This is the final part of a series on Presbyterianism by David Silversides (Minister of Loughbrickland Reformed Presbyterian Church). You will find part one HERE from which you can follow all the previous posts.

Responsibilities and Rights

Together

Pride makes us much more touchy about our rights than our responsibilities. It is easy to be rather vocal when we think our rights are being ignored and strangely quiet in the face of our neglected responsibility. For that reason, we’ll spend more of this article on what we are most inclined to bypass.

Responsibilities

In any Christian church there are many God-given responsibilities that the members have toward each other. We are to be kind to one another, forgive one another, love one another, bear on another’s burdens, exhort one another, provoke one another to good works, comfort one another. To be technically correct about church-government and yet neglect the basics gives a disfigured impression of what the body of Christ is meant to be like in the midst of a needy world in darkness. Nevertheless, we do need to look at responsibilities towards the government of the church.

A. Learning

A fundamental mark of the genuine convert is discipleship. He wants to follow and so he wants to learn in order to follow.
If you want to follow Christ, you will make every effort to be present when the Word is being expounded, not just to “support the minister”, but because you want to be there and you feel the need to be there. You are not doing God a favour; He is doing you one by giving you the opportunity to learn. The converts at Lystra accepted teaching
(Acts 14:21), and so should we. When any of the elders counsel you from the Word, a willingness to listen should be evident.

B. Submission

“Obey them that have the rule over you, and submit yourselves: for they watch for your souls…”
(Hebrews 13:17).
In all matters which are the proper concern of the church, you should submit to the decisions of the eldership of the church. Even if you think they may not have made the best decision, provided no sin is involved, fall in line to the glory of God and for the peace and order of the church. Too many uproars in churches are over trivia where no matter of real Biblical principle is involved.

As far as possible, uphold the good name of the members of session. Avoid those social situations where people delight in expressing indignation at the latest misdemeanour of a minister or elder.

C. Support of the Testimony

If the session is making efforts to bring the Gospel to the people of the district, give your wholehearted support. Put other things to one side, even other Christian activities if possible. Join with them in “striving together for the faith of the Gospel,” (Philippians 1:27). Even the Apostle Paul appreciated the presence of fellow Christians in his testimony to the truth. When he was brought to Rome, some of the brethren came to meet him, “whom when Paul saw, he thanked God and took courage” (Acts
28:15).

D. Support of Biblical Discipline

If the elders find it necessary to exercise discipline, the members should help the effectiveness of that discipline, not undermine it. The main aim of such discipline is the good of the offender, to bring him to repentance. You must encourage him towards such repentance. Urge him to heed to the exhortation of the minister and elders. Don’t be two faced, giving verbal agreement that the session’s action is biblical in one situation and yet agreeing in the presence of the offender that he’s had a raw deal. Assure him of your love, but love him wisely. Take the flack to the glory of God and for the good of his soul. This must be done even when family ties are involved.

E. Prayer

Strengthening The Disciples Failure to pray is either failure to believe or failure to care. You either don’t believe the minister and elders need the Lord’s help or you don’t care whether they have it. If you don’t pray for them and you are tempted to criticise them, don’t. Your words will not proceed from a right motive and are likely to have a purely negative, wounding effect without any positive benefit.

Rights

There are privileges that all the people of God should have within the body of Christ. Fellowship in Christ in corporate worship and witness and mutual care for one another are among these. But what about members’ rights as far as the office-bearers are concerned?
You are not necessarily entitled to brilliance in the pulpit but you are entitled to hear an honest attempt to expound the Scriptures week by week. You should have opportunity to join in all the ordinances of worship the Lord has appointed in His Word. You should receive pastoral care from your session and Biblical answers to your questions, if possible. In more formal terms, church members’ rights include the following

A. Sacraments

If you are a Christian, walking with the Lord, you should be baptised (if not already), your children should be baptised and you should be admitted to the Lord’s Supper for your encouragement and strengthening in the faith.

B. Election of Officers

In history, Presbyterians have been prepared even to defy the civil courts rather than have ministers forced upon a congregation against their will. Election of local office-bearers is a right Christ has bestowed upon the congregational membership, subject to ordination by session or presbytery.

