All right, welcome back. So let's go to the next chapter, the evangelist restoration of the ministry of the evangelist. Now, this is a more of a practical chapter that what I'd like each one of us maybe to do is whenever you're free, choose any one evangelist, read about him, see how his ministry was.  So there are instances where God has used people greatly, right? They've been doing, they did a wonderful ministry, but they failed in the area of looking after their family, or they've done wonderful ministry and they failed in their marriage, right? It was a broken marriage. Why? Because all the time they were in ministry. So, so what I'm trying to get at is you can probably choose any one person, read about him, but take what is important to learn about their lives, be encouraged with their life as well, so that, you know, it'll help us, right? And learning from their lives is good, but also learning their failures is good because we can avoid those failures, right? So let's look briefly at the restoration of the ministry of the evangelist. Now, after the book of Acts and after all the apostles and the disciples were martyred, the ministry obviously went on and we don't know much about who took on the roles of leadership, but we do know that there was Eusebius, there was other people who became leaders in the church after a while and let's look at a few of them, right? Eusebius was the earliest church historian, right? Occupying the first steps in succession of the apostles. Now, what did he do? He set on on a journey from home to work as an evangelist. He preached the word of God in places where the gospel was not reached, right? And he used faith as his most powerful tool to bring out the ministry. And if you do a study about his life, you know, he was a man of extreme faith, just like, you know, many years later we see John G. Lake also. He was a man of extreme faith and Eusebius was one of that, right? Whenever he went, he demonstrated extreme faith in God and he journeyed to many places. He came, he journeyed to India as far as India being an evangelist to the word. The ministry of the evangelist is again evidenced after that by many other, you know, groups of, you know, groups of ministries, right? So for example, the Hussites, the Lolads, the Puritans, the Methodists, the Presbyterians. Now, when we study church history, we'll see that there were a lot of groups that were, you know, that came up during the early church, right? But in all these groups, we don't see any of them saying, no need to preach the gospel. The gospel itself will come to everyone. We don't see that. All these groups had one thing in common. You have to go and preach the gospel. Now, whether it's right or wrong, that is secondary, but they had one thing in mind. Go preach the gospel. They all were involved in the work of the evangelism, right? And so when we look at this, later on in church history, we see George Whitefield, right? Who was across the Atlantic Ocean 13 times. He would preach from between 5,000 to 50,000 people. Now, George Whitefield was a contemporary of John Wesley, right? And he was known to be a man of, you know, whenever he spoke, it was like flames of fire would come out of his mouth. So it's wonderful to read about these men of God. You know, George Whitefield, even in his own house, in his room, it was said that, you know, as they were burying him, they saw two on his knees. His knees was, there was no knees. It was capped. It was just gone inside. And so they wondered, why is it like this? And then they, as they were cleaning up his room and getting rid of all the things, they saw two holes on the ground, right? And they realized that he had spent so many hours in prayer that eventually there were holes on the strong flooring. And that's why his knees were capped. He was a man of extreme prayer, right? And he did wonderful ministry, reaching out to many people, preached many gospels. Again, John and Charles Wesley dedicated their lives. But more than Charles, it was John Wesley who went from England to different parts of the world, right? During the 18th century, he traveled more than 200,000 miles, preached more than 20,000 sermons, went mostly by horseback, ministering to the Red Indians, the electorate, the poor, and also the elite, right? Those who are well advanced in knowledge. So we see that the ministry of the evangelists were restored by these great men and women of God in church history, right? And even now in a day and age that we are in, the work of the evangelist is never, never, never going to stop, right? Now, this is such an encouragement for us, right? It's not like, okay, this is done. We are over. Everyone can, you know, just relax, start something. No. The work of the evangelist will continue till his second coming. It will continue. And actually, if you read the book of Revelations, after that, after, you know, the rapture during the whole time of the tribulation, there's a great revival, right? One side, the enemy is doing all his work, right? Bringing, you know, all these plagues and diseases. And the other side, there's this world revival that happens. And God uses those two witnesses to, again, to reach out and touch many, many lives. So, until the last page, the book of Revelations, the work of the evangelist will continue, right? So, maybe what we can do is, I want to encourage all of us, maybe you can choose one person, right? Now, this is not an assignment and you're not going to get marked for it, but this is just going to encourage us, right? You can take your time, do a research about this person. You can choose somebody, study about him. And probably if you want to write it down, you can write it down. If you want to put it on a Word document and just go through it, go ahead and do that. But just choose an evangelist and look at his or her life. You can go up to even, you know, the this century, so no problem. But the point is, take in, you know, learn from their lives, right? Learn the good things, learn their success and learn from their failures as well, right? So, if any of you would like to share, maybe next month or the following month, you'd like to share the document or you want to share during the class, we leave it open so you can also share your thoughts as well. So, you can keep it a little bit interactive. Is that okay? Any questions? Is that okay? I don't think, oh, another assignment. Yes, Pastor. Right? It's not an assignment, right? It's just so that we can learn, right? We can all learn together. Okay, so let's move. I wanted to finish this chapter, chapter five, the practical keys to doing the ministry of the evangelist. The practical keys, right? Seven points. First one, follow the biblical pattern of the evangelist. Now, we read those verses in the previous class. What is the biblical pattern of the evangelist? To move from one place to another, ministering the gospel, reaching out to those who are lost. So, follow the biblical pattern, right? I remember this one preacher, one of my known pastor. This happened in North India. And I was talking to him and he said, you know what? I invited this very well-known evangelist to come and minister in my church. And do you know what happened? I said, tell me what happened. The evangelist, that person asked for five huge sum of money. I don't know if the others can relate to that about, but a huge sum of money to come and minister for one hour. This for an hour, right? A huge sum of money. And this pastor was shocked. He was shocked for two reasons. One, first of all, the Bible says that freely we receive freely we give, right? It's good to bless them. That is secondary. And two, he was shocked because there was no feeling of, you know, oh, I'm doing the wrong thing. I shouldn't be asking for it poorly, right? Just open about it. You have paid me so much, I'll come and minister. And as he was saying this, I remember this pastor, he teared up saying, he asked me one question. What is the ministry coming to? If now we are like this, what is it going to be 10 years from now? Right? But, you know, we just were discussing and we ended with prayer and he said, no, God knows. This is God's work. God knows what he's going to do, how he's going to do it.  