rn 
 
 11 
 
 Count Leo Tolsto! 
 
Cibrarjp of tlreolojical ^emmarjp 
 
 PRINCETON • NEW JERSEY 
 
 
 PRESENTED BY 
 
 The Estate of the 
 Rev, John B, Wiedlnger 
 
 

 
“THE KINGDOM OF GOD IS 
 WITHIN YOU ” 
 
Digitized by the Internet Archive 
 in 2017 with funding from 
 Princeton Theological Seminary Library 
 
 https://archive.org/details/kingdomofgodiswi00tols_1 
 
‘THE KINGDOM OF GOD IS 
 WITHIN YOU” 
 
 CHTilSTMNITY NOT AS A MYSTIC %ELIGION 
 BUT AS A NEIV THEOTiY OF LIFE 
 
 TRANSLATED FROM THE RUSSIAN OF 
 
 COUNT LEO 'TOLSTOI 
 
 BY 
 
 CONSTANCE GARNETT 
 
 NEW YORK 
 
 THE CASSELL PUBLISHING CO. 
 
 31 East 17TH St. (Union Square) 
 
Copyright, 1894, by 
 
 THE CASSELL PUBLISHING CO. 
 
 A/i rights reserved. 
 
 THE MERSHON COMPANY PRESS, 
 RAHWAY, N. J. 
 
TRANSLATOR’S PREFACE. 
 
 The book I have had the privilege of translating is, 
 undoubtedly, one of the most remarkable studies of the 
 social and psychological condition of the modern world 
 which has appeared in Europe for many years, and its 
 influence is sure to be lasting and far reaching. Tolstoi’s 
 genius is beyond dispute. The verdict of the civilized 
 world has pronounced him as perhaps the greatest novelist 
 of our generation. But the philosophical and religious 
 works of his later years have met with a somewhat 
 indifferent reception. They have been much talked about, 
 simply because they were his work, but, as Tolstoi himself 
 complains, they have never been seriously discussed. I 
 hardly think that he will have to repeat the complaint in 
 regard to the present volume. One may disagree with his 
 views, but no one can seriously deny the originality, bold- 
 ness, and depth of the social conception which he develops 
 with such powerful logic. The novelist has shown in this 
 book the religious fervor and spiritual insight of the 
 prophet ; yet one is pleased to recognize that the artist is 
 not wholly lost in the thinker. The subtle intuitive per- 
 ception of the psychological basis of the social position, 
 the analysis of the frame of mind of oppressors and 
 oppressed, and of the intoxication of Authority and Servility, 
 as well as the purely descriptive passages in the last chap- 
 ter — these could only have come from the author of “ War 
 and Peace.” 
 
 The book will surely give all classes of readers much to 
 
VI 
 
 TRANSLATOR'S PREFACE. 
 
 think of, and must call forth much criticism. It must be 
 refuted by those who disapprove of its teaching, if they do 
 not want it to have great influence. 
 
 One cannot of course anticipate that English people, 
 slow as they are to be influenced by ideas, and instinctively 
 distrustful of all that is logical, will take a leap in the dark 
 and attempt to put Tolstoi’s theory of life into practice. 
 But one may at least be sure that his destructive criticism 
 of the present social and political regime will become a 
 powerful force in the work of disintegration and social 
 reconstruction which is going on around us. Many earnest 
 thinkers who, like Tolstoi, are struggling to find their way 
 out of the contradictions of our social order will hail him 
 as their spiritual guide. The individuality of the author is 
 felt in every line of his work, and even the most prejudiced 
 cannot resist the fascination of his genuineness, sincerity, 
 and profound earnestness. Whatever comes from a heart 
 such as his, swelling with anger and pity at the sufferings 
 of humanity, cannot fail to reach the hearts of others. No 
 reader can put down the book without feeling himself 
 better and more truth-loving for having read it. 
 
