them, or rather he did administer unto them, and he departed from them, after having blessed them according to their several stations, having imparted the word of God unto them, or administered unto them before his departure; and thus they took their several journeys throughout the land. And Ammon went to the land of Ishmael, the land being called after the sons of Ishmael, who also became Lamanites. And as Ammon entered the land of Ishmael, the Lamanites took one and bound one, as was their custom to bind all the Nephites who feel into their hands, and carry them before the king; and thus it was left to the pleasure of king to slay them, or to retain them in captivity, or cast them into prison, or to cast them out of his land, according to his will and pleasure. #RandolphHarris 21 of 25
“And thus Ammon was carried before the king who was over the land of Ishmael; and his name was Lamoni; and he was a descendant of Ishmael. And the king inquired of Ammon if it were his desire to dwell in the land among the Lamanites, or among his people. And Ammon said unto him: Yea, I desire to dwell among his people. And it came to pass that king Lamoni was much pleased with Ammon, and caused that his bands should be loosed; and he would that Ammon should take one of his daughters to wife. However, Ammon said unto him: Nay, but I will be thy servant. Therefore Ammon became a servant to king Lamoni. And it came to pass that he was set among other servants to watch the flocks of Lamoni, according to the custom of the Lamanites. And after he had been in the service of the king three days, as he was with Lamanitish servants going forth with their flocks to the place of water, which was called the water of Sebus, and all the Lamanites drive their flocks hither, that they may have water—therefore, as Ammon and the servants of the king were driving forth their flocks to the place of water, behold, a certain number of the Lamanites, who had been with their flocks to water, stood and scattered the flocks of Ammon and the servants of the king, and they scattered them insomuch that they fled many ways. #RandolphHarris 22 of 25
“Now the servants of the king began to murmur, saying: Now the king will slay us, as he had our brethren because their flocks were scattered by the wickedness of these humans. And they began to weep exceedingly, saying: Behold, our flocks are scattered already. Now hey wept because of the fear f being slain. Now when Ammon saw this his heart was swollen within him with joy; for, said he, I will show forth my power unto these my fellow-servants, or the power which is in me, in restoring these flocks unto the kind, that I may win the hearts of these my fellow-servants, that I may lead them to believe in my words. And now, these were the thoughts of Ammon, when he saw the afflictions of those whom he termed to be his brethren. And it came to pass that he flattered them by his words, saying: My brethren, be of good cheer and let us go in search of the flocks, and we will gather them together and bring them back unto the place of water; and thus we will preserve the flocks unto the king and he will not slay us. And it came to pass that they went in search of the flocks, and they did follow Ammon, and they rushed forth with much swiftness and did head the flocks of the king, and did gather them together again to the place of water. And those men again stood to scatter their flocks; but Ammon said unto his brethren: Encircle the flocks round about that they flee not; and I go and contend with these people who do scatter our flocks. #RandolphHarris 23 of 25
“Therefore, they did as Ammon commanded them, and he went forth and stood to contend with those who stood by the waters of Sebus; and they were in number not a new. Therefore they did no fear Ammon, for they supposed that one of their men could slay him according to their pleasure, for they knew not that the Lord had promised Mosiah that would deliver his sons out of their hands neither did they know anything concerning the Lord; therefore they delighted in the destruction of their brethren; and for this cause stood to scatter the flocks of the king. However, Ammon stood forth and began to cast stones at them with his along; yea, with mighty power he did sling stones amongst them; and thus he slow a certain number of them insomuch that they began to be astonished at his power; nevertheless they were angry because of the slain of their brethren, and they were determined that he should fall; therefore, seeing that they could not hit him with their stones, they came forth with clubs to slay him. However, behold, every human that lifted his club to smite Ammon, he smote off their arms with the edge of his sword, insomuch that they began to be astonished, and began to flee before him; yea, and they were not few in number; and he caused them to flee by the strength of his arm. #RandolphHarris 24 of 25
“Now six of them had fallen by the sling, but he slew non save it were their leader with his sword; and he smote off as many of their arms as were lifted against him, and thy were not a few. And when he had driven them afar off, he returned and they watered their flocks and returned them to the pasture of the king, and then went in unto the king, bearing the arms which had been smitten off by the sword of Ammon, of those who sought to slay him; and they were carried in unto the kind for a testimony of the things which they had done,” reports Alma 17.1-39. O God, Who, by Thine invisible power, dost wonderfully work out the effect of Thy Sacraments, and although we be unworthy to perform such great mysteries, yet Thou forsakes not the gifs of Thy grace, incline Thy gracious ears even to our entreaty; be present to us in Thy goodness, assist us in Thy loving-kindness, while we are observing Thy commands, O God Almighty. May that which is to be performed by our humble ministration, be fulfilled by Thine effectual power. Be present, O merciful God; that what has been done by our office and service may be confirmed by Thy benediction; through our Lord. Look down from Heaven, O Christ, on Thy flock and lambs, and bless their bodies and souls. Grant those who have received Thy sign, O Christ, on their foreheads, to be Thine own in the day of judgment. #RandolphHarris 25 of 25
#Meadows is the largest community at #PlumasRanch, offering 4 floor plans to choose from with all the features that make #CresleighHomes extraordinary. Check out today’s blog to learn more about this community! https://cresleigh.com/cresleigh-meadows-at-plumas-ranch/residence-1/
God, please bless us with your grace, and may Thy hand of power have the completion of the effect on Earth as in Heaven. https://www.instagram.com/p/CDmxNoYlsS8/
It is very peaceful to be able to live for your work alone. The self-denial, the sacrifices that our work demands are all compensated for by that lovely serenity of giving yourself up to dance. People also need to understand their existential freedom and their responsibility in exercising that freedom. One must develop the chance to experience one’s self as an entity separate from one’s environment, with the capacity to respond to one’s own initiative rather than merely reacting. Does emotion have a presence r identity independent of the person it is “in”? We talk as if it did. We commonly speak of expression, storing, getting in touch with, or even spreading and emotion. We speak of guilt as something that haunts us, or fear as something the grips, strikes, betrays, paralyzes, or overwhelms us. Fear, as we talk about is, is something that can lurk, hide, creep, look up, or attack. Love is something we fall into or out of. Anger is something that overtakes or overwhelms us. In this way of talking we use the fiction of some independent, outside agency in order to describe a contrasting inner state. It is important for a person to understand the sociohistorical precedence for the present attitudes one felt victim to. #RandolphHarris 1 of 22