So we were encouraged, but we will see these discouraging things happening, right? Now, I'm not saying don't, you know, don't bless or don't ask for money, but there's a way to do things, right? Of course, we want to bless people, bless people in ministry, but demanding things like this is not right. What did the Bible say? You know, we read in Luke, right? When you go into a house, if they offer you anything, take it, right? Take it and have it. Be pleased with it. Bless them. If they don't, it's okay, move on, right? So that's a biblical pattern. What is the point? We are to reach out the gospel, right? So it's very important that we follow the biblical pattern of the evangelists. Two is develop the supernatural. Now some of us may say, hey, I don't know. I'm not flowing the gifts of the spirit. I'm still learning about it. That's all right. One thing we should learn is we develop the gifts of the spirit. We develop in the supernatural, right? Many a times, you know, we have conferences, we have weekend schools. Why do we have all this? Because we want to develop ourselves in the supernatural. There will be times when, you know, we have prayed over people. They've not received healing. Well, sometimes they've received healing, right? But we are continuing to develop, continuing to grow. Now the supernatural is not something which is a box, right? You can't put God in a box and say, okay, God, you work like this only. No, God can do anything in any way, any house. So the supernatural is a huge area that we can all develop in. So we develop, we grow. Now, what are some key points or key ways to develop in the supernatural? First, spend time in God's Word. Let God speak to you. Read and see how God worked miracles. Now, you know, I was talking to some of my, some people, you know, that I know, and they were saying, you know what, I'm going on reading the book of Acts, but seeing the supernatural and praying, but I'm not, you know, able to flow in it. So I said, you know, it's not only about reading it, it's about understanding it. What is their life?  I said, Old Testament, yeah, yeah, read the life of Elijah. Did he do the supernatural? Of course he did. Read the life of Elisha. Did he do the supernatural? Yes. What about, you know, Moses? So you read their life. How did they develop? They didn't have the gospel. They didn't have the word. They didn't have all these, you know, the Holy Spirit to lead them every step of the way, meaning inside of them. Can you picture Elijah standing there on the mountain trying to, you know, he's telling the people one against thousands. He's telling them, now let's see who's God is a true God. That's a supernatural work of God. Supernatural demonstration of God's power. Elijah is telling Nehman, Nehman, you go, you dip yourself seven times and you'll be healed. So we're seeing all these things, right? We're seeing God working so beautifully. Thirdly, develop the ability to present the gospel in various audiences. Now, as an evangelist, we will get opportunities to minister to various audiences, right? So for example, you have the church, then you have people who are in colleges, youth, then you have teens. Now, if I'm talking to a set of youth or teens, I'm not going to be talking about marriage. How to love your wife and how to love your husband, they'll switch off, right? Say, hey, last night I'm not married yet. So I need to develop this ability to minister to them in the right way, right? Now, if I'm talking to a, you know, maybe a couple, an older couple, I'm not going to be talking about Instagram and Facebook. Then I'm not presenting the gospel in the right way, right? So I need to develop that ability. Now, the gospel remains the same, but how we portray it, it's up to us. How we, you know, present the gospel is up to us, right? And that is something which God gives, God puts on us, right? We must do it. We can't say, God, you know, give me the exact sentence and I will say that, no. Yes, we ask God, God, he does give us the wisdom. We'll ask questions, we will answer them and give us the right words, put the right words in our mouth, yes. But we don't say, God, give me the exact sentence that I should speak. No, God puts the onus on us. We have to, we know the gospel, we have to present it the right way. Right? So we need to develop that ability if it's true for working professionals. You know, you talk about something that they can relate to. Fourth one, maintain your passion for souls, very important. What is passion? Tell me, what is passion? I'm sure all of us have something that we are passionate about.  Passion generally means love for something. Okay, very good. Thank you, Isaac. Yes, Lupega? A strong love for something that you don't feel okay when you don't do it. Yes, yes. Thank you, Lupega. I like that last sentence that you said. A strong love for something that you don't feel okay when you don't do it. You're so passionate about it. Anybody else? What do you think is passion? Yes, anyone else? Go ahead. Sid, Paul, any thoughts? Zilly, any thoughts? Yes, go ahead, Sid. So passion for me is something like in which you have interest and you have a great zeal for something. Okay, a great zeal. Like some people, they are having passion for music. They dedicate their whole life in music. Every time they have music in their mind and they're always trying to pursue that thing, they're always like, I want to make this beat, that tune, something like that. Yeah, thank you so much, Sid. Yes, very true. Something that they probably give their whole life for, right? That's nice. Zilly says a strong feeling or emotion for something, right? A strong feeling or emotion. Yes, that's right. So we all are passionate about something, yes? Now, if any of us are not passionate about anything, please pray and ask God to make you passionate about something because I'm sure you will be passionate about something, right? It could be anything. It doesn't need to be something super spiritual, right? I was speaking to one of our young teens from church, right? And as I was talking to him, he's probably about 9th or 10th standard.  He was passionate about knitting, right? And so what he does is he knits different, you know, images or different pictures of different kinds of things. And he's passionate about it. I was so surprised. And I really learned a lesson, you know, that day because sometimes we say, okay, guys should only like this or girls should only like this. No, God can put a desire or a passion, a burning desire regarding anything, right? And what he does is he, once he knits these things, he freely donates it to children's homes and he blesses the poor with it or, you know, it's just what he's passionate about. Now, here's the thing. Passion is something that we can also lose, right? Let me give you an example. How many of you have tried to learn an instrument and given up? Tell me. Jeffina has done that, okay. Sid and Anita, okay. You all have tried to learn an instrument. You're very passionate about it. So, hey, one day I want to play. That's how many you've given up, right? So what does it say? There is a possibility to, for us to lose passion about things. Now, one is, there are two things. One is it could be because naturally, we may just tend to say, hey, this is too much of a task. It's better I do something else. Naturally, we feel okay. Two is the enemy steals that from us, right? He steals that, especially with something to do with God, something to do with ministry, something that God really has put in our hearts. The enemy will come to steal that. So for example, maybe some of you are passionate about worship, right?  