Truth and social reform


Download 0.58 Mb.
Size0.58 Mb.
1   2   3   4   5   6   7   8




Social evils usually are unjust social relationships and their chronic consequences. The Church was meant to be a structure to ensure just relationships; therefore, by its very nature it was intended to be the answer to social evils, a force for social reform, a threat to the unjust oppression.

Poverty, when it is chronic, for example, can also be a product of oppressive, exploitative economic relations. The Proverbs say, `A poor man's field may produce abundant food, but injustice sweeps it away' (13.23). In this chapter we shall see that in the Bible the Church is the antidote to poverty, because it was meant to be a community bound by self-sacrificing love.
In Chapter 2 we saw that slavery, i.e. an oppressive, exploitative economic relationship, is justified and perpetuated by false beliefs; therefore, proclamation of truth is the basic tool of reform. Poverty, however, has not only a theological dimension to it but a social dimension also. That is the focus of our concern in this chapter.
Evangelism which does not take church planting seriously usually springs from a deficient theology which does not take the social dimensions of sin and salvation seriously. Evangelism without church planting and evangelism without a compassionate concern for society are two sides of the same coin. They are rooted in the lack of a clear understanding of the mission of our Lord.

The Mission of Christ and the Necessity of the Church

We do not need to take a comprehensive look at the mission of our Lord to understand why it was necessary for Jesus to create the Church. We can be selective and refer to only three examples of how Jesus perceived Himself, the people and His Church to understand the role of the Church.

1. Jesus' Perception of Himself
Jesus proved his Messiahship by pointing out His mission to the weak and the poor. When John the Baptist sent his disciples to find out whether Jesus was indeed the Christ, Jesus responded by exhibiting His compassion for the needy and saying, `Go back and report to John what you have seen and heard: The blind receive sight, the lame walk, those who have leprosy are cured, the deaf hear, the dead are raised and the good news is preached to the poor.' (Luke 7:22).
According to Luke, when Jesus first claimed to be the Messiah He supported this claim from Isaiah 61:1-2:
The Spirit of the Lord is on me,

because he has anointed me to preach

good news to the poor.

He has sent me to proclaim freedom

for the prisoners

and recovery of sight for the blind,

to release the oppressed,

to proclaim the year of the Lord's favour” (Luke 4:18-19).
2. Jesus's Perception of People
Jesus did not see people merely as souls to be saved from hell. He saw them as sheep without a shepherd, `harassed and helpless' (Matt. 9:36); sheep in need of deliverance from the wolves (Matt. 10:16); as oppressed men `weary and burdened' who needed rest -shalom (Matt. 11:28). Jesus's claim to kingship rested on the fact that He was the `ruler who [would] be the shepherd of... Israel' (Matt. 2:6).

  1. Jesus’s Perception of the Church

Jesus said that He was sent 'to the lost sheep of Israel' (Matt. 15:24) to gather them into the fold, like the good shepherd who leaves the ninety-nine and goes after the one that is lost, to bring it in (Matt. 18:12-14). He sent out His disciples to do the same, to work as under-shepherds, to gather the harassed sheep into an `ecclesia', the Church `As the Father has sent me,' said Jesus `I am sending you' (John 20:21). Why is He sending them? To take care of the sheep, who are at present at the mercy of wolves. 'Feed my lambs... 'He gently pleaded with Simon Peter 'Take care of my sheep... Feed my sheep' (John 21:15-17).

The Church as a Power Structure

Many Christians conceive of the Church as merely a harmless, worshipping, witnessing and serving community. If it were so, it would hardly invite the persecution it did, nor would it have needed the supernatural Power which we discussed in the previous chapter. When Jesus used the word 'ecclesia' to describe the community He was intending to create, He obviously had an image of the Church which is radically different from the modern connotations created by the word `Church'. William Barclay, in his study New Testament Words, describes what the word 'ecclesia' meant. That was the picture which Jesus's use of the word 'church' would have conjured up in the minds of His audience. Barclay says:

“The ecclesia was the convened assembly of the people (in Greek City States). It consisted of all the citizens of the city who had not lost their civic rights. Apart from the fact that its decisions must conform to the laws of the State, its powers were to all intents and purposes unlimited. It elected and dismissed magistrates and directed the policy of the city. It declared wars, made peace, contracted treaties and arranged alliances. It elected generals and other military officers. It assigned troops to different campaigns and dispatched them from the city. It was ultimately responsible for the conduct of all military operations. It raised and allocated funds. Two things are interesting to note: first, all its meetings began with prayer and a sacrifice. Second, it was a true democracy. Its two great watchwords were 'equality' (isonomia) and 'freedom' (eleutheria). It was an assembly where everyone had an equal right and an equal duty to take part.” {Insertion from text: William Barclay, New Testament Words, SCM Press, 1964, pp.68-9}
Thus, according to Barclay, ecclesia referred to a power structure.
Did the word ecclesia have similar connotations in Jesus's mind, as described by William Barclay? Yes, in the very first usage of the word ecclesia, Jesus envisaged a community in conflict. He said to Simon, 'And I tell you that you are Peter, and on this rock I will build my church, and the gates of Hades will not overcome it' (Matt. 16:18).
In this first statement about the Church, we are told that the Church was going to be a social structure in conflict with the forces of death. Why? Because in an oppressive society if a group stands up to take care of the lambs, it automatically stands up against the wolves. The wolves are bound to fight the good shepherd. They have to do their best to destroy the ecclesia, if the ecclesia dares to protect the sheep. The Church was not meant to be an army that attacks evil, oppressive social structures, but a community that cares for the harassed and helpless sheep. But, unlike many Christians, Christ had no romantic vision of peaceful service. He knew that one cannot serve the sheep realistically without infuriating the vested interests—the wolves. Therefore, because conflict was inevitable, the Church had to be a powerful structure, a community that could withstand the very forces of Hades itself. It had to be a community which had the power to take up its cross, to follow its master.

The Church as the Antidote to Social Evils

Perhaps the themes of this chapter are best summed up in Ezekiel 34 which deals with the following facts:

(a) Poverty: A Product of Unjust Relationships
Poverty in Judah at the time of this writing was a problem of unjust economic relationships. Ezekiel said:
The Lord spoke to me. Mortal man, denounce the rulers of Israel. Prophesy to them, and tell them what I, the Sovereign Lord, say to them: You are doomed, you shepherds of Israel! You take care of yourselves, but never tend the sheep. You drink the milk, wear clothes made from the wool, and kill and eat the finest sheep. But you never tend the sheep. You have not taken care of the weak ones, healed the ones that are sick, bandaged the ones that are hurt, brought back the ones that wandered off, or looked for the ones that were lost. Instead, you treated them cruelly…”
Now then, my flock, I, the Sovereign Lord, tell you that I will judge each of you and separate the good from the bad, the sheep from the goats. Some of you are not satisfied with eating the best grass; you even trample down what you don't eat! You drink the clear water and muddy what you don't drink! My other sheep have to eat the grass you trample down and drink the water you muddy. So now, I, the Sovereign Lord, tell you that I will judge between you strong sheep andthe weak sheep. You pushed the sick ones aside and butted them away from the flock...” (34:1- 4;17-20).
(b) Ingathering of Sheep: The Answer To Poverty
The shepherdhood of the Messiah was seen in His care for the weak and the hungry sheep.
I, the Sovereign Lord, tell you that I myself will look for my sheep and take care of them in the same way as a shepherd takes care of his sheep that were scattered and are brought together again. I will bring them back from all the places where they were scattered...
I myself will be the shepherd of my sheep, and I will find them a place to rest” (Ezek. 34 :11-15).
(c) The Kingship of Christ as Shepherdhood
One of the Messiah's primary answer to socio-economic problems would be in gathering the harassed sheep into His flock.
I, the Sovereign Lord have spoken, I will look for those that are lost, bring back those that wander off, bandage those that are hurt, and heal those that are sick; but those that are fat and strong I will destroy, because I am a shepherd who does what is right... I will give them a king like my servant David to be their one shepherd, and he will take care of them. I, the Lord, will be their God, and a king my servant David will be their ruler...
I will give them fertile fields and put an end to hunger in the land. The other nations will not sneer at them any more. Everyone will know that I protect Israel and that they are my people. . . . You, my sheep, my flock that I feed, are my people, and I am your God (Ezek. 34:15-23, 29-31).