C. Access to the Eldership Bodies

In Acts 15:1-2, a disagreement in the Antioch church was referred to a wider eldership body. In the Reformed Presbyterian Church every member has the right to bring matters to the session. If not satisfied, he then has the right to bring a matter to the presbytery and synod. Such access to the higher eldership bodies is something for which to be thankful, though to be used with restraint and where a real issue of Biblical principle is to be resolved. This reference to the wider church can reduce the number of unnecessary divisions in churches.
Sometimes Presbyterians have made church government seem a very complex affair and it would be naive to assume that we as a denomination have entirely escaped this. Perhaps sometimes the biblical concepts get lost in a sea of ecclesiastical jargon. Nevertheless, behind all the “presby-speak”, there are principles that are Biblical and beneficial and these should be prized.

Presbyterianism should express, in a non-hierarchical way, the unity of the whole body. Even so, the right form of church-government alone will never preserve the unity. Let us pray for our church and for the unity of the Spirit within it. Pray for a God-given reviving among us that the time for the Lord to favour Zion may come. (Psalm 102:13).

Part 7 of 7

G.M

This is the sixth part of a series on Presbyterianism by David Silversides (Minister of Loughbrickland Reformed Presbyterian Church). You will find part one HERE.

“Presbyterianism – For What?

“Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost: teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you…” (Matt 28: 19-20).

Ok, so Presbyterianism is the Biblical form of church government, but what exactly is this “governing” anyway?
Limited Functions

As Christ is the King of the church, He appoints the functions of the church, that is the church in the sense of an organised body. There are many legitimate activities that Christians individually and as a group may engage in, but the instituted church has specific functions appointed by Christ.

Limited Authority

The eldership of the church, whether we think of the local session or the higher Presbyterial bodies, always has a limited authority. They are to act under Christ, the Chief Shepherd. “Whatsoever I have commanded you’, is the circumference of church authority and f church authority and the church’s governing bodies should take great care to go up to but not across that line. So the synod at Jerusalem could say, “It seemed good to the Holy Ghost and to us, to lay upon you no greater burden than these necessary things.” (Acts 15:28). The word “teach” in Matthew 28:19 means “to disciple” or “to make disciples of’. This is the great work of the church empowered by and under the authority of Christ.

Making New Disciples

A.The Church’s Job – Apart from the witness of the individual Christian, the only evangelistic or missionary agency mentioned in Scripture is the church. Other missionary organisations exist largely as a result of either the failure of the church to evangelise or as a stopgap because of the fragmented state of the church. We should not, however, lose sight of the Biblical ideal or give up working towards it.

B. Local Evangelization – The church should always be engaged in evangelism by those straightforward methods found in Scripture, avoiding underhand or entertainment methods of human invention (2 Corinthians 4:1-3). The role of the eldership should be more than simply approving what a few enthusiasts in the congregation want to do. They should lead.

c. The Wider Mission – The wider missionary work of the church should also be lead by the eldership. Even when direct revelation was given of Paul and Barnabas’ call to a particular missionary work, that revelation was received by what was essentially a presbytery at Antioch and they sent the missionaries out (Acts 13:1-3). Biblical Presbyterianism is well designed to further co-ordinated missionary work, provided we depend on Christ the King to bless the work and build His church by adding new disciples to it. (Acts 2:47, 13:48, 16:14).

Recognizing Disciples

A. The Impossible Not Expected – Baptism is the sign of church membership. Although administered by the minister, the whole eldership is responsible before the Lord for determining who shall be baptized on the basis of His Word. Those who give credible profession of faith are to be recognized by Baptism (unless previously baptized) as members of the professing church on earth, though this is not and cannot be an infallible declaration that they are born again. The session can only see the outward God knows the heart (Acts 5:1-11; 8:13, 20-23, 2 Corinthians 13:5 etc.). Faithfulness within the limits of our knowledge is what is required. If outward profession and practice indicate that a person is not converted he must not be admitted.

B. Junior Members – Baptism replaces Old Testament circumcision (Colossians 2:11-12), however, whereas in the Old Testament the women were incorporated in the sign given to men, in the New Testament the sign given personally to male and female (Acts 8:12; 16:15). Beyond these Divinely revealed alterations, the administration of the sign of membership of God’s covenant people must continue as in the Old Testament. What the Lord does not change, we must not change. Abraham was circumcised as a believer (Romans 4:11), but his children were to be circumcised as well (Genesis 17, Exodus 12:48). Therefore the children of professing Christians are to be baptised, but only admitted to the full active responsibilities of their church membership (including the Lord’s Supper) when they give mature credible profession of faith in Christ or themselves. (Infants did not and could not have taken the passover, the Old Testament forerunner of the Lord’s Supper, Exodus 12:26).