You start off, say tomorrow I'm going to start, start day one, day two. By the time day five has come, oh, God, passion has gone. Nobody is there. There's no music. There's no instruments. There's no band. I don't feel like worshiping. The passion has gone, right? Now, the point here says, maintain your passion for souls. You have to maintain your passion. I have to maintain my passion, right? There will be times when we are pursuing what God has given us. There will be weakness. There will be weariness. There will be tiredness. You feel like, God, I just want to break. I want to break. I want to stop. But a passion is a burning desire, right? It can't just stop because you can't. You can't give up something because it's burning inside. But what Paul says, fan into flame, a passion for your name. So we have to fan it, no? We have to fan the flame. If we don't fan the flame, that flame is going to go off. We can look at a person and feel, hey, what is this person doing? Or we can look at the person and think, hey, is there a way that I can share the gospel with this person? Is there a way I can bring Christ into his life? How do I do that? Lord, give me a way. That's passion. Now, whether we do it or not, that is secondary. But that passion is still there. Lord, it's been five years, you know. I'm bleeding worship or I'm preaching the gospel. I feel so dry inside. We all go through those seasons, right? It feels so dry inside, Lord. You know, I'm just serving and ministering. But nothing's happening inside. Stop, pause and say, God, fan into flame, a passion for your name, a passion for your desire, right? Maintain that passion in everything, right? I remember this couple of weeks back, you know, I was a bit down and I said, okay, I'm not going to wake up today. I want to sleep. But, you know, when we have that passion, it doesn't matter what. I'm not saying I have all the passion. I'm just trying to say that there will be times.  But when we ask the Holy Spirit, Lord, help me to maintain that passion, that zeal for you. And he continues to do that for us. We are to maintain that. Say, God, give me that passion for souls. Give me the passion to do your ministry in the right way, right? Learn how to equip the saints in the ministry. I love what Apostle Paul says. Forget the worst, chapter and worst, but he says, you are my crown in heaven. The first time I read it, I thought, how can these people, I mean, who God has, Paul has ministered to, how can they be a crown? You know, I always thought, oh, Paul will come with his list of missionary journeys and all the wonderful things he did directly into heaven. No need judgment. Just go in, Paul, you've done the work. But Paul is saying, you are my crown. The people who were saved by the gospel through his preaching, through his ministry, they are the crown when he goes to heaven. So as leaders, we are to raise up leaders who are passionate about ministry. When ministering to a local church, submit to the leadership of the local pastor. Like I gave you that example, right? The pastor who called the evangelist, that's the wrong thing to do. Submit to the leadership when the pastor says certain things, gives you a certain time, submit to it, right? Be sensitive to the local church order, which means what? Now, when you go to ministered to different places, maybe in some churches you'll see the men at one side and the women at another side. Now, don't go there and preach and say, we are all one in Christ. You can all sit together. You don't have to do that, right? Or you may say, some of the churches may say, remove your footwear in common. Now, we are not to go there and say, that is for Moses, not for us, right?  It's okay. Just be normal. So we need to be sensitive, right? There are times when I've gone to certain churches, certain ministries, and these ministries don't believe in the Holy Spirit. They don't believe, meaning they don't believe in the gifts of the Holy Spirit and all of that. They believe that after the book of Acts, it's all stopped. But I went, they've invited me, I went, I preached, and I shared the gospel, right? I shared the true gospel. I shared about what the Holy Spirit does and some of them didn't like it. Some of them liked it. Some of them wanted me back to come and teach. Some of them didn't want me back, right? But the point is, I did not say, you're doing something wrong and I am right. Because when we point fingers, we are bad. That would be a bad evangelism strategy, right? When we are evangelizing, as evangelists, we have to say, hey, we are not perfect. We are also learning. But this is what I have learned from the gospel. This is what the truth of the word is. So being sensitive to the local church. Finally, as an evangelist, even as you decide to be one, be connected to a local church, right? There will be times when now when you're connected to a local church, that does not mean you share the gospel with everyone in the church and then tell them, okay, why don't you go here or why don't you? That would be, again, the wrong thing. So let me just put this book up. So I encourage each one of us to read this book, right? Divine Order in the Citywide Church. Maybe you already have. This is by Pastor Ashish. Read this book. It will really help you to align your thinking and what the church is all about. All right, so I think we'll come to a close. We'll stop here. We'll pick up from the next week. Any questions? Any questions? Anybody want to share your thoughts? Right. So I think the main takeaway is don't lose passion, right? Don't lose passion for God, for God's work and trust God that he will be able to, you know, lead you. Even through those hard seasons, through the good seasons, God is faithful. Amen? Right. So maybe one of us could close in prayer. Any one of us? Go ahead, anybody close in prayer. Yes, go ahead, Lephina. Dear Heavenly Father, we come to you under the name of Jesus. We thank you for this beautiful day and for the beautiful class we had. God, we thank you for calling us. We thank you for achieving this. Even you left the 99 and chased us down. And you have placed us right here with a great purpose and we thank you so much for that. Help us to never lose passion for you. Help us to always look into you no matter where we are God. Thank you for loving us and thank you for the beautiful class. Thank you for helping us to understand the role of evangelists and pastors and teachers. God, give us the boldness that we need so that we can go out and preach the gospel boldly. Be with us and guide us. In Jesus' name, I pray. Amen. Amen, thank you. All right, thank you everyone. Have a good week ahead. I'll see you next week. God bless you all.


Welcome, this is Melissa Arma with the Stock Swish and Reviewing Boeing. This is pretty much the short of the year for the Stock Swish 2020, called two puts in this today that ran down, again, perfect timing in them, called the 182.50s and the 180s, this is through the strike. And I've been watching this and watching this and watching this and my expectation, it has been four weeks, months, that this was lower even after the rally. And then we actually had a couple good shorts in here after the rally, actually, to be honest with you. So where does this really have to go to fall off a cliff? I think it's gonna start to fall off a cliff under 160, to be honest with you. So that could happen in a gap down, it could happen on the live day. This did gap down today and it's very interesting because it had barely any lift at all today even though the spy did. So the spy opened pushback, then it fell around lunch. This did the opposite, fell immediately. In fact, you could have day traded this today. I'm looking at this here, you could have shorted that today as a day trade with a very nice profit. But anyways, called two options in this, really nice. Looking forward to see where this puppy goes. If you're interested in how I make the picks and how I rate the gaps and my strategy, email me at melissathestockswish.com next class is July 18th and 19th.