Contemporary Image of the Church

Looking at much of the contemporary Church in India, one can be justified in dismissing the view that the Church is the antidote to poverty. Shamefully, we must confess that very often the institutional Church has been the cause or means of perpetuating injustice and poverty. One ecumenical theologian, who is on the pay-roll of a church-related institution and is concerned about poverty, argued in a conference that the greatest sacrifice the Church can make for the poor in the twentieth century is to sacrifice itself, i.e., get out of existence! We have no quarrel with such theologians because they are talking about the existing image and reality of a part of the Church. In fact, we are ashamed that ecumenical theologians have had the courage to attack the evils within the Church, whereas evangelicals have sometimes been content either to woo even the corrupt Church leaders or just separate themselves from the wider Church.

The problem with these theologians begins when they seem to dismiss the very concept of Church as irrelevant to the struggle against injustice and the struggle for the weak. At that point it seems that the economists understand the need for human organisation to combat poverty better than the theologians. For example, C. T. Kurien, a leftist economist, in his book, Poverty and Development, say that development in India is possible only through conscious and deliberate mass movement. He said,
“a mass movement can be effected only through organising for action and through various forms of new institutions. . . .Such institutions also serve as new centres of power however limited their density may be to begin with. What is significant his that they form a new basis of power - the power of an informed and organised people as contrasted with property power, for instance. The building up of such a new power base is necessary to bring about a separation between property power and political power which so often tend to merge.”* {Insertion from text: C.T. Kurien, Poverty and Development, CLS, Madras, 1974, p. 24}
Many people fail to see the relevance of the Church to the question of social evils such as chronic poverty, because progress is judged in terms of quantity of production. Therefore, the problem of poverty is seen as a problem of technology - lack of technical know-how, tools and material resources.
Knowledge, tools and resources are indeed important, but their lack is not the basic problem, certainly not in rural India. A Western agriculturist, who worked for years in India trying to fight poverty at the grass-roots level with appropriate technology, ultimately gave up in despair. He said to me, `If the problems were technological, we could have solved them, because we have all the technical answers. But the problem is different. My training and background do not enable me even to understand the problem of poverty in India.'
One of the basic causes of poverty is the concentration of political power in the hands of those who are also economically and socially powerful. Hinduism gives religious sanction to this concentration of power which his almost consistently used for oppression. The top leadership of the nation also uses (and thereby reinforces) the hold of the existing power structures for gathering votes. Much of the Church development also works to strengthen the existing leadership, but hardly anyone consciously stands up to empower the oppressed . . . though that is precisely what Jesus did.

From the Acts of the Apostles, we see that Jerusalem, like any other pilgrim centre, attracted the poor, orphans, widows, beggars, priests and others. These poor were attracted to the Church, because the Church was a centre of power which cared for the weak, in contrast to the Jewish temple. Once they came into the Church, they were no longer poor because the believers shared their wealth with each other very liberally. `There were no needy persons among them, `the New Testament says. `For from time to time those who owned lands or houses sold them, brought the money from the sales and put it at the apostles' feet, and it was distributed to anyone as he had need' (4:34-5).

This care for the powerless did not come about only after Pentecost. It was part of the ministry of Christ's ecclesia during His own life. It was not just the twelve apostles whose needs were met by the common purse of Christ's community. When blind beggars, such as the one at Jericho, received their sight, the Gospels say that `he received sight and followed Jesus' (Luke 18:35-42), i.e. the beggar no longer begged, but lived as a part of the community of disciples.
When Jesus called disciples to follow Him, He offered to look after their material needs, too. They did not need to go back to their jobs such as fishing. Even the rich young ruler was asked to give away all his wealth to the poor and follow Jesus (Luke 18:22), meaning that for his needs he must trust Jesus and his community, not his own material resources. The incident at the Lord's Supper makes it clear that care for the poor was a routine function of Christ's community. When Jesus told Judas, `What you are about to do, do quickly,' His disciples thought that, `Since Judas has charge of the money. . . Jesus was telling him. . . to give something to the poor' (John 13:27-9). Earlier, when Mary anointed Jesus's feet with expensive perfume, Judas asked, `Why wasn't this perfume sold and the money given to the poor?' (John 12:5).
This care of the poor continued after Christ’s ascension. Paul says that the Church leadership had specifically asked him to take care of the poor, which he was doing anyway (Gal. 2:10). The Church was a power structure which was intended to care for the powerless. Jesus compared the Church to a small seed which grows into a mighty tree, `so that the birds of the air come and perch in its branches' (Matt. 13:32).
In contrast to the Jewish Establishment where political and economical power had become concentrated in the same hands, the New Testament Church was a counterbalancing centre of power. C. T. Kurien said that India needed `a new basis of power - the power of an informed and organised people as contrasted with property power.'* To build up an ecclesia in poor societies, such as an Indian village where the present social organisation (caste) favours the powerful, is to build up a new power base which automatically threatens the concentration of political and economic power. However, it is important for us not to be carried away by the Marxist presuppositions of writers such as Mr. Kurien. The Church of Jesus Christ must welcome the rich as much as the poor. Before the wealth can be distributed, it has to be created. Those who create wealth and share it with others will have their reward in heaven (Matt. 19:21). {Insertion from text: C.T. Kurien, Poverty and Development, CLS, Madras, 1974, p. 24}