Perfect Church Purity in Heaven Only

The eldership is to seek to mark out the boundaries of the congregation of the Lord, the visible church, as required by the church’s King. They must however, discourage a misplaced confidence in that outward membership, a sin of which the Jews of Christ’s day were so often guilty only the genuine believer belongs to the perfected church of heaven.

Discipline Among Disciples

A. Suspension and Excommunication All church members sin. When, however a church member pursues a course of defiance of God’s Word after exhortation, the privileges of membership must be withheld, though at this stage he is still regarded as a brother (2 Thessalonians 3:14,15). If resistance to the Word continues must ultimately be regarded as “an heathen man and a publican” (Matthew 18:17) i.e. an unbeliever and an apostate.

B. Medicinal and Surgical – The purpose of such discipline is first of all to seek the cure of the offending member by his coming to repentance. It is also, if it goes the full length, to be surgical, preserving the purity of the whole body (1 Corinthians 5:4-7), though even then, repentance is not to be despaired of. The way back into all the privileges of membership is open when repentance is clearly evident (2 Corinthians 2:5-7).

C. Not Optional – Failure by the eldership to exercise discipline when Biblically required is not love but selfishness. To seek a quiet life by allowing sin to go unchecked or to allow someone the status of being counted a Christian, when he is evidently not a disciple of Christ, is to act unfaithfully to men’s souls. No one should be encouraged in a false sense of security and the potential hostility at least in the short term if not more, to the exercise of discipline should not deflect the eldership from its duty. After all, Christ is not glorified by the church allowing itself to become indistinguishable form the world. The elders should love unselfishly by doing the necessary, though unpopular, thing though unpopular, thing, (2 Corinthians12:15).

Strengthening The Disciples

A. Teaching – The elders must ensure that the flock are taught the truth. (Acts 20:28, 1 Peter 5:1,2). The preaching and teaching of God’s Word is a means of strengthening the people of God. The minister is to preach everything that God has revealed, (Acts 20:20, 25-27) so that they may be more consistent disciples of Christ (Ephesians 4:11-16). In counseling those with problems and troubles, sympathy should not be lacking, but the Word must also be brought to bear upon the situation. Indeed, the elders in all their dealings with the flock should not be afraid to lean upon the Word to guide and instruct the members.

B. Worship – The eldership have responsibility for the church’s worship. Preaching of the Word is one part of that worship, but there are several other ordinances appointed by the Lord to strengthen his disciples. Sometimes impatience is expressed with our simple form of worship. But we should rejoice in the fact that the ministers and elders of our church have refused to impose on the flock of God anything that is not known to have Christ’s authority. This is in line with our comments at the beginning about the limits of church authority. This is not a burdensome restriction but freedom from the commandments of men. The Lord’s ordinances are best suited to teach us to love the Lord. “Whatsoever I have commanded” – this is the key! How much better this, than the form of worship being determined by whoever has the strongest will to impose his preferences. Freedom in Christ is freedom under Christ.”

Part 6 of 7

G.M

This is the fifth part of a series on Presbyterianism by David Silversides (Minister of Loughbrickland Reformed Presbyterian Church). You will find part one HERE.

“The Sword and the Keys

The Sword

The basic function of the state is to punish the evildoer. In Romans 12:19, the Apostle Paul quotes the scripture “Vengeance is mine: I will repay, saith the Lord”. He then shows that since it belongs to God to punish sin, private revenge by individuals is wrong. (Verses 20,21).
Continuing into Chapter 13, however, since the civil ruler is the “minister of God”, when sin expresses itself in open crime, God requires the ruler to execute vengeance in His name, having delegated a limited authority to him for that end.

The principle that vengeance belongs to God both prohibits private revenge and requires punishment of crime by the ruler. This duty to punish the criminal is called the “bearing of the sword”, (verse 4) showing that it extends to the sentence of capital punishment. The duty of submission to rulers rests on the fact that “the powers that be are ordained of God”. This means not simply that they exist in God’s providence, but that civil government is His institution. It follows that His law should be the ruler’s definition of right and wrong and open or and wrong and open or public transgression of that law should be the basic definition of crime. (See also 1 Peter 2:13-16).