Snapshots from 1998, a season of greatness. On May 17, David Wells turned beanie baby day at the stadium into an afternoon that will never be forgotten. Facing Minnesota, Wells threw the 15th perfect game in Major League history and the first by a Yankee since Don Larson in the 1956 World Series.


I used to see you... I missed the morning out. I didn't. There. I see. Yes, I do.  Okay, sir. You would come in for a picture. What do we have here? Soon we'll get these trade matters straightened out so we can get on with making a firm relationship. Yes. If nothing is followed, we can never have to exchange our papers. Papers here and there. And now. Okay, thank you. The ambassador of the Dominican Republic. How do you do? What am I? I don't know right now. Welcome. Pleased to have you here. And Mrs. Leon? How do you do? Pleased to see you here. My name is Fabio Monofi. Hello. And Maria Monofi. We don't have any children, so that's why we're here. Well, I think that's fine.   Pleased. I know that we have a picture. I'm trying to do something about it. Pleased. Pleased. Pleased. Pleased. Pleased. Pleased. Pleased. Pleased. Pleased. Pleased. Pleased. Pleased. Pleased. Pleased. Pleased. Pleased. Pleased. Pleased. Pleased. Pleased. Pleased. Pleased. Pleased. Pleased. Pleased. Pleased. Pleased. Pleased. Pleased. Pleased. Pleased. Pleased. Pleased. Pleased. Pleased. Pleased. Pleased. Pleased. Pleased. Pleased. Pleased. Pleased. Pleased. I was very pleased to meet you.  And then you will come in and join us. It is indeed a pleasure to have friends and their recalls and remarks with special greetings from the President. Well, please give him my warmest greetings. He was very, very satisfied with the results of this. We were too. Yeah, very thankful or deeper to him. We are very much aware of that. A solid tradition of democracy in Costa Rica. Being able to be there in 1982. You have been there. I think it was just one. Yeah. This year, what's he doing? Yes. I know that after this length of time, though, I'm getting this get for me to be harder to remember.  Yes, sir. Give it to me so it'll be a prettier picture. Thank you very much. Thank you. I'll see you. I'll just try and pass it on. Hello. Nice to meet you. Nice to meet you. It's a pleasure. Mm-hmm. Sure. Pleasure. Very supportive of stand-fronts against... Yes. Hope that I can assure you. The ambassador brought him out. The ambassador. Welcome. Nice to see you. Nice to see you. And Mrs. Padilla. What do you do? It's great. The ambassador will introduce his family. Is that... Son? Yes. And Maya. We've done a lot of this.  Thank you. We're going to see the better one. The mother. The real one. The children will have us. Either side. I don't know. I don't know. I don't know. I don't know. I don't know. Two on one. Three on one phone, and then the other time. There you go. Thank you, sister. You moved a little more. OK, yes. OK, thank you. Enjoy. I'll try to make a plan for you. President, the ambassador will saw... Yes. Yes, president, how are you? It's a good to see you, sir. Pleasure. And madam... Hello there. See, this is... One thought has been dying for me at you. Hello there. Nice to see you. My daughter, Lorena, my granddaughter, Elisa, and their mother, Mike. Very nice to meet you. This is the banner day in their lives. So it was a very nice day for me.  Can they stand there so close to you? Is that possible? Are we sure they can stand right next to us? No, we're in there. Presley, I thought the United States gave us that. That doesn't want the prices to show. Okay, but let me pay though. We'll get that camera. So Presley, the banner day, as you know, it asked me to give it to you personally. I wrote it in Spanish. I'm a loyal and great fan of Presley and Roman Reagan. I signed it. It's another banner day. Well, thank you very much, Elisa. You have a fine account, David. Yes. Well, Elisa, I look forward to reading it. Thank you very much. Yes, sir. Good to have you all here. Thank you. We brought the sun out, but we know we've got to make it a little warmer. I know, but it's much warmer today than yesterday. We're pleased to have you.  Yes. The United States should be proud of having the first time for it. It's just done very well. That's great. I'm sorry about that. Nice to meet you. In Patriotic Awakening, we say thank you for proclaiming 1987 as a national year of Thanksgiving. The first act of the English settlers was to fall to their knees in gratitude. Surely, we above all people have reason to be thankful. Immigrants through the ages have voted with their feet that America is the greatest nation, is the greatest place on earth to live. The early settlers came to this country to escape the dominion of men and establish a nation whose model is in God we trust. In their Declaration of Independence, they pledge their lives, their fortunes and their sacred honor for the animal rights such as life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. They implemented these rights in the Constitution and further defined them in the Bill of Rights, guaranteeing people freedom of religion, speech, assembly and the press. Because of his constant acknowledgement of the intervening hand of God, President George Washington led the nation to the successful conclusion of the Revolution. The writing of the Constitution and the establishment of our Constitution is particularly meaningful that you, Mr. President, are signing this proclamation on the anniversary of Abraham Lincoln's birthday, eight-score and 18 years ago. Television specials and tributes to the armed forces and the... You can go to Japan to live, but you cannot become Japanese. You can go to France and not become a French, to Greece and not become a Greek. You went out to several countries, but he said the miracle is anybody, anybody in the world can come to the United States and become an American. Is that a good one? Yeah. That's a good one. Thank God. Thank you. Three years from coming. Thank you, sir. Bill, in regards to this... Thank you, sir. Thank you. I will. I'll tell honey you said that. Thank you, sir. Good to see you, sir. The waterfowl population was charactered 50 years ago.  And instead of turning to the federal government, they went out and started raising money for all these projects. Perfect. Yes. And my dad was one of them. Oh, very well. Listen, no one ain't done a fantastic job. No question about it. Well, and they keep it up, and it's grown and grown and grown. And they spend most of their money in Canada. A lot of them. Yeah. Canada, United States and Mexico. What is it? Something like $40,000. Have I got the figures right? $30,000. Is it acres? Six hundred. Acres? Six. Let's see. Four. Four. Four million. Four million acres.  