The evangelists who go out preaching the good news, in obedience to their Lord, are often unaware of the social implications of conversion and Church planting. Their opponents, however, understand much better the threat that the Church represents. That is why they oppose evangelism and Church planting. Today in India, the most serious opposition to evangelism, conversion and church planting comes from those Hindu organisations such as the RSS (Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh) and Vishwa Hindu Parishad, which are committed to re-establishing political control of the nation in the hands of the high-caste Hindus - those who already have the economic and social power. These organisationsunderstand the political threat a growing Church represents. The RSS is self-consciously built on the teachings of the German thinkers who created Nazism. These thinkers understood well the threat Christianity represents to every ideology of domination of some by the others. For example, Freidric Nietzche, one of the most influential German thinkers wrote:

“Christianity sprang from Jewish roots and comprehensible only as a growth on this soil, represents the counter movement to any morality of breeding, of race, of privilege: it is the anti-Aryan religion par excellence.”
To appreciate the breadth of Jesus’ vision of ecclesia it will be helpful to look afresh at His statement in Matthew 16:18.
I tell you that you are Peter, and on this rock I will build my church and the gates of Hades will not overcome it.”

Church : A Community in Conflict with Forces of Death

We have already noticed the fact that Jesus implied in this statement that the Church will be a community in conflict with the forces of death because it will be a channel of life to the little lambs, which are harassed and helpless without a shepherd.

Church : A Community of Servants, not a Collection of Heroes.

Peter was one of those disciples who were dreaming of sitting next to Jesus at His left or right hand when He came to power. They dreamt of the day when the present political institution of darkness, under the authority of Satan, will be overthrown and the Kingship of Christ will be established. It was a great revolution for which they were planning to fight.

Therefore, when a few mothers brought their little children to Jesus so that he might bless them, the disciples got upset. `Why do you make our Master weary,' they probably said, `by these petty petitions of yours? Don't you see the great mission for which we need to conserve our energies?' Jesus rebuked the disciples. “Let the little children come to me,” He said, “for the kingdom of heaven belongs to such as these” (Matt. 19:14).
The great people are already having good times in the kingdom of Satan. They don't need the Kingdom of God. If the Kingdom of God means nothing for these little ones, it means nothing at all.
After Peter’s confession of Jesus as Messiah in Matthew 16:16, Jesus began to teach His disciples `that He must go to Jerusalem and suffer many things at the hands of the elders, chief priests and teachers of the law, and that He must be killed. . . ' (Matt. 16:21).
At this, Peter was upset and began to rebuke Jesus. Peter may have said `what do you mean, you are going to die? Are we fools that we have left our wives and work to follow you and you want to end up on a cross? Our families have allowed us to follow you because one day they expect to see us on the throne with you. You can't desert us like that.'
Jesus responded to Peter with a severe rebuke: `Get behind me, Satan!' (v.23).
Just because Peter acknowledged Jesus as King he did not qualify to become a hero in Christ's ecclesia. He was being called to become a servant, a shepherd to the helpless sheep and to lay down his life for the lambs.
Jesus said, `If anyone would come after me, he must deny himself and take up his cross and follow me. For whoever wants to save his life will lose it, but whoever loses his life for me will find it' (vv.24-5).

Jesus was saying that the structure which can withstand the force of death will not be a collection of heroes but a community of love, an ecclesia - where leaders are willing to lay down their lives for one another. That was Christ's vision of the Church.