It is the duty of rulers, not only in their personal lives, but also as rulers to submit to God and to His Christ (Psalm 2:10 – 12, Revelation 1:5, 1 Timothy 6:15). For men to act independently of the Word of God is always wrong.

The Keys

“And I will give unto thee the keys of the Kingdom of Heaven” (Matthew 16:19). The Church’s authority lies in a different realm to that of the state. The church’s function relates to the gospel of grace rather than to civil justice. The church exercises the “power of the keys” by the preaching of the gospel, in which the door to the kingdom is opened. Not only in the preaching of the Word, is the line of demarcation between the children of the kingdom and the children of the world made clear, but in the discipline of the Church that distinction is applied within the limits of fallible human observation of outward profession and practice. (Matthew 18:17, 1 Corinthians 5:9- 13 etc.).

Distinct under Christ

We conclude that church and state are both to acknowledge Christ as King and both to submit to the Word of God. Nevertheless, they are separate institutions with different membership, functions and officers. On top of this Christ has appointed a definite form of church government in which kings and magistrates have no place.

In the Old Testament, kings were punished in Israel for intruding into the role of the priesthood (1 Samuel 13:11-13, 2 Chronicles 26:16-21). Seventeenth century Presbyterians wrote at length on this subject, showing that even in Israel, civil and ecclesiastical government were distinguishable from each other. The New Testament makes this clearer still. This means that Rome’s view that for a nation to be Christian it must be church controlled is to be rejected. Likewise, the view (known as Erastianism) that the monarch at least if he is a professing Christian, should govern the church is also rejected. Church and state are distinct under Christ and our forefathers were correct when they saw resistance to state interference in the church as an expression of their loyalty to King Jesus.

The Right Connection

The right connection between church and state is one of mutual obligation under Christ.

A. The State must recognise and accommodate Christ’s church – Since civil rulers are under Christ and are to base civil law on God’s law, then so far as it comes within their proper scope of activity, they must, on the basis of the first four commandments, distinguish between the true religion and the false. They are to pave the way for the Church’s function of upholding and spreading the truth. This is their duty to Him who is the prince of the Kings of the earth as well as the Head of the church. Since Christ in providence governs all for the good of the church, then rulers must show their submission to him by consciously using their God-given authority in the interests of the church also. If we are to pray “For kings and all in authority; that we may lead a quiet and peaceable life in all godliness and honesty” (1 Timothy 2:2), then kings are to promote that which we are to pray for.

Rulers are not to govern within the church but use their legitimate authority outside the church to facilitate the church in the exercise of its distinctive functions. “And kings shall be thy nursing fathers and queens thy nursing mothers”, (Isaiah 49:23, see also Isaiah 60:12 & 16).

B. The church must teach the state – It is the church’s duty to “declare all the counsel of God” (Acts 20:27). All that is in the Word of God is within the church’s teaching function. This means that all the Word of God says about how a nation is to be governed is to be part of our testimony in the world. Also, civil rulers, like everybody else, are appropriate recipients of that testimony.

When the people, the publicans and the soldiers asked John the Baptist what form their repentance should take in practice, he gave definite answers (Luke 3:10 – 14). If Tony Blair and his cabinet repented of their sins and were asking the church what the Word of God says about running the country to the glory of God the church should be able to respond.
“I will speak of thy testimonies also before kings, and will not be ashamed” (Psalms 119:46).”

Part 5 of 7

G.M

This is the fourth part of a series on Presbyterianism by David Silversides (Minister of Loughbrickland Reformed Presbyterian Church). You will find part one HERE

“The Right Connections

We have been looking so far mainly at the local congregation. Now we move to the question of connections. What should be the connection between one congregation and another? What should be the connection, if any, between the Church and the state? We look at the first of these questions this time.

No Hierarchy

Episcopalians favour the idea of certain ministers acting as “bishops”, that is as a higher level of minister with authority over several congregations and their office-bearers.

That the word “bishop” itself refers to the same office as “elder” (see previous sections) in the New Testament is usually acknowledged nowadays even by those who favour this view. Nevertheless, terms apart, appeal is made to the case of men like Timothy and Titus as justification for a higher office with wider authority outside the local congregation.