They kind of got a number. Yeah. Four million. Yeah. You got it. Any hooks on them. That's a little nice to meet you. Thank you. The executive vice president. Nice to see you. Nice to see you. It would be nice for you to take time for us. Bill Mormons, our assistant secretary at the Department of Information Wildlife and Parks. Frank Dunkel, who is the director of the Fish and Wildlife Service. Good to see you. I have a little presentation for you here. I don't know if you're looking up the proper name. Ambassador Eisen. All right. Nice to see you. This is a little gift on Ducks and Looters. Two years earlier, it's a bluing kill. And we think that the carbon emissions are easy, you know, to get subscribed on the bottom of it. No one would turn it upside down if they didn't want to break it. We can't do that. We can't do it that way. Okay. I would say, well, I'm very pleased to have this. I have a few of these. A little collection. Oh, good. I'm delighted to have Mr. Ed, too. I'm very pleased. Okay. And this is a commemorative Italian and our stamp celebrating our 50th anniversary this year. I hope you can take that. And this is a history book. Return to Big Grass. Big Grass was our first project 50 years ago in Manitoba. This is a book about history of ducks. Now it's four million acres of woodland. Right. The United States of Mexico. And 600,000 members. Right. We're very proud of that. I'm pleased to have all of this. Thank you very much. Man, we ought to get a group photo holding the microphone. All right. Here we go. No, why don't you see it's here. Just hold it back. Okay. Do you want to move in a little closer? Okay. They're remarkable. Well, thank you very much. They're teaching about getting there with the use of metal. This is a belt. Also, thank you very much. Okay. Well, thank you very much for your time. We really appreciate it. I'm glad you're looking so well after your operation. Thank you. Thank you. Come back. Come on. Thank you very much. Introduce them all to you now. But also in the room today are members of our staff who have been made responsible for putting together all the thoughts and ideas that go for people like this around the table. I'd also like to introduce Bob Helms who built the Human Services and John Bode from the Department of Agriculture. I think you know that we're ready, but they will be our lead testifiers when we start going to the Congress with this because I can't go up there and testify to be happy because of where I am with the White House. With that, to the opening, Mr. President, I think we want to get into, first of all, from the Attorney General, Lisa, how we got here very briefly and then I want to ask some specific strategy questions so that you can get some answers from the next person. Well, it's just like my rules. Is it making any sense? Well, it should emphasize state and community initiative. You also said that we should build into any reform ways to help families become economically self-reliant. Listening to you all, I was so impressed that I believed I said right then and there. Your way was the way we had to go. Here we are again. And your ideas have become our program. As you know, we formally released our welfare study up from dependency. This week and soon we'll be submitting legislation to the Congress. I've invited you here today to ask you how we can rally support for our proposal and persuade the Congress to make it the law of the land. Ask the Attorney General of the University to review for us how far we've got and how we've gotten this far. Mr. President, the starting point on this really...


Wel, wrth gweithio, dyfodol y gallwn mewn gweld. Gwyrdd yw yw'r ddebyrch, dyfodol yma. Mae'n gweld fawr yn ymgylchedd ar y dyfodol ar gyfer y Llywodraeth Ymddian yn Ymddian, y Llywodraeth Ymdian yw'r Llywodraeth Hwnnw. Hefyd yw Kenneth Armstrong, rydyn ni'n gweld y gweithfawr hefyd yn y Llywodraeth Llywodraeth yn y Llywodraeth Rydyn a'r ddefnyddio y Llywodraeth Ymddian yw'r ddefnyddio ymddian y Llywodraeth a'r ystafell yw'r 27 yma yn brydol yn y sgwrs. Mae'r Llywodraeth MacIntyll yn gweithio'r oed yn cyllsig o'r cyflwyno yma o'r ddechrau o'i Llywodraeth Llywodraeth Cymru o'r ysgwrs. A wedi'r Ysgrifennu Unigol yn 1973, mae'r Llywodraeth MacIntyll yn ymgyrchol that has been the president of that court. And tonight's lecture is the 20th to be delivered. And I'm delighted that we will be able to welcome tonight Pascal Llamées to give this year's lecture. Like the other speakers in the series Pascal Llamées has made an enormous contribution to public life. As you will all know, he served as an EU Trade Commissioner a?'r dyrectorion gympan o gweithio ddechrau. Pascala me is also someone who thinks and reflects deeply on what and who trade liberalisation is for and very helpfully he puts his thoughts on paper. His topic for tonight's lecture is globalisation faltering and it could hardly be more timely. Ie, mae'r bobl yn ysgolwch yn ein candliadau, yn cyfnodd gyda'r Cymru yn 2013, ac yn y bobl, Pascal, yn ystod y bydd yn fydig o'r cyfnodd gyda'r cyfnodd cyfnodd cyfnodd, ac yn y ffondol cyfnodd cyfnodd gyda'r cyfnodd cyfnodd cyfnodd cyfnodd cyfnodd cyfnodd cyfnodd cyfnodd cyfnodd cyfnodd cyfnodd cyfnodd. Ond yn ystod, mae'r bobl yn eich bod yn iawn oedd y gweld yn ardal yn ystyried. Felly ar gyfnodd cyfnodd cyfnodd cyfnodd cyfnodd cyfnodd cyfnodd cyfnodd cyfnodd cyfnodd, a'r redistribwysio fawr ac'n duddol. Mae'r brydol ysgolwch yn gallu lleidoli iawn, pleidoli iawn i'r rau lleidoli arnyn nhw'n ffermynol pethau o'r eisteddydd Cymru, ...wyddi'r Cymru weithio y Cymru iawn ar y union Europea.  Well, good evening! Thanks for this introduction. Thanks for the invitation. It's an honour for me to have been invited for this annual MacKenzie Stewart lecture. I happened to have had the privilege of working with Lord Maconley Stewart at the time when I was chief of staff to Jacques Delor, which was the position I had between 85 and 94. Part of this coincided with the mandate of a late Maconley Stewart. It's also an honor because you just said you are celebrating the 25th anniversary of this Center for European Legal Studies, which in 2017 may be a bit of a paradox, because this year is the year where history will say it was the year when article 50 was triggered and the Brexit process started. You already kind of hinted at that as I'm well known for being among those who regret this vote. I thought it might not be academically quite given my total lack of objectivity to address this Brexit issue up front this year, which is why I retweeted to a somehow, although, and I'll come back to that in a minute, less contentious issue which is globalization. Now why are these two issues closely connected in my mind is obvious. It's because European integration and globalization have been the two big major transformations of which my generation have lived through and I've been lucky enough to be involved quite directly in the very machine room of these two transformations, which is why they are, in my view, connected with one another. Both of these transformations, which indeed have been grand of our times, at least for a few decades, are now under scrutiny, if not outrightly rejected by some, at least in the West. And I think we need to understand why and what this means for the future. So that's what they have in common. There is, of course, a major difference between EU integration and globalization. You can step down from the EU train at some cost, I believe, but I may be wrong, but you can't step down from the train of globalization and that's a major difference. And in these circumstances, my main point, which I will give it up tonight with you, is that given that you cannot step down from the train of globalization, the only option you are left with, at least for those who have issues with globalization, and I have issues with globalization, is to harness it in order to move it in the direction which we believe is right for those of us who believe that it doesn't naturally lead in the right direction. And this is where you're taken back to European integration because I think that for us, being a French, I think I would say the same if I was a German or an Italian or a Spaniard, EU integration is the only tool we have to try and move globalization in the direction