 Many readers may be disappointed with the opening 
 chapters of the book. Tolstoi disdains all attempt to cap- 
 tivate the reader. He begins by laying what he considers 
 to be the logical foundation of his doctrines, stringing to- 
 gether quotations from little-known theological writers, and 
 he keeps his own incisive logic for the later part of the book. 
 
 One word as to the translation. Tolstoi’s style in his 
 religious and philosophical works differs considerably from 
 that of his novels. He no longer cares about the form of 
 his work, and his style is often slipshod, involved, and dif- 
 fuse. It has been my aim to give a faithful reproduction 
 of the original. 
 
 Constance Garnett. 
 
 January , 1894. 
 
PREFACE. 
 
 In the year 1884 I wrote a book under the title “What 
 I Believe,” in which I did in fact make a sincere statement 
 of my beliefs. 
 
 In affirming my belief in Christ’s teaching, I could not 
 help explaining why I do not believe, and consider as 
 mistaken, the Church’s doctrine, which is usually called 
 Christianity. 
 
 Among the many points in which this doctrine falls short 
 of the doctrine of Christ I pointed out as the principal 
 one the absence of any commandment of non-resistance 
 to evil by force. The perversion of Christ’s teaching by 
 the teaching of the Church is more clearly apparent in this 
 than in any other point of difference. 
 
 I know — as we all do — very little of the practice and the 
 spoken and written doctrine of former times on the sub- 
 ject of non-resistance to evil. I knew what had been said 
 on the subject by the fathers of the Church — Origen, 
 Tertullian, and others — I knew too of the existence of 
 some so-called sects of Mennonites, Herrnhuters, and 
 Quakers, who do not allow a Christian the use of weapons, 
 and do not enter military service ; but I knew little of 
 what had been done by these so-called sects toward 
 expounding the question. 
 
 My book was, as I had anticipated, suppressed by the 
 Russian censorship ; but partly owing to my literary 
 reputation, partly because the book had excited people’s 
 curiosity, it circulated in manuscript and in lithographed 
 
 vii 
 
Vlll 
 
 PREFACE. 
 
 copies in Russia and through translations abroad, and it 
 evoked, on one side, from those who shared my- con- 
 victions, a series of essays with a great deal of informa- 
 tion on the subject, on the other side a series of criticisms 
 on the principles laid down in my book. 
 
 A great deal was made clear to me by both hostile and 
 sympathetic criticism, and also by the historical events 
 of late years ; and I was led to fresh results and con- 
 clusions, which I wish now to expound. 
 
 First I will speak of the information I received on the 
 history of the question of non-resistance to evil ; then of 
 the views of this question maintained by spiritual critics, 
 that is, by professed believers in the Christain religion, 
 and also by temporal ones, that is, those who do not profess 
 the Christian religion ; and lastly I will speak of the con- 
 clusions to which I have been brought by all this in the 
 light of the historical events of late years. 
 
 L. Tolstoi. 
 
 YasnaIa Poliana, 
 
 May 14 / 26 , 1893 . 
 
CONTENTS 
 
 CHAPTER PAGE 
 
 I. The Doctrine of Non-resistance to Evil by Force 
 HAS been Professed by a Minority of Men from 
 THE Very P'oundation of Christianity, . . i 
 
 II. Criticisms of the Doctrine of Non-resistance to 
 Evil by Force on the Part of Believers and of 
 Unbelievers, 29 
 
 III. Christianity Misunderstood by Believers, . . 48 
 
 IV. Christianity Misunderstood by Men of Science, . 85 
 
 V. Contradiction Between our Life and our Christian 
 
 Conscience, 109 
 
 VI. Attitude of Men of the Present Day to War, . 133 
 
 VII. Significance of Compulsory Service, . . .164 
 
 VIII. Doctrine of Non-resistance to Evil by Force Must 
 Inevitably be Accepted by Men of the Present 
 
 Day 184 
 
 IX. The Acceptance of the Christian Conception of 
 Life will Emancipate Men from the Miseries 
 
 OF OUR Pagan Life, 208 
 
 X. Evil Cannot be Suppressed by the Physical Force 
 OF THE Government — The Moral Progress of 
 Humanity is Brought About not only by Indi- 
 vidual Recognition of the Truth, but Also 
 Through the Establishment of a Public Opinion, 235 
 
 ix 
 
X 
 
 CONTENTS. 
 