This is not on. The role of Timothy and Titus differs from that of, say, a Church of Ireland bishop in several ways. They acted under the direction of the apostles and as their assistants. Today there are no apostles to assist. Their call like that of the apostles, involved direct revelation not promotion (1 Timothy 4:14). They did not stay permanently in the one place but only for a time to help establish and settle a church (e.g. Titus 1:5). We find them constantly on the move at the direction of the Apostle Paul.

One Body

The church is described as the body of Christ of which he is the Head (Ephesians 1:22-23, 5:23 etc.). There are not several bodies of Christ only one. This idea is prominent in 1 Corinthians 12. In verses 27-28 we read ‘now ye are the body of Christ, and members in particular and God hath set some in the church, first apostles, secondly prophets, thirdly teachers.

Gifts For the Body

The list includes offices like the apostles which were not based in a particular congregation and other temporary gifts that were given only while scripture was still being completed. Nevertheless, it also includes the continuing gifts and offices that are linked to a particular local congregation. This means that the gifts given to individuals in the local congregation are for the benefits of that congregation first of all, but not only so. The list includes the gift of “governments” (verse 28). Just as the labours of the minister are not confined to his own congregation, but his gifts are to be used to some extent to edify other parts of the church, so ruling gifts of the eldership are to find wider application.

Church and Churches

The word “church” is used of a single congregation. It is also true that several congregations can be called churches (1 Corinthians 11:16, Galatians 1:2). At the same time, the people of God as a whole even on earth, are called “the church” (singular), (Galatians 1:13, Philippians 3:6). Christ builds one church (Matthew 16:18). Also in the larger cities where several congregations undoubtedly existed, the group of congregations is still called the church and the elders of that group are called the elders of that church. So, for example, in Jerusalem the vast numbers of believers and the number of apostles preaching regularly indicates that they would have met in several congregations (Acts 12:24; 21:20) yet we find reference to “the church which was at Jerusalem” (Acts 8:1 cf. Acts 12:5, and 15:4). At Ephesus a church met in the house of Aquilla and Priscilla (1 Corinthians 16:19 – written from Ephesus – see Acts 19) yet this could hardly be all the Christians at Ephesus (Acts 19:18-20). Still we find reference to the church at Ephesus and the elders of the church (Acts 20:17 and Revelation 2:1).

All of this leads us to conclude that there where several congregations were in close proximity and rendered it geographically possible, the elders exercised a joint oversight over those congregations together. This is also in line with the practice in the Jewish synagogues. Where there were several synagogues in one city, they governed by what we would call a presbytery of elders of all those synagogues. The Sanhedrin in Jerusalem, though including priests which do not exist in the New Testament church, was essentially an eldership body and acted rather like the Synod or General Assembly of a Presbyterian church.

A Biblical Synod

Acts 15 contains an account of the action taken when men brought in heresy at the church at Antioch (verse 1). Paul and Barnabas referred the matter to the elders at Jerusalem (verse 2). After discussions, decisions were reached (verses 19-23). The people concurred in the decisions (verse 22) and joined in the greetings sent to the church at Antioch etc (verse 23), but the decisions were those of the “apostles and elders” only (see Acts 16:4). It was an act of government, not of apostles only but of elders also. Thus, when there are no apostles, such councils or synods are part of the proper function of the continuing eldership of the church. This unity of government can transcend even cultural differences such as that between

Antioch and Jerusalem

There are many lessons in Acts 15 on how presbyteries and Synods should use their authority, but they must wait until later. What is clear is that for a congregation to remain independent when wider fellowship in church government (as well as in other ways) is possible is a mistake. Episcopacy rightly recognises the need for unity in church government but wrongly invents a hierarchy of office to achieve it. Presbyterianism expresses the biblical teaching that since the disappearance of the apostolic office the connecting link between congregations in church government is through the elders meeting in wider and therefore higher assemblies which for convenience we call presbyteries, synods etc.