we want. But let's first look at this issue whether or not we still have to look at the future with globalization in mind, and of course whether it's or not faltering. Now, there are some signals, rumors, interpretation, sort of market ideas. You can find traces of this notion that globalization is not only faltering, but halting or even moving backwards. There is a bit of that in economics, and assuming globalization is what you rightly said, I believe it is, which is a hysterical face of the expansion of market capitalism, and we've had others in preceding times, and we probably will have others in coming times. True, if you look at the numbers, and the numbers are, trade numbers are probably the best approximation of the speed, the force of globalization, I mean trade numbers, which is international trade measured in volumes. There are traces that the speed of growth of international trade measured in volume is not what it used to be 10 or 15 years ago. In other words, the ratio between the growth of trade volumes and the growth of GNPs, which is Pierce and Apple, GNPs being a sum of value addition, trade volumes being a sum of trade flows, and if trade Chris crosses several borders in the case of a global value supply chain of cars, for instance, you can have a huge volume of trade for the same car because things spare parts, which are assembled here or there, increase the volume of international trade. So by this standard, by this measure, there are signs that the acceleration of globalization understood as inter-penetration of production of goods and services, which you can also measure in measuring the import content of exports. All these numbers tell us that we are probably at a stage where the speed which we've had is not there anymore, so it's slowing. There are also obvious cultural signs, and I think the US election can be taken as an example of that. That speed, the force, past decades of globalization has led to a sort of cultural backlash. What Panca Mishra called the sort of title of his latest book, The Age of Anger, a sort of mutiny against modernizing elites, which triggers nativist, illiberal reactions, including on the form of religious fundamentalism. So there is a sort of new problem of us versus them, which finds a clear expression in what happened in the US, with what happened if you look at the growing support that these so-called populist movements received in Europe, and I put populist in brackets. It's a word I do not like to use because I think using it is in a way recognizing that the people are with them, which I don't. But let's agree that there is a sign of that, at least again in the western hemisphere. Although what happened in the recent season in the Philippines or in Turkey or even in India could be interpreted in the same manner. Now, there are signs in the economic side, cultural side. There are signs also in the difficulty, in global governance of this previous very high-speed globalization, addressing for instance in the story of the development agenda. Assuming the World Trade Organization is one of the prime governors of globalization because it is the prime governor of international trade. Obviously, the fact that from 2008 on until now, this agenda hasn't moved, although other treaties or trade-opening agreements have moved forward, is a sign of globalization, having a problem in terms of its governance. So, there are signals, but there are also signals in another direction from which one would consider that the news, as said Mark Twain, the report of legalizations are probably greatly exaggerated. And that's also stemmed from the observation of economics, cultural reactions, mood of times or even global governance. If you look at economics and if you assume, which is my case, that the main engine of globalization is technological progress, which itself stands for a large part, not the total part, the large part from science, the odds are that globalization will keep going on. The main reason why globalization will keep going on is that the capacity of technology to crush the cost of distance, which was what limited globalization during a long time, still has a lot of potential. So, brace for more of this international division of labour. It sometimes will reach the plateau, as it probably does for the moment, but assuming relative prices start changing for whatever reason, for instance, if one day we would have a price for CO2, then the shape of globalization will change, but it still will be globalization in different circumstances. The global supply chains will keep expanding, not least because a large part of what now is exchanged and which is not measured by the volumes of trade is data. A lot of what now is used to create value is not accounted in any statistic of international trade. And that, of course, creates a measuring issue, which we economists have known for a long time. It's not that we don't have a theory of how the thing works, that we can't measure it, at least for the moment, because we haven't put our observation in the right place. So, I personally believe that this sort of interconnection, which creates interdependence, will keep growing, notably in the digital age. This is also partly true in areas like cultures, like imagination, like mind projections or concepts. If you consider, for instance, the growing role of NGOs in public perceptions and the framing of public attitudes in this world, if you take issues like hunger or corruption or environment, there is a very large convergence all over this planet and stemming from systems of thought, traditions, spirituality, culture, very different. There is a huge process of convergence on a number of these issues. And, by the way, part of this convergence is triggered by this infrastructure. I'm not 100% Marxist, but enough to believe that infrastructure is still meta. If you look at the way, for instance, the expansion of trade leads to a necessity to agree on animal welfare standards, which is maybe not the first priority that we have for the global culture. Why start with animal welfare standards? Well, it has to start with animal welfare standards because meat is traded. And the moment comparative advantage works, the weight works now, it becomes an issue of major importance. When I was a digital reviewer, I had avoided, at the last minute, a litigation between Australia and Indonesia at a time where animal welfare activists in Australia tries the government to ban the export of life capital to Indonesia because there was slaughtered hal, which was a terrible thing for that. Now, one would normally react and say, aren't human rights a priority as compared to animal welfare standards, certainly on the moral point of view, but the way the world works and the way globalization expands leads to this sort of convergence, which probably would not have been intellectually the first thing to do. As far as signals on governance are concerned, true in some cases, there have been its own failures in recent time. We've also had reasonable successes. COP 21 was certainly a moment where global governance worked after many years of failures and probably a bit late as compared to some of our ambitions, but the G20 has done reasonably good work on taxation of multinationals. Not that we are there yet, at least in my view, but something is happening which never happened before and it's an area where, as you know, vested interests are extremely strong. One of the reasons why this global governance may be moving forward in some areas is probably that, because of globalization, what previously was in the hands of sovereign animals, sovereign Vespallians animal, as per the piece of Vespallia 1648, which had until now the monopoly of international relations of global governance are losing this monopoly, which now falls probably a bit more in the hands of non-state actors and I'm thinking of cities, for instance, when you look at the role major cities on this planet played to prepare the COP 21 and their presence at the event itself, it's pretty clear. Of course NGOs, of course multinationals, some of them now understand that as stakeholders of this globalization process, they have to take their own responsibilities in engaging. And those of us who attended COP 21 cannot not have noticed that there were three big wide pavilions, like an expo. One was for states and they had their logo and their name, Japan, etc. Another one was for NGOs, it was the same setting, it was another whole, the same setting, and the names had roughly the same characters. And a third one was with multinationals, we had General Electric and the Philips and the Alibaba in the same hall, with roughly the same name tags as the one you found in it. So that was visually extremely striking and I think this is moving forward in what I call polygovernance as opposed to multi-governance, which was the traditional system. So, bit of signals on the one side but also other signals on the other side, which lead me to believe that globalization is here to say. Now what does this mean for the time to come, and I will conclude in, of course, in mentioning Brexit, what does this mean? It means that we will have to keep coping with globalization as a force, with its good sides and its bad sides, like often said and written that this is a genus, you've got two faces, one was smiling, and one grimacing. The good side is poverty reduction, the good side is creating interdependences, creating links, which the distinction which is costly. And this is reality, especially if you look at the map of the world and if you look at where zones of hardship, conflict, tensions, wars are, they usually are the places of this planet which have remained outside of globalization. When I was a BGFWTO, I often discussed with a very good friend of mine who now has become SecGN of the UN, Antonio Bouterres, and we would look at our respective maps. I would have my map of the world with where I have members and where I don't have members. He would look at his map of the world where he had most of his clients, refugees, asylum seekers, displaced populations, and where I had most of my non-clients was in an art between Afghanistan, Iran, Syria, Iraq, and the eastern corner of Africa, plus North Korea, Algeria, a bit outside of these zones. That's where I had 80% of my non-members and that's where he had 80% of his clients. So that says something about this relationship. So there are good sides in globalization. There are also, as we know, less good sides, which is that why globalization has reduced poverty and created some stability. It has also increased inequalities. There's a big debate whether this is forever, whether this is intrinsically linked to the way market capitalism works. Others would say it's a transition period, a bit like in the 19th century, to which the reply would be, yeah, but in the 19th century it only was on a standard indicator because of social movements that then took a bit of control of the situation. The reality being that if globalization works, and it does, in my view, it is because it is painful. So globalization works to create economic efficiencies, which is a pretension for welfare. Economic efficiencies are not automatically welfare. There are a pretension for welfare, but this, of course, needs a series of conditions, which is, by the way, the reason why when I wrote this, when I recovered my freedom of speech, leaving WTO in 2013, I published this book, which the title of which is the Geneva Consensus. As opposed to the Washington Consensus, the Washington Consensus being roughly, you open, you liberalize, and God will take care of the rest. The Geneva Consensus being you open, but you have to observe a series of conditions for this trade-opening efficiencies to translate into welfare, and that's, in my view, to be easily understood what Mr Ricardo and Mr Schumpeter theorized at the time with that comparative advantage with work. If I do something better than you do, and you do something better than I do, we have a rational interest to trade and exchange, but of course the people with me who are producing what you do better than them won't be that happy. They will suffer a competitive shock, which is where Mr Schumpeter comes in, and of course the weakest in my truth will be hit by this as the weakest in your truth will be hit by my comparative advantage, and this is the reason why you need this efficiency creation to be, at least in my view, matched with proper social system, which is where I still am after a number of years in engagement and running such processes. That's roughly how I see the problem. The difficulty, of course, being that this process of globalization by definition with this technological engine is a global one, whereas what you have to do in order to harness it is mostly of a local nature. Most of what you have to do in order to harness globalization relies on redistribution, solidarity in one way or another, and solidarity is inevitably something much more local. I will accept to pay for people who belong to the same community as I do for a variety of reasons, but I have a limited sense of belonging. At some stage, I'm not going to accept, which is why this interaction between politics and economics becomes so crucial, and it's understandable that the moment you rely on solidarity, more or less, and you can detail this, the moment you rely on solidarity, you have an accountability issue, and accountability is something that goes with local. There is a lot of local accountability, and inevitably, and this probably will not change before a long time, a very limited global accountability. So that's the issue we have to struggle with in this complex articulation. As far as culture is concerned, I think we also have to invent something that is different from a sort of cosmopolitan identity. I don't think there is something like a cosmopolite identity, or at least there is nothing like a cosmopolitan identity that would substitute other identities. I think the way forward on this, and that's what I have observed, including through my train of lens, is that the way forward is to articulate different levels of identity, which is perfectly possible if you look, for instance, at the federal systems. And this takes back, before I conclude, this takes us back to this European question. And in many ways, I mean, the European integration process is key to this issue. A, because it is about economic integration and political integration. B, because in these cultural sphere, we have things in common, which in terms of values, which probably bind us together in a specific way. Now, not that the dream of the founding fathers, which was that economic integration would, by itself, produce political integration, has worked, I think, after 60 years of celebrating the treaty of Rome this month, after 60 years, we know that this belief they had, my boss had, when I was with the law, I had, including when I was a EU commissioner, that forging economic integration would, by whatever, a chemistry miracle lead to forging political union, we have to know it doesn't work this way. I'm not saying it doesn't work at all, but it doesn't work this way. There is something more that needs to enter in so that this chemistry works. And there's something more, in my view, is in the area of values, beliefs, of concepts, of imagination, of symbols, of narratives. And that's something in a way I realized much more clearly when I left Brussels, Strasbourg and Luxembourg to join Geneva at the WTO, where I had the occasion during many years to observe EU from outside with the eyes of non-Europeans. And this is a fantastic experience because what you quite rapidly realize is that what European identity is about is much clearer in the eyes of non-Europeans than it is in the eyes of Europeans. If you ask an average Chinese or British or Nigerian or Indonesian, what's Europe about? What's the definition? They will probably give you a rather clear definition. The shortest probably being it's a place where it's nice to live. That's a very short one. And I think it still remains the very short one, although some are starting to have a few doubts, given the relatively low level of economic and social performance of the EU for the last 10 years. If you dig a bit more, people will tell you it's a place where there is a specific mix balance between individual freedom, collective social security systems. It's a place where people are less intolerant to inequalities than in other places. It's a place where environment sensitivity is higher. It's a place where access to culture is more widespread in the population, especially depending of your level of resources. So there is something like a European civilization model which is, I believe, what needs to be realized a bit more in the future than it has been in the past. I mean Jean Monnet never said what he was said to have said, which is if I had to restart, I would restart with culture. He never said that. And I'm not saying that's proper way forward, but there is something true in the fact that in between this economic integration and this political integration, you need this glue which is about values. And that leads me naturally to my conclusion, which is that, of course, if EU, if Europe is about values, UK is part of that. There is no way you could, if you look at European identity this way, distinguish the EU omelet on the one side and the UK egg on the other, which is the whole problem of Brexit, which is getting this egg out of the omelet, which is a very complex issue. And this is the big question mark for people like me and I'm working quite a lot on trying both to understand and to think of a Brexit something that would limit what I believe are damages for us all. Going back to my introduction, I believe that long-term globalization remains a process where economics will, at the end of the day, trump politics. Have they done it for the last 30, 40 years? Not, obviously, in a very convincing way for the last two or three years, but long-term I think the fundamental reasons remain there. On Brexit, I think only time will tell whether what happened last June and which, in my view, again, I'm not objective at all, but which, in my view, is a moment where politics trumped economics, whether this will be the case three years, five years, eight years, ten years from now. I don't know and I'll be looking at that extremely carefully, not least because for us remaining the continental EU 27, the Brexit is also a test case. The fundamental ideological fuel of European integration is that we will do better together than single. What's at stake with Brexit is exactly this experience. We have to take it as it is. After all, most of us would not have wished it to happen, at least on the continent, which is where we probably differ from the British public. But this experience is going to have a huge impact on the UK, of course, but it would also have a huge impact on the EU, notably when the jury will be there ten years from now, not before, in my view, will tell you whether it's a good choice or not. Thanks for your attention.


I don't remember much. This can't be real, but it is. I don't remember building this architecture. However, whenever I look upon it on Roblox Studio, I feel a sense of deja vu. It almost feels like if Dawn is missing every time in the day. I don't remember the dawn sky, or I don't even remember the hour of 5 a.m. every day. Hey there. Just to clear things up, I'm Daisy. At the time of writing this, I'm 14, soon to be 14 in a few weeks. My mental state, well, isn't the best thing. I'm broken and traumatized, but that's my life story, not the actual experience I want to tell you. I'm speculating that what has been happening these past few days is because of my mental state. Maybe out of stress or anxiety. It all happened one day. I don't really remember much, but I was crying, and I felt like I was at the lowest point. I cry a lot, but this felt different. It felt way worse. My chest was hurting, so many tears came out that I couldn't see clearly. It was hard to breathe, I heard voices in my head, I felt like such a failure and I felt so guilty. I don't remember what for. These kinds of crying episodes usually happen to me, every time I cry which is almost daily. But this specific time felt different. That day, I got no sleep. I felt so horrible, and I felt like I was going to do something very bad. I was trying to sleep but I couldn't, something was keeping me awake. Then it happened. I blacked out. It wasn't out of exhaustion, I still had plenty of energy when I blacked out. I wasn't dehydrated either. All I remember was I looked outside, and I saw a twilight sky. It seemed if the sun was going to rise in about 20 minutes. While I was blacked out, I felt this low pitched steady noise in my ear. Not the typically high pitched ringing that is very common among people. This wasn't known. I tried to look it up on Google for answers, but I got no results. Sometimes in the day, I hear this same sound but quiet, and in my right ear only. Then I woke up. I was sitting at my desk. My right hand was on the mouse, and my left hand was hovering over the WASD letters on the keyboard. My laptop was open and was on. It was in Roblox Studio. I saw that it had something built in it. I didn't react surprised at first, because I thought one of my siblings had played a prank on me. Then I realized my laptop had a password only I knew, and my laptop cable, which I usually hide before I go to sleep, was plugged in. That whole day, I kind of stayed silent. The whole ordeal kept going on. I would wake up at 6am, and find myself in the same position, except with more and more building every time. Recently, I even saw what seemed to be a script, and I opened it up. It was just a click function script though. I never really paid much attention to the actual building until it seemed complete. It was weird. On the outside, it looked like one giant box, with a smaller box on top with a neck, and a small room at the top with glass windows. And it was for the most part, white. On the inside was stranger. It looked like some kind of court or something. I'm not really sure how to really explain it. I got video of it though. Also it had some type of weird purple door. I really don't know what to think of any of this. I'm confused and scared. This is a real situation by the way. I just wanted to ask for help. I've decided to open the game to the public for further investigation if someone can. I'm not sure.