 CHAPTER 
 
 XI. 
 
 XII. 
 
 The Christian Conception of Life has Already 
 Arisen in our Society, and will Infallibly Put 
 AN End to the Present Organization of our Life 
 Based on Force — When That Will Bf, . . 264 
 
 Conclusion — Repent Ye, for the Kingdom of 
 
 Heaven is at Hand, 
 
 279 
 
“ Ye shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you 
 free.” — John viii. 32. 
 
 “ Fear not them which kill the body, but are not able 
 to kill the soul ; but rather fear him which is able to 
 destroy both soul and body in hell.” — jMatt. x. 28. 
 
 “Ye have been bought with a price ; be not ye the 
 servants of men.” — i COR. vii. 23. 
 
“THE KINGDOM OF GOD IS 
 
 WITHIN YOU.” 
 
 CHAPTER I. 
 
 THE DOCTRINE OF NON-RESISTANCE TO EVIL BY FORCE HAS 
 BEEN PROFESSED BY A MINORITY OF MEN FROM THE VERY 
 FOUNDATION OF CHRISTIANITY. 
 
 Of the Book “What I Believe” — The Correspondence Evoked by it — 
 Letters from Quakers — Garrison’s Declaration — Adin Ballou, his 
 Works, his Catechism — Helchitsky’s “ Net of F'aith” — The Attitude 
 of the World to Works Elucidating Christ’s Teaching — Dymond’s 
 Book “On War” — Musser’s “ Non-resistance Asserted” — Attitude of 
 the Government in i8i8 to Men who Refused to Serve in the Army — 
 Hostile Attitude of Governments Generally and of Liberals to Those 
 who Refuse to Assist in Acts of State Violence, and their Conscious 
 Efforts to Silence and Suppress these Manifestations of Christian 
 Non-resistance. 
 
 Among the first responses called forth by my book were 
 some letters from American Quakers. In these letters, 
 expressing their sympathy with my views on the unlawful- 
 ness for a Christian of war and the use of force of any 
 kind, the Quakers gave me details of their own so-called 
 sect, which for more than two hundred years has actually 
 professed the teaching of Christ on non-resistance to evil 
 by force, and does not make use of weapons in self-defense. 
 The Quakers sent me also their pamphlets, journals, and 
 books, from which I learnt how they had, years ago, es- 
 
2 
 
 “ THE KINGDOM OF GOD 
 
 tablished beyond doubt the duty for a Christian of fulfill- 
 ing the command of non-resistance to evil by force, and 
 had exposed the error of the Church’s teaching in allow- 
 ing war and capital punishment. 
 
 In a whole series of arguments and texts showing that 
 war — that is, the wounding and killing of men — is incon- 
 sistent with a religion founded on peace and good will 
 toward men, the Quakers maintain and prove that nothing 
 has contributed so much to the obscuring of Christian 
 truth in the eyes of the heathen, and has hindered so much 
 the diffusion of Christianity through the world, as the disre- 
 gard of this command by men calling themselves Christians, 
 and the permission of war and violence to Christians. 
 
 “ Christ’s teaching, which came to be known to men, 
 not by means of violence and the sword,” they say, “ but 
 by means of non-resistance to evil, gentleness, meekness, 
 and peaceableness, can only be diffused through the world 
 by the example of peace, harmony, and love among its 
 followers.” 
 
 “ A Christian, according to the teaching of God him- 
 self, can act only peaceably toward all men, and therefore 
 there can be no authority able to force the Christian to act 
 in opposition to the teaching of God and to the principal 
 virtue of the Christian in his relation with his neighbors.” 
 