Individualism Restrained

In today’s world where everyone wants to “do his own thing”, Christians have to resist the temptation to think they don’t need the fellowship and oversight of the church. Individual congregations must resist that temptation also by seeking fellowship with other congregations and expressing that fellowship even in joint church government by the elders of such congregations acting together. Isolation can easily lead to doctrinal and practical eccentricity in the individual Christian or congregation. We need the checks and balances of biblical Presbyterianism. ” … yea, all of you be subject one to another, and be clothed with humility: for God resisteth the proud, and giveth grace unto the humble”. (l Peter 5:5).”

Part 4 of 7

G.M

This is the third part of a series on Presbyterianism by David Silversides (Minister of Loughbrickland Reformed Presbyterian Church). You will find part one HERE and part two HERE.

“Elders and Deacons

Eldership in the local church

We have seen that each congregation is to have elders and at least one of these elders is to be a minister of the Word (1 Timothy 5:17). In the Reformed Presbyterian Church each congregation has a body of elders (traditionally called the ‘Session’). The minister usually acts as Moderator (another name for chairman). Where there are insufficient elders or no minister ‘interim elders’ or an ‘interim moderator’ are appointed so that each congregation has a session of at least one minister and two other elders responsible for its care.

Behind the official language a biblical principle is being upheld, namely that each congregation should be under the oversight of a body of elders, including both kinds of elders (ministers/ruling elders). If we can distinguish scriptural principle in the midst of customary Presbyterian language it helps!

Deacons

1. Deacons are different from elders – The Philippian church had ‘bishops and deacons’ (Philippians 1:1). 1 Timothy chapter 3 gives separate lists of qualifications for bishops (elders) and deacons (see verses 1-8).

2. Deacons were new – Although in Israel the poor were cared for in various ways, the office of deacon, unlike the eldership, apparently began in New Testament times. Acts 6:1-7 is regarded as the beginning of the diaconite. The newness of the office perhaps explains the specific and detailed account of its origin under the apostles of Christ, whereas the eldership simply appears on the pages of the New Testament as the continuation of a thing known in the Old Testament. Indeed, it is a good general point to remember that the book of Acts focuses attention on the differences between the church in the Old Testament and the church in the New. What is not repealed by God simply continues. For example, the evangelisation of the nations is given prominence whereas the building up of the church through the family is largely assumed to continue as in the Old Testament. The introduction of Baptism, rather than circumcision, as the sign of the covenant and of church membership is spelled out, but the place of the children of believers in the covenant and visible church is mainly taken for granted. The change of the weekly day of worship to the first day of the week to commemorate the resurrection of Christ is clearly indicted, but that this is the continuation of the weekly and universally required Sabbath of creation is assumed. Likewise, the beginning of the diaconite is given whereas the eldership simply appears as a thing already known.

3. The Deacons work is with physical needs – They are to look after the material side of the church’s affairs. In Acts chapter 6, it was to relieve the apostles of the work of caring for the poor widows of the church that the diaconite was formed.
When the church has lost sight of the true functions of the eldership, the distinction between elders and deacons will hardly seem necessary, since the handing round of the bread and wine at communion will be virtually the only distinctive eldership activity observable. This happens either when a church is so dead that spiritual matters no longer feature and there is only money and fabric left to think about or when a church sincerely but wrongly sees the spiritual care of the flock as basically the concern of the minister alone. Alternatively, the need for deacons can be lost sight of by a low view of the ministry of the Word altogether. People who only want a minister to give a trifling little talk once a week will inevitably expect him to be an ecclesiastical ‘Jack-of-all-trades’. Nevertheless, for church members to call a man to be first and foremost a ‘minister of the Word’ while wanting minimal ministry of the Word is hypocrisy and deceit. On the other hand, where there is an appetite for the truth and a real commitment to attending upon the preaching and teaching of God’s Word, then the apostolic division of labour makes sense, “It is not reason that we should leave the Word of God and serve tables. Wherefore brethren look ye out among you seven men of honest report, full of the Holy Ghost and wisdom, whom we may appoint over this business. But we will give ourselves continually to prayer and to the ministry of the Word” (Acts 6:2-4).

4. The Deacons must be spiritual – Whilst in 1 Timothy 3:8-13 the qualifications for deacons place less emphasis on doctrinal ability, they must still be spiritual men in the Biblical sense of ‘full of the Holy Spirit’ (Acts 6:3). To handle the temporal affairs of the church under Christ and to His glory requires more than being good with figures. It requires godliness.”

Part 3 of 7

G.M