The writers of the New Testament devote much space in their epistles, in exhorting us to be a church, a body, a temple in which God can dwell through His Spirit because there is a context of love and holiness which results in our mutual submission to one another.

Church: A Community Built on a Victorious Faith

`Upon this rock,' said Jesus, `I will build my church. . . I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven; whatever you bind on earth will be bound in heaven, and what ever you loose on earth, will be loosed in heaven' (Matt. 16:18-19).

Chairman Mao taught that political power comes from the barrel of a gun. Jesus said to Peter that his knowledge of the truth that Jesus is `Christ, the Son of the living God' (Matt. 16:16), and faith in this truth are together the rock upon which the victorious ecclesia would be built.
While the angel was describing the brutal power of the kingdom of Satan to Daniel, he conceded that strength of arm will not be able to withstand the power of wickedness. `But the people that do know their God', said the angel, `shall be strong and do exploits (Dan. 11:32 AV) or, as the New International Version puts it, `the people who know their God will firmly resist him [the evil ruler]’.
The apostle John says, `This is the victory that has overcome the world, even our faith. Who is it that overcomes the world? Only he who believes that Jesus is the Son of God' (1 John 5:4-5).
The church is a community that cares for the weak, but it is built on a victorious faith in a supernatural universe. The battle for social reform requires a transcendental faith.

Church: A Dwelling-Place of God

Jesus said, `I will build my church'. We have seen that the Bible teaches that the root cause of social evils is that the world has become Satan's kingdom. In contrast, Jesus is seeking to establish the Church as God's dwelling-place in the midst of the kingdom of Satan. The Church is God's new community in a fallen world, a channel of life and liberty. It is described as God's `temple', `household', `bride' or ‘the body’, of which Christ is the head. It is created to be the showpiece of God's work of redemption through which the manifold wisdom of God could be exhibited to the rulers and authorities in the supernatural dimensions of the universe (Eph. 3:10)

Church: An Inseparable Part of the Good News

Upon this victorious faith . . . `I will build my church, and the gates of Hades will not overcome it' means that the creation of the Church is an intrinsic part of the hope, the Good News that Jesus offers. The Good News is a message of individual forgiveness for sin, freedom from captivity of enslaving beliefs - and it is also the creation of a new community, built on truth, which cares for others with self-sacrificing love - a community which overcomes sinful social barriers that alienate men such as Jews v. Gentiles, masters v. slaves, men v. women.

St. Paul says that the Church is:
the mystery of Christ, which was not made known to men in other generations as it has now been revealed by the Spirit to God's holy apostles and prophets. This mystery is that through the gospel the Gentiles are heirs together with Israel, members together of one body, and sharers together in the promise in Christ Jesus” (Eph. 3:4-6).
St. Paul was excited about the Church, `the great mystery of God', because the Church is the `unsearchable riches of Christ... in God'.
The Church can become a matter of excitement in a country like India if it is seen to be uniting `untouchables' and the `high caste' into one body. The same applies to other countries where human beings are sharply divided according to race, colour, economic status, sex, etc. These alienations are the results of sin, features of the kingdom of Satan. Salvation includes becoming one body by overcoming the sin that separates.

An Unfinished Story

In 1980, as a result of the work of ACRA, three small worshipping congregations had sprung up, consisting exclusively of non-Christians who had put their trust in Christ. In one village five families, led by my father, used to meet for worship. `D' was one of them - a semi-literate man converted from an untouchable background. Some years ago, when he was a child, his family land had been forcibly taken by a high-caste Hindu. In 1974, while `D' was still a Hindu, he started a court case against the man who had grabbed his land. The case did not go far because no one in the village was willing to come forward as a witness in support of `D'. This was because twenty-five families had grabbed the little plots that had been given to over 100 families. The twenty-five families were more powerful than the 100 families. Therefore, the poor could not even give witness for one another.

But the Church was a new factor in that oppressive situation. `D' shared his problem with other Christians and they prayed about it. They felt that the case should be reopened. After some time the Church discovered that legally the land still belonged to `D'; he just needed the courage to cultivate it. The prayer and moral support of the little church gave him the courage to venture out and repossess his land. Another believer, `S', from the same village offered to plough the land for `D' with our tractor. The high-caste man's family stood by with their axes, abusing us and threatening to murder `S'. However, because they feared that the other Church members would bear witness in court, they did not take any step. The next day they said, `You have ploughed the land, but we will sow it.' That night `S' took the tractor and sowed the field himself. The high-caste were infuriated.
They called a meeting of high-caste Hindus from nearly thirty villages to discuss what to do with these Christians. The high-caste man who had grabbed `D's land argued convincingly that it was not a matter of one man and his land, but of thousands of acres belonging to thousands of low-castes. He said, `If one of these untouchables succeeded in getting his land back, with the help of the Christians, you can be sure that thousands of them will become Christians and we shall lose our land'. Those who participated in the meeting vowed with `Ganga Jal' (water of the river Ganges) that they would chase the Christians away from their area. They understood the threat which the Church posed, merely by virtue of its commitment to stand with one of its weak members.
My father was threatened, `You tell your son not to meddle in our affairs, otherwise the consequences for you will be bad'. We prayed and felt that it was worth taking the consequences. If we failed, we failed. But if we succeeded then it could open up floodgates - thousands of oppressed and thousands of acres of land.
My wife and I were leaving for a lectures-cum-study trip to Europe for three months. The night before we left, three men entered my father's farmhouse. They beat him up as well as my step-mother and tied them up. They looted the house. Then one of them threatened to gouge out my father's eyes with a knife. He did not do so because my father promised to empty out his bank account the following day and give them all his life's savings.
My father came to see us in the morning. He was worried that the men might have come to us after leaving them. He did not say a word about the incident, but as we left for the airport, he excused himself and went to the bank to draw out the money for them.
My father had to flee from the village and take temporary shelter in the city. Thus he was shattered. Two days later, two Hindu neighbours of `S' were murdered over a land dispute. This shook `S'. Then `D' was threatened with murder. A little later my aunt and her husband were brutally murdered in their own home in Chattarpur where my father was staying. This last episode apparently did not have anything to do with our struggle, but the cumulative impact of it all was that the little church was thoroughly demoralised. Under pressure `D' agreed to `sell' the land to the high-caste man. The high-caste man's illegal possession was legalised for a paltry sum of three hundred rupees.
My father took a loan from ACRA and helped `D' to buy another plot of land in the same village. It was a witness to the Church's care and commitment to the oppressed, even though it was also an admission of powerlessness and failure. `D' is still there cultivating. For the moment the Church stands disintegrated. It is a reminder of Moses' abortive attempt in Egypt to free the Israelites. By himself he was too weak to stand against the forces of Hades. He was forced to flee. But that was not the end of the story. Moses met with God. He was transformed into a prophet and he returned and liberated the Jews in the power of God.
The above story has not ended yet. `D' has land of his own, with an irrigation well. The bank financed him to buy an electric pump. He worked hard, but could not feed his family. In 1983 his total product sold for less than four thousand rupees. He repaid two thousand to the bank for the pump, fertlisers, etc; twelve hundred were spent on seed, repairs and fencing. That left him with eight hundred for his annual wages, i.e., sixty-six rupees ($6) per month for a family of six. His girls were getting free education in a Christian boarding-school. He couldn't pay their travel from home to school, so in disgust he withdrew them from the school. He sold firewood to make a little extra money, but he was still forced to borrow, just to eat.
The high-caste man who grabbed `D's land and had my father nearly killed, is our `friend' now. Recently, with `D' and `S' he spent a whole day in one of our spiritual retreats listening to the Gospel. He knows that even though we disapprove of what he did, we love him and are concerned about the fact that he, too, is enslaved and exploited by the politico-economic system in which he lives. He knows that we understand that he, too, is not making ends meet and is therefore forced to exploit his neighbours, labourers, cattle, land, forest and his own children. He now knows that the Christians are as much concerned for his salvation as for `D's.
The above experience contributed to my understanding that the problems of poverty, where they were rooted not in a lack of resources and skills, but in unjust relationships were dealt with better by God’s NGO (Non-Governmental Organization) than by our NGOs. The Church is a Non-Governmental Organization which God has built. While our NGOs bring people together for brief periods, for specific programmes, God’s NGO brings people together in a life-long relationship. In a Church people come together not because of economic interests but first of all as sinners, seeking to get right with God and with one another.

Download 0.58 Mb.

Share with your friends:
1   2   3   4   5   6   7   8

The database is protected by copyright © 2023
send message

    Main page