 “ The law of state necessity,” they say, “ can force 
 only those to change the law of God who, for the sake of 
 earthly gains, try to reconcile the irreconcilable ; but for a 
 Christian who sincerely believes that following Christ’s 
 teaching will give him salvation, such considerations of 
 state can have no force.” 
 
 Further acquaintance with the labors of the Quakers 
 and their works — with Fox, Penn, and especially the work 
 of Dymond (published in 1827) — showed me not only that 
 the impossibility of reconciling Christianity with force and 
 war had been recognized long, long ago, but that this irrec- 
 
IS WITHm YOU." 
 
 3 
 
 oncilability had been long ago proved so clearly and so 
 indubitably that one could only wonder how this impossible 
 reconciliation of Christian teaching with the use of force, 
 which has been, and is still, preached in the churches, 
 could have been maintained in spite of it. 
 
 In addition to what I learned from the Quakers I 
 received about the same time, also from America, some 
 information on the subject from a source perfectly distinct 
 and previously unknown to me. 
 
 The son of William Lloyd Garrison, the famous champion 
 of the emancipation of the negroes, wrote to me that he 
 had read my book, in which he found ideas similar to those 
 expressed by his father in the year 1838, and that, thinking 
 it would be interesting to me to know this, he sent me a 
 declaration or proclamation of “ non-resistance ” drawn 
 up by his father nearly fifty years ago. 
 
 This declaration came about under the following cir- 
 cumstances ; William Lloyd Garrison took part in a dis- 
 cussion on the means of suppressing war in the Society for 
 the Establishment of Peace among Men, which existed in 
 1838 in America. He came to the conclusion that the 
 establishment of universal peace can only be founded on 
 the open profession of the doctrine of non-resistance to 
 evil by violence (Matt. v. 39), in its full significance, as 
 understood by the Quakers, with whom Garrison happened 
 to be on friendly relations. Having come to this conclu- 
 sion, Garrison thereupon composed and laid before the 
 society a declaration, which was signed at the time — in 
 1838 — by many members. 
 
 “ DECLARATION OF SENTIMENTS ADOPTED BY THE 
 PEACE CONVENTION. 
 
 “ Boston, 1838. 
 
 “ We, the undersigned, regard it as due to ourselves, to 
 the cause which we love, to the country in which we live. 
 
4 
 
 “ THE KINGDOM OF GOD 
 
 to publish a declaration expressive of the purposes we aim 
 to accomplish and the measures we shall adopt to carry 
 forward the work of peaceful universal reformation. 
 
 “ We do not acknowledge allegiance to any human gov- 
 ernment. We recognize but one King and La,wgiver, one 
 Judge and Ruler of mankind. Our country is the world, 
 our countrymen are all mankind. We love the land of our 
 nativity only as we love all other lands. The interests and 
 rights of American citizens are not dearer to us than those 
 of the whole human race. Hence we can allow no appeal 
 to patriotism to revenge any national insult or injury. . . 
 
 “ We conceive that a nation has no right to defend itself 
 against foreign enemies or to punish its invaders, and no 
 individual possesses that right in his own case, and the unit 
 cannot be of greater importance than the aggregate. If 
 soldiers thronging from abroad with intent to commit rapine 
 and destroy life may not be resisted by the people or the 
 magistracy, then ought no resistance to be offered to 
 domestic troublers of the public peace or of private 
 security. 
 
 “ The dogma that all the governments of the world are 
 approvingly ordained of God, and that the powers that be 
 in the United States^ in Russia, in Turkey, are in accord- 
 ance with his will, is no less absurd than impious. It 
 makes the impartial Author of our existence unequal and 
 tyrannical. It cannot be affirmed that the powers that be 
 in any nation are actuated by the spirit or guided by the 
 example of Christ in the treatment of enemies ; therefore 
 they cannot be agreeable to the will of God, and therefore 
 their overthrow by a spiritual regeneration of their sub- 
 jects is inevitable. 
 
