Easy Chair Series

Interview with Dr D. Mitchell

Professor: Dr. R.J. Rushdoony

Subject: Conversations, Panels and Sermons

Lesson: 85-91

Genre:

Track:

Dictation Name: EC393

Year: 1986

This is R. J. Rushdoony, Easy Chair number 393, August the 31st, 1997.

Tonight or this afternoon we are here to interview or to listen to Dr. David Mitchell and in a moment I will tell you more about him. And Mark Rushdoony, Douglas Murray, Carlo Dinota of Boston and Sam Blumenfeld are here with us. Andrew Sandlin could not be with us this afternoon.

We have with us, as I indicated, Dr. David Mitchell from Tasmania which is now part of Australia. Now, Tasmania has in itself a very important history which is different from that of Australia. It was settled by English and Scots of a remarkable character. It became an important part of the empire. In 1902 it became a part of the dominion of Australia, although Dr. Mitchell tells me they continue to issue their own postage stamps of whom... of which I have a few until 1912, I believe.

Now I am going to ask Dr. Mitchell to begin with an account of his own background, because it has been a distinguished one. It has included being the attorney general of an African kingdom and the lawyer who helped win a landmark case in Australia establishing the freedom of Christian education.

Dr. Mitchell, it has been a pleasure to have you with us here in Vallecito and California. I know you have been all over the world on this trip, back in Africa and in Europe as well as across the United States. Tell us, first, about your self and some of your accomplishments and then about your most recent travels.

[Mitchell] Dr. Rushdoony, I like talking as my friends and others well know. I don’t very much like talking about myself and I avoid that as much as I possibly can. May I say that Tasmania became part of the commonwealth of Australia on the first of January 1901.

[Rushdoony] Oh, 1901.

[Mitchell] And I think it was 1910 that they stopped issuing their own stamps. But Tasmania did send Tasmanian... Tasmanian troops to the Boer War which was in 1902. They did not go as Australian troops. They went as Tasmanian troops.

[Rushdoony] Now tell us some of your work over the years, because you have been active in more than one area in you long career.

[Mitchell] Well, I have been privileged to graduate from law school and be admitted to the bar in a number of Australian states, in England and Wales, in one or two different African countries.

I started my professional career, I suppose, as an attorney, as the Americans would call it in Hobart, Tasmania in very much a general private practice including some of what the Americans call trial work. I then joined the British colonial service and went to what was then called the {?} protectorate and worked there in the district administration. I was there about three years. I then returned to Australia and joined the federal civil service, federal public service, had joy in working in a number of places including Darwin in the Northern Territory where the Aborigines, of course, have form a large percentage of the population. Subsequently I was involved in the move to self government and then independence of Papua New Guinea. I was involved with the constitutional development and the legal system for their independence.

There was a change in government in Australia and I was appointed to assist in the establishment of a legal aid service so that Australians would be able to obtain proper legal professional assistance without needing to pay for it, so that it would be paid for by the tax payer.

When that service was established, I was appointed to the kingdom of Lesotho as their attorney general. Lesotho had once been a British protectorate. In 1966 it became independent. In 1970 there was a major uprising which some would call a civil war and another in 1974. The government of Lesotho was running treason trials in relation to the 1974 rebellion when they asked the government of Australia to provide them with an attorney general who would hopefully be able to bring a perspective of justice as seen by the world as not being politically motivated for those treason trials. In the upshot, I personally had little to do with the treason trials, but spent just over two years as attorney general of the city.

Returned to Australia, went into what the Americans call theological seminary and was ordained as a minister and subsequent to that I have been privileged to be involved in, as you have mentioned, several education court cases in Australia where, in the providence of the Lord, we have been successful in each of them. Please, I am not saying that that will always continue, but up till this time, the hand of the Lord has been much upon those cases.

[Rushdoony] Let me say something parenthetically about the Australian importance on the world scene. Our modern perspective is political so that if we were to write a history of the 20th century we would list as one of the great powers, for example, the Soviet Union. But when you look at things from a non political point of view you have to conclude something very different, because food is life and one of the things we forget is that as one agricultural expert told me a few years back, of the five ... five of the six net exporting countries of food in the world, without... without which the world could not survive, because most of the world does not produce enough food to take care of itself. Five of the six have an English heritage which is a very, very remarkable fact. One of those, now, South Africa, is out of the picture. But I say this so that we do not look at history politically. We would have to say in terms of this that Australia is one of the great powers of the world, because without Australia the food situation would be dramatically worse so that we, when we look at ourselves here in the United States must say we gain a great deal of our power on the world scene as a powerful exporter of food.

One German economist has said that one of the great mistakes of the United States was beginning with World War I, to get involved in the world political scene, when its greatness to that point had been its economic asset. It was the great food exporter.

So if we take a realistic view, we can see that Australia today is a major factor on the world scene. In fact, the political center of the world is the Atlantic basin, but the economic center is the Pacific basin.

Now would you men like to ask any questions of Dr. Mitchell? And please don’t hesitate to take all the time you want to answer, five, 10, 15 minutes.

[Mitchell] I would like to make a comment, first, if I may, about Australia as a food exporter. That is perfectly true. Australia has been and continues to be a major food exporter. However, present Australian policy which is to see Australia as a diversified economy and much of the effort formally put into food production now goes into manufacture. And as I go to the supermarket I find food imported, imported from all parts of the world, fresh food and canned food, food that historically had been produced in Australia and exported. This is surprising.

[Rushdoony] The same is true here. Now many things that are produced right in California are, nonetheless exported from abroad. It is a political decision and not only so. There used to be a law that required fruits, for example, and vegetables coming from outside the country to be labeled in the bin in the grocery as coming from, say, Chile or Mexico or wherever. But that has been repealed. So you don’t know where the fruit and vegetables are coming from. And one of the results is that since at least one country not too far from us uses raw sewage to irrigate its vegetables it does mean a health problem in the United States.

[Voice] Dr. Mitchell was telling us last night about the apple growing situation in Tasmania and how the government, what the government has done to practically shut it down. Could you relate that to us, because it is fascinating? Since Tasmania was known as a great apple exporting province or ... or state.

[Mitchell] Yes. Indeed, there was a time when in Europe, particularly in Britain you could be fairly sure that any apple you purchased came from Tasmania. Tasmania was known across the world as the apple isle. The apple industry still exists in Tasmania, but has nowhere near the prominence it once had. There was a multiplicity of problems that beset the apple industry. Probably the best known of them was the closure of the Suez Canal. After the Suez Canal was closed every Tasmanian apple had to pass South African apples on its way to Europe which mean that Tasmanian apples arrived in Europe after the South African apples, not nearly as fresh and the journey was more expensive, not to mention {?} production costs. So that had an effect. But also the ... there was much government regulation of the apple industry in Tasmania whereby the government determined to support the apple industry by controlling the.... the... not only the export, but the purchase and sale of all apples so they purchased, for example, the apple crops from the trees. And while they were still on the trees an inspector went and looked and paid the farmers for the apples.

But, of course, there may well be a hail storm after the inspector has inspected the apples or there might be a problem with the picking. And, thus, there was a problem the government paying more than they should. They changed this so that the apples were to be picked first, before they were inspected and purchased by the government’s apple and pear board.

This created problems, too, for the apples were supposed to be placed in a pile on the ground so the inspector could measure them. There is no need for me to explain the problems that would arise with this kind of bureaucracy.

Furthermore, they determined that all apples over a certain size needed to be retained for export. Now there was a standard size apple case in which a box in which the boxes were exported. They also determined that they needed to be a certain of apples in every box. The result of this was that the large apples could not be sold on the local market and could not be exported. You would understand without any further explanation from me, I know, that this caused much problem for the apple industry.

The problem was so great that the government decided that they needed to do something about these poor, unfortunate apple growers who were suffering. So they subsidized the apple growers to pull out the apple trees and the apple production then, of course, was reduced dramatically.

Tasmania is no longer the apple isle although many apples are still grown there. On our recent visit to Britain one of my friends said, “Why is it that Tasmanian apples... when I was young they used to be lovely apples. Now they are wizened up likely to be bad. I wouldn’t buy a Tasmanian apple now.”

[Voice] It just shows you what government bureaucracy can do to ruin a perfectly good apple growing business.

[Rushdoony] It might be worthwhile noting at this point that in Australia, the further south you go, the colder it is, because north you are closer to the equator so that it is the reverse of the American climate. The snows will be in the southern part of Australia. Are they in Tasmania or do the waters there keep the climate a little gentler?

[Mitchell] Tasmanian climate is remarkable. Tasmania is small. It is about the size of the state of Idaho, that is, about the size of England if you were to cut Yorkshire off and don't count Wales. And in that small area there are dramatic climatic differences. Where we live it is uncommon for the temperature to reach freezing even at night, even in the middle of winter. But then it doesn’t get very warm either. It is cool in the winter and, indeed, in the summer. The east coast of Tasmania is dry as the west coast of Tasmania is wet. The winds blow across the Atlantic Ocean missing South Africa as they come, across the Indian Ocean and hit the west coast of Tasmania with the clouds full of rain. Tasmania is mountainous and the mountains in Tasmania over the whole island rise to some 6000 feet which is sufficient for the winds to drop their water on the mountains in the middle and on the west coast meaning that there is a dramatic climactic difference.

The waters keep the coastal areas very temperate. The inland areas—even in such a small state—do receive snow and frosts and the temperatures go fairly low.

[Rushdoony] On this trip you have been to Africa. What are situations like there where you once served as attorney general?

[Mitchell] The Kingdom of Lesotho is still a lovely country. It is high country. Its lowest point is about 5000 feet and it goes on up to about 12,000 feet. There is no point lower than 5000 feet and it is often said to be the country with the highest average height of any in the world.

Since we were there a lot of work has been done on roads. We had a 1.3 liter South African built Volkswagen car and we were able to go right up into the mountains and right across the roof of Lesotho, often referred to as the roof of Africa. The roads are not good. I don’t recommend it to any but an intrepid traveler. But, yes, the country is being opened up in all sorts of ways.

One of the dramatic things that is happening in Lesotho is that there is water storage and Katse, spelled K A T S E that is to provide a water and electricity for the whole of Johannesburg.

[Rushdoony] Now what is the Christian situation there? How are the churches and Christians generally doing?

[Mitchell] I regret to report that they are not doing very well. The very faithful early missionaries brought the good news of the Lord Jesus Christ, they brought a full orbed teaching of the Scriptures. They were missionaries, interestingly, from the Paris evangelical mission.

[Rushdoony] Oh.

[Mitchell] And there was a genuine thrust of Christianity in the country. The Catholics were unhappy and they sent Canadian French missionaries to reconvert the Africans and to this day some 54 percent of the Basotho, that is the people of Lesotho, would claim to be Catholic. And probably about 38 percent Basotho are evangelical church, that is Paris, evangelical missions.

Unfortunately, at least from my perspective, the Lesotho Evangelical Church has become socially conscious rather than spiritually conscious. The interest in the church has waned and attendance is now relatively small.

[Rushdoony] That is too bad. How did you assess the future of those parts of Africa you saw? Was it a rather grim picture as some have painted?

[Mitchell] I would perceive South Africa has been sitting still on a powder keg. I was not there really long enough to make a proper assessment. I needed to rely on comments from friends and others, but it seems to me that South Africa’s problems are only beginning. Law and order is a matter of great, great concern. A home in which we stayed in Johannesburg has around it a 14 foot security fence with barbed wire twisted around it, a gate, security gate that is... I would think it would be almost impossible to get through, a bell on the gate so if you want to go and visit these folk, you need to press the bell on the gate. They have a little video that they can see who is at the gate and they then decide whether they are going to let you in or not.

They have two dogs. They say it is absolutely essential to have dogs. The windows on the house, despite this peripheral... perimeter security, the windows on their house are barred and their doors are barred and they have very extensive burglar alarm system in the house which they at least turn on at night.

[Rushdoony] It is a rather grim way to live.

[Mitchell] Indeed.

[Rushdoony] I am afraid that is a condition now in too many countries, not African ones as well.

[Mitchell] Perhaps I should say that a former member of the South African parliament who I was talking to about these things said, “Oh, David, these are only temporary. Look. The country is right. It is going very well and we will see peace and harmony before long in our great country, South Africa.”

[Rushdoony] I hope he is right rather than merely optimistic.

[Mitchell] So do I. So do I.

[Rushdoony] What about the scene in Australia as far as the churches are concerned? I know it differs from one state to another.

[Mitchell] It is not just a matter of differing from one state to another, it is from one congregation to another. Some congregations are growing and thriving. There is a growth, I believe, in the Pentecostal charismatic areas and there is also a growth in the Bible preaching churches that some would call fundamentalist churches. I wouldn’t necessarily call those that tare growing fundamentalist. I would call them conservative, gospel preaching churches.

The mainline churches in general are losing people quickly. The mainline churches are having a great deal of difficulty attracting men to the ministry. They are even having difficulty attracting women to the ministry.

[Voice] David, is Fabian Socialism still the prominent political philosophy in Australia or has it seen its day? Is it... is it... is the scene changing in favor of a more—how would you say it—a more democratic way of life?

[Mitchell] Many of my critics would say that I do not see this sort of thing {?}. Many of my critics would say that Fabian Socialism has had its day in Australia, if ever there was a day at all. From my perspective, however, Fabian Socialists, Socialism is still predominant. In there are two basic political parties in Australia, the labor party which is a validly Socialist and the liberal national parties which run in coalition which claim to be conservative, non Socialist, indeed, anti Socialist. I perceive little difference between the two parties. From my perspective I see Fabian Socialism pervading both camps.

[Voice] I see. I know that in ... in New Zealand they say that there is a resurgence of this Reaganomics, you know, of this ... that there is a group there talking in terms of ... of... of a market economy ala Ronald Reagan. Did Ronald Reagan have any effect at all on Australia as far as the economic thinking is concerned?

[Mitchell] No. I think essentially he had no effect at all. There are, of course, small groups that have a different opinion from those of the major political parties.

[Voice] So you don’t have the kind of think tanks, the conservative think tanks that we have here in the United States such as the Cato Institute and the Heritage Foundation and that sort of thing?

[Mitchell] There are conservative think tanks. One or two of the existing conservative think tanks I would agree are generally conservative. But they have very little impact on the political scene in Australia.

In general terms, however, the conservative think tanks, from my point of view, are not conservative think tanks at all, but Fabian Socialist think tanks.

[Voice] One... one last question I would like to ask is: What about this situation of Australia discarding the monarchy and becoming a republic? What are... what are the ramifications of that?

[Mitchell] Well, that is a long story.

[Rushdoony] Take your time, please.

[Mitchell] The Commonwealth of Australia constitution is not a constitution in the sense that it is the fountain head of right and wrong. The measure of right and wrong, at least theoretically, exists independently of the constitution. Thus, in the Australian constitution you will find no bill of rights. There are many in Australia who are offended by the fact that there is no bill of rights in the Australian constitution and wish to amend the constitution in order to include some guarantees of the individual freedoms and rights.

Historically, the rights and freedoms of the people have been drawn from the Scriptures. The idea of government at the time that the Australian colonies were settled and in 1828, which was said, subsequently by the British parliament to be the cut off date, that is the date on which Australian law developed independently of British law, it was still the ... not only the theoretical, but practical basis of law that the Scripture established the measure of right and wrong.

I know that the Scripture was not always applied and I know that when it was applied it was often misapplied. But that was the basis of law and it has not changed since.

How does this apply in Australia? Well, the leak flows like this. At the coronation the monarch of Britain is required to take an oath which includes words to this effect.

Do you acknowledge that the only rule for life and government in your dominions is the Word of God in the Old and New Testaments?

[Voice] Yes.

[Mitchell] The governor general of Australia is the queen’s representative or the monarch’s representative of the purpose of maintaining the godly law in Australia. Under section 58 of the Australian constitution the governor general has the power in his discretion to disallow any proposed legislation of the parliament of Australia. Now that discretion is not to be exercised just on his personal views or personal feeling. The idea, when that provision was put into the constitution, was that the discretion would be to implement God’s truth from the Scriptures.

So if Australia were to become a republic and sever that tie with the monarchy, it would seem that they would sever the tie with the ... the laws of God. It would seem to me that the people pressing for a republic are conspiring together to throw off what they perceive as the chains of the eternal one. It would seem to me that they are seeking to establish a country, a government, a governmental structure that is not linked in any way to the Scriptures or to the providence of the eternal God.

As I read Psalm two I am {?} that the Lord God laughs at their proposals and endeavors.

[Voice] In other words, the monarch makes Australia a Christian nation.

[Rushdoony] Yes.

[Mitchell] Yes, exactly so.

[Rushdoony] The coinage within the British dominions has, in Britain, always reads when you have the image of the queen deo gratia, the whole foundation of rule is that. And one noted liberal English periodical would seem to favor abandoning the monarchy, two or three years ago when Prince Charles was so unpopular had one writer conclude, “It cannot be done without destroying the legal foundations of the realm.”

I think the coronation ceremony of the monarch is very revealing. I have the full text in my library and it is very emphatic. When the monarch is handed a copy of the Bible by the moderator of the Church of Scotland, by the way, in the ceremony for Queen Elizabeth, they have to answer that this is, indeed, the law by which men and nations are to be ruled.

[Voice] So there would be great implications if the monarchy were to fall in England itself. And there is a movement, as you know....

[Rushdoony] Yes. It would be a... a legal vacuum, a chaos. Yes, Carlos.

[Voice] Dr. Mitchell, I am very interested in knowing your views of the American constitution and the American legal system.

[Mitchell] I don’t claim to be an expert in American constitution or American law at all. I, however, in my ignorance, perceive the American constitution as it at present stands to take the view that the measure of right and wrong is established by the people of America. I do not think this was the original intention. I perceive the original intention as having been that godliness would pervade in this nation.

As I look at the historic law reports in the earlier, up to the... oh, up to the mid 1800s in the United States, I see that godliness was the measure that was generally used in giving judgment in the courts. I think that this was what was intended in the constitution, but in my ignorance, I do not see that the constitution with its bill of rights and some of its other amendments, the way that it is at present being interpreted by the Supreme Court, the way that it is being interpreted by many people in the country and the way that it is being interpreted in educational institutions recognizes the godliness that I think was originally intended.

Perhaps then, as the learned people in America have a different view of the constitution and what it intended, perhaps I am wrong.

[Rushdoony] Carl, it is an interesting fact that on the 50th anniversary of the constitution in the great celebration in New York, the son of one president, John Adams and himself a president, John Quincy Adams, gave a very, very emotional address in which he struck out against the developing ideas of state sovereignty.

Now John Quincy Adams was not an evangelical believer. So all the same, he said very passionately and eloquently that if the founding fathers were present they would say of the doctrine of sovereignty, “It is not in us. It is only in the Lord God of hosts.” He gave a magnificent statement, because whatever his personal semi Unitarian faith, he knew that the foundation was in terms of radically biblical presuppositions.

Now that address by John Quincy Adams went into grade school textbooks. And it was there for some years and now it is forgotten. Most historians don’t know its existence.

[Voice] Rush, you made a wonderful statement about the five of the six exporting countries of food.

[Rushdoony] Yes.

[Voice] {?} they have an English heritage. What is the explanation? Why ... why... why did that produce this kind of high productive economies?

[Rushdoony] Well, the person who showed me that said it was a part of the reformed, the Calvinistic heritage of those peoples, that if left to character there.

Now the sixth country is France with a Huguenot background and, at present, a growing Huguenot revival. So this man concluded there is a connection between faith and life.

[Voice] I see.

[Rushdoony] Douglas?

[M. Rushdoony] Well, I was going to ask Dr. Mitchell to give us a view of the educational system in Australia, the home school situation as well as the state run school system.

[Mitchell] Historically in Australia, schooling was started as a Christian thrust. Education was fairly quickly taken over by the governments of the various states of Australia and in most states it became compulsory to send children between the ages of six and 16 to school. That is a very different principle from the principle that pertained in Britain or in the United States where, I understand, the requirement for compulsory education was for compulsory education, that is, parents were required to ensure that their children were educated.

It is a different thing requiring the children be sent to school. The home school movement is growing in Australia. The situation of Christian schools and of home schooling in Australia is probably 10 or even 20 years behind the United States. Home schoolers are still being harassed by governments across the nation. There are prosecutions of home schoolers on a fairly frequent basis. I nearly said a regular basis, but there is nothing regular about it. It is random. No regularity involved at all, but a frequency.

Home schooling is becoming recognized as a possibility in all states of Australia, but the home schoolers must register with the government, obtain approval from the government to teach their children at home and be subject to government inspection. They must follow the government syllabus.

There are many home schoolers objet to registration. Many home schoolers object to using the government syllabus and many home schoolers object to the inspection and control of the government. This leads, of course, to a degree of friction.

In the state of Queensland where home schooling is thoroughly approved, it is thoroughly approved if the parent or person providing the home schooling is a state registered teacher, otherwise it is not allowed.

As far as Christian schools are concerned, Christian schools have to apply for government—according to the law—have to apply for government permission to operate, have to submit themselves to government inspection, have to follow the government syllabus and in some states can only recruit teachers for government trained and approved.

You will understand, therefore, that there is little difference in the education in a Christian school from the education in a government school. There are some remarkable and wonderful exceptions to this. There are some Christians schools that are very faithful at bringing education from a biblical perspective in every aspect of their training and every credit to them. There have been two or three major prosecutions of Christian schools that have failed to register or maintain their registration and, as I commented earlier, I am not sure whether we were on tape at that stage, as I commented earlier, in the providence of the eternal God, two of those cases which had been enormously significant, the school has been found not guilty. On each occasion it has been for technical reasons that the school has been found not guilty and the time will come when the defense attorneys will not be able to find some technical reason and the issue of the freedom to teach children in accordance with the Scriptures will be before the courts.

As the courts operate at the moment, when that issue arises, I can only anticipate within no divine intervention, as I believe there has been in the cases already been heard, if there is no divine intervention there will be a precedent on the books against Christian training in the schools.

[Rushdoony] One of the great landmark victories that Dr. Mitchell helped the schools gain was... involved Peter Frogley, known to more than a few of you here in the United States. Peter Frogley has been here in Vallecito more than once and he studied for a time here in California, a very remarkable man.

Mark, do you have any questions to ask?

[M. Rushdoony] Would you tell us a little bit about the status of the Christian schools in Australia? You, I believe you said particularly that they are ... they are pretty much under government control.

[Mitchell] In every state of Australia there is a requirement that schools must be approved by the government. To be approved by the government they have to have certain facilities in premises, in libraries, in sports activities, in social interaction and in teaching methods. The ... there are a growing number of Christians schools in Australia, but, yes, they are all subject to government control. Some of them I perceive little difference between the Christian school and the government school. Indeed, sometimes I would feel that the government schools provide a superior education even in issues of morals and, dare I say, biblical understanding. I am not decrying in any way the enthusiasm or commitment of those who established the Christian school. I, too, would wish to see Christian schools right across the country. I would wish to see those schools under biblical supervision rather than under humanist government supervision.

[Rushdoony] What about the Church scene in Australia? What is the outlook there? Is it becoming more faithful to its confessions? I know there have been divisions there, as for example, among the Presbyterians.

[Mitchell] You will have already perceived, sir, that I am somewhat cynical in many respects. I fear that the world is entering the church to a large extent in Australia.

[Rushdoony] Yes.

[Mitchell] There are many even among those who would seek to be faithful to God’s Word, who take the view that the Church, its activities, its worship services, its preaching and its practice should conform to the culture.

[Rushdoony] Oh, my.

[Mitchell] And, to me, this troubles me.

[Rushdoony] Yes.

[Mitchell] But there are those who faithfully maintain the historic, the historic faith and proclaim it vigorously and fearlessly. The ... it is not possible, I think, to give an overall picture of the Church in any short compass, for there are sections of the Church that are political machines. There are sections of the Church that are social machines and there are parts of the Church that are faithful for God’s Word.

There are sections of the Church that would seek to see godliness pervading the nation, not just the Church and its people, but the whole nation. And the cause is by no means dead. Of course it is not. There is no need for me to say why. Of course it is not.

Some people would see the scene as black. I personally have an optimistic view of ... of the future. I have an optimistic view of the Church. I have an optimistic view of the way that godly rule will pervade the nation. It is important that the preachers of the gospel must maintain their faithfulness as some do.

[Rushdoony] We have about three or four minutes left. Is there a last question any of you would like to ask? And a further word from you? How would you like to make a statement, Dr. Mitchell, by way of conclusion?

[Mitchell] I would only like to quote from the...the Psalms. There is an interesting question. When the foundations are being destroyed, what shall the righteous do? If one looks on to the next verse one will see that the righteous must not be distressed, because the Lord God is on his throne.

[Rushdoony] Yes. That is a good verse to close on, because we need to recognize that since God is on the throne, we cannot be pessimistic. And my impression is that those who are most active in the battle are also the most confident of victory, because they are a part of the coming victory as you are.

And we thank you for being with us. We appreciate what you are doing there and what you have done elsewhere over the years. And we pray for God’s richest blessing upon you. Thank you for being with us, Dr. Mitchell.

And thank you all for listening and God bless you.