 “ We regard as unchristian and unlawful not only all wars, 
 whether offensive or defensive, but all preparations for 
 war ; every naval ship, every arsenal, every fortification, we 
 regard as unchristian and unlawful ; the existence of any 
 
IS WITHIN YOU." 
 
 5 
 
 kind of standing army, all military chieftains, all monu- 
 ments commemorative of victory over a fallen foe, all 
 trophies won in battle, all celebrations in honor of military 
 exploits, all appropriations for defense by arms ; we regard 
 as unchristian and unlawful every edict of government 
 requiring of its subjects military service. 
 
 “ Hence we deem it unlawful to bear arms, and we can- 
 not hold any office which imposes on its incumbent the obli- 
 gation to compel men to do right on pain of imprisonment 
 or death. We therefore voluntarily exclude ourselves from 
 every legislative and judicial body, and repudiate all human 
 politics, worldly honors, and stations of authority. If we 
 cannot occupy a seat in the legislature or on the bench, 
 neither can we elect others to act as our substitutes in any 
 such capacity. It follows that we cannot sue any man at 
 law to force him to return anything he may have wrongly 
 taken from us ; if he has seized our coat, we shall surrender 
 him our cloak also rather than subject him to punishment. 
 
 “We believe that the penal code of the old covenant — 
 an eye for an eye, and a tooth for a tooth — has been abro- 
 gated by Jesus Christ, and that under the new covenant 
 the forgiveness instead of the punishment of enemies has 
 been enjoined on all his disciples in all cases whatsoever. 
 To extort money from enemies, cast them into prison, exile 
 or execute them, is obviously not to forgive but to take 
 retribution. 
 
 “ The history of mankind is crowded with evidences 
 proving that physical coercion is not adapted to moral re- 
 generation, and that the sinful dispositions of men can be 
 subdued only by love ; that evil can be exterminated only 
 by good ; that it is not safe to rely upon the strength of an 
 arm to preserve us from harm ; that there is great security 
 in being gentle, long-suffering, and abundant in mercy ; 
 that it is only the meek who shall inherit the earth ; for 
 those who take up the sword shall perish by the sword. 
 
6 
 
 THE KINGDOM OF GOD 
 
 “ Hence as a measure of sound policy — of safety to 
 property, life, and liberty — of public quietude and private 
 enjoyment — as well as on the ground of allegiance to Him 
 who is King of kings and Lord of lords, we cordially 
 adopt the non-resistance principle, being confident that it 
 provides for all possible consequences, is armed with 
 omnipotent power, and must ultimately triumph over every 
 assailing force. 
 
 “We advocate no Jacobinical doctrines. The spirit of 
 Jacobinism is the spirit of retaliation, violence, and 
 murder. It neither fears God nor regards man. We 
 would be filled with the spirit of Christ. If we abide 
 by our fundamental principle of not opposing evil by 
 evil we cannot participate in sedition, treason, or violence. 
 We shall submit to every ordinance and every requirement 
 of government, except such as are contrary to the com- 
 mands of the Gospel, and in no case resist the operation of 
 law, except by meekly submitting to the penalty of dis- 
 obedience. 
 
 “ But while we shall adhere to the doctrine of non-resist- 
 ance and passive submission to enemies, we purpose, in a 
 moral and spiritual sense, to assail iniquity in high places 
 and in low places, to apply our principles to all existing 
 evil, political, legal, and ecclesiastical institutions, and to 
 hasten the time when the kingdoms of this world will have 
 become the kingdom of our Lord Jesus Christ. It appears 
 to us a self-evident truth that whatever the Gospel is 
 designed to destroy at any period of the world, being con- 
 trary to it, ought now to be abandoned. If, then, the time 
 is predicted when swords shall be beaten into plowshares 
 and spears into pruning hooks, and men shall not learn the 
 art of war any more, it follows that all who manufacture, 
 sell, or wield these deadly weapons do thus array them- 
 selves against the peaceful dominion of the Son of God on 
 earth. 
 
IS WITHIN YOU. 
 
 7 
 
 “ Having thus stated our principles, we proceed to 
 specify the measures we propose to adopt in carrying our 
 object into effect. 
 
 “ We expect to prevail through the Foolishness of 
 Preaching. We shall endeavor to promulgate our views 
 among all persons, to whatever nation, sect, or grade of 
 society they may belong. Flence we shall organize public 
 lectures, circulate tracts and publications, form societies, 
 and petition every governing body. It will be our leading 
 object to devise ways and means for effecting a radical 
 change in the views, feelings, and practices of society 
 respecting the sinfulness of war and the treatment of 
 enemies. 
 
 “ In entering upon the great work before us, we are not 
 unmindful that in its prosecution we may be called to test 
 our sincerity even as in a fiery ordeal. It may subject us 
 to insult, outrage, suffering, yea, even death itself. We 
 anticipate no small amount of misconception, misrepresen- 
 tation, and calumny. Tumults may arise against us. The 
 proud and pharisaical, the ambitious and tyrannical, princi- 
 palities and powers, may combine to crush us. So they 
 treated the Messiah whose example we are humbly striving 
 to imitate. We shall not be afraid of their terror. Our 
 confidence is in the Lord Almighty and not in man. Hav- 
 ing withdrawn from human protection, what can sustain us 
 but that faith which overcomes the world ? We shall not 
 think it strange concerning the fiery trial which is to try us, 
 but rejoice inasmuch as we are partakers of Christ’s suffer- 
 ings. 
 
 “ Wherefore we commit the keeping of our souls to God. 
 For every one that forsakes houses, or brethren, or sisters, 
 or father, or mother, or wife, or children, or lands for 
 Christ’s sake, shall receive a hundredfold, and shall inherit 
 everlasting life. 
 
 “ Firmly relying upon the certain and universal triumph 
 
8 
 
 THE KINGDOM OF GOD 
 
 of the sentiments contained in this declaration, however 
 formidable may be the opposition arrayed against them, we 
 hereby affix our signatures to it ; commending it to the 
 reason and conscience of mankind, and resolving, in the 
 strength of the Lord God, to calmly and meekly abide the 
 issue.” 
 
 Immediately after this declaration a Society for Non- 
 resistance was founded by Garrison, and a journal called 
 the Non-resistant, in which the doctrine of non-resistance 
 was advocated in its full significance and in all its conse- 
 quences, as it had been expounded in the declaration. 
 Further information as to the ultimate destiny of the 
 society and the journal I gained from the excellent biog- 
 raphy of W. L. Garrison, the work of his son. 
 
 The society and the journal did not exist for long. The 
 greater number of Garrison’s fellow-workers in the move- 
 ment for the liberation of the slaves, fearing that the too 
 radical programme of the journal, the Non-resistant, might 
 keep people away from the practical work of negro-eman- 
 cipation, gave up the profession of the principle of non- 
 resistance as it had been expressed in the declaration, and 
 both society and journal ceased to exist. 
 
 This declaration of Garrison’s gave so powerful and 
 eloquent an expression of a confession of faith of such 
 importance to men, that one would have thought it must 
 have produced a strong impression on people, and have 
 become known throughout the world and the subject of 
 discussion on every side. Bui nothing of the kind oc- 
 curred. Not only was it unknown in Europe, even the 
 Americans, who have such a high opinion of Garrison, 
 hardly knew of the declaration. 
 
 Another champion of non-resistance has been over- 
 looked in the same way — the American Adin Ballou, who 
 lately died, after spending fifty years in preaching this 
 
IS WITHIN- YOU. 
 
 9 
 
 doctrine. How great the ignorance is of everything relat- 
 ing to the question of non-resistance may be seen from the 
 fact that Garrison the son, who has written an excellent 
 biography of his father in four great volumes, in answer to 
 my inquiry whether there are existing now societies for 
 non-resistance, and adherents of the doctrine, told me 
 that as far as he knew that society had broken up, and that 
 there were no adherents of that doctrine, while at the very 
 time when he was writing to me there was living, at Hope- 
 dale in Massachusetts, Adin Ballou, who had taken part in 
 the labors of Garrison the father, and had devoted fifty 
 years of his life to advocating, both orally and in print, the 
 doctrine of non-resistance. Later on I received a letter 
 from Wilson, a pupil and colleague of Ballou’s, and entered 
 into correspondence with Ballou himself. I wrote to 
 Ballou, and he answered me and sent me his works. Here 
 is the summary of some extracts from them ; 
 
 “ Jesus Christ is my Lord and teacher,” says Ballou in 
 one of his essays exposing the inconsistency of Christians 
 who allowed a right of self-defense and of warfare. “ I 
 have promised, leaving all else, to follow him, through 
 good and through evil, to death itself. But I am a citizen 
 of the democratic republic of the United States ; and in 
 allegiance to it I have sworn to defend the Constitution of 
 my country, if need be, with my life. Christ requires of 
 me to do unto others as I would they should do unto me. 
 The Constitution of the United States requires of me to do 
 unto two millions of slaves [at that time there were slaves ; 
 now one might venture to substitute the word ‘laborers ’] 
 the very opposite of what I would they should do unto me 
 — that is, to help to keep them in their present condition 
 of slavery. And, in spite of this, I continue to elect or be 
 elected, I propose to vote, I am even ready to be appointed 
 to any office under government. That will not hinder me 
 from being a Christian. I shall still profess Christianity, 
 
lO 
 
 THE KINGDOM OF GOD 
 
 and shall find no difficulty in carrying out my covenant 
 with Christ and with the government. 
 
 “ Jesus Christ forbids me to resist evil doers, and to take 
 from them an eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth, blood- 
 shed for bloodshed, and life for life. 
 
 “ My government demands from me quite the opposite, 
 and bases a system of self-defense on gallows, musket, and 
 sword, to be used against its foreign and domestic foes. 
 And the land is filled accordingly with gibbets, prisons, 
 arsenals, ships of war, and soldiers. 
 
 “ In the maintenance and use of these expensive appli- 
 ances for murder, we can very suitably exercise to the full 
 the virtues of forgiveness to those who injure us, love 
 toward our enemies, blessings to those who curse us, and 
 doing good to those who hate us. 
 
 “ For this we have a succession of Christian priests to 
 pray for us and beseech the blessing of Heaven on the 
 holy work of slaughter. 
 
 “ I see all this (/. e., the contradiction between profession 
 and practice), and I continue to profess religion and take 
 part in government, and pride myself on being at the same 
 time a devout Christian and a devoted servant of the gov- 
 ernment. I do not want to agree with these senseless 
 notions of non-resistance. I cannot renounce my authority 
 and leave only immoral men in control of the government. 
 The Constitution says the government has the right to 
 declare war, and I assent to this and support it, and swear 
 that I will support it. And I do not for that cease to be a 
 Christian. War, too, is a Christian duty. Is it not a Chris- 
 tian duty to kill hundreds of thousands of one’s fellow-men, 
 to outrage women, to raze and burn towns, and to practice 
 every possible cruelty ? It is time to dismiss all these false 
 sentimentalities. It is the truest means of forgiving injuries 
 and loving enemies. If we only do it in the spirit of love, 
 nothing can be more Christian than such murder.” 
 
IS WITHIN YOU." 
 
 II 
 
 In another pamphlet, entitled “ How many Men are Nec- 
 essary to Change a Crime into a Virtue ? ” he says ; “ One 
 man may not kill. If he kills a fellow-creature, he is a 
 murderer. If two, ten, a hundred men do so, they, too, are 
 murderers. But a government or a nation may kill as many 
 men as it chooses, and that will not be murder, but a great 
 and noble action. Only gather the people together on a 
 large scale, and a battle of ten thousand men becomes an 
 innocent action. But precisely how many people must 
 there be to make it so ? — that is the question. One man 
 cannot plunder and pillage, but a whole nation can. But 
 precisely how many are needed to make it permissible ? 
 Why is it that one man, ten, a hundred, may not break the 
 law of God, but a great number may ? ” 
 
 And here is a version of Ballou’s catechism composed 
 for his flock : 
 
 CATECHISM OF NON-RESISTANCE. 
 
 Q. Whence is the word “ non-resistance ” derived ? 
 
 A. From the command, “ Resist not evil.” (M. v. 39.) 
 
 Q. What does this word express ? 
 
 A. It expresses a lofty Christian virtue enjoined on us by 
 Christ. 
 
 Q. Ought the word “ non-resistance ” to be taken in its 
 widest sense — that is to say, as intending that we should 
 not offer any resistance of any kind to evil ? 
 
 A. No ; it ought to be taken in the exact sense of our 
 Saviour’s teaching — that is, not repaying evil for evil. We 
 ought to oppose evil by every righteous means in our 
 power, but not by evil. 
 
 Q. What is there to show that Christ enjoined non- 
 resistance in that sense ? 
 
 A. It is shown by the words he uttered at the same 
 time. He said : “Ye have heard, it was said of old, An 
 
12 
 
 “ THE KINGDOM OF GOD 
 
 eye for an eye, and a tooth for a tooth. But I say unto you 
 Resist not evil. But if one smites thee on the right cheek, 
 turn him the other also ; and if one will go to law with thee 
 to take thy coat from thee, give him thy cloak also.” 
 
 Q. Of whom was he speaking in the words, “ Ye have 
 heard it was said of old ” ? 
 
 A. Of the patriarchs and the prophets, contained in the 
 Old Testament, which the Hebrews ordinarily call the Law 
 and the Prophets. 
 
 Q. What utterances did Christ refer to in the words, “ It 
 was said of old ” ? 
 
 A. The utterances of Noah, Moses, and the other proph- 
 ets, in which they admit the right of doing bodily harm to 
 those who inflict harm, so as to punish and prevent evil 
 deeds. 
 
 Q. Quote such utterances. 
 
 A. “ Whoso sheddeth man’s blood, by man shall his blood 
 be shed.” — Gen. ix. 6. 
 
 “ He that smiteth a man, so that he die, shall be surely 
 puttodeath. . . And if any mischief follow, then thou shalt 
 give life for life, eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, 
 foot for foot, burning for burning, wound for wound, stripe 
 for stripe.” — Ex. xxi. 12 and 23-25. 
 
 “ He that killeth any man shall surely be put to death- 
 And if a man cause a blemish in his neighbor, as he hath 
 done, so shall it be done unto him : breach for breach, eye 
 for eye, tooth for tooth.” — Lev. xxiv. 17, 19, 20. 
 
 “Then the judges shall make diligent inquisition; and 
 behold, if the witness be a false witness, and hath testified 
 falsely against his brother, then shall ye do unto him as he 
 had thought to have done unto his brother. , . And thine 
 eye shall not pity ; but life shall go for life, eye for eye, 
 tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot.” — Deut. xix. 
 18, 21. 
 
 Noah, Moses, and the Prophets taught that he who kills. 
 
IS WITHIN YOU. 
 
 13 
 
 maims, or injures his neighbors does evil. To resist such 
 evil, and to prevent it, the evil doer must be punished with 
 death, or maiming, or some physical injury. Wrong must 
 be opposed by wrong, murder by murder, injury by injury, 
 evil by evil. Thus taught Noah, Moses, and the Prophets. 
 But Christ rejects all this. “ I say unto you,” is written in 
 the Gospel, “ resist not evil,” do not oppose injury with 
 injury, but rather bear repeated injury from the evil doer. 
 What was permitted is forbidden. When we understand 
 what kind of resistance they taught, we know exactly what 
 resistance Christ forbade. 
 
 Q. Then the ancients allowed the resistance of injury by 
 injury ? 
 
 A. Yes. But Jesus forbids it. The Christian has in no 
 case the right to put to death his neighbor who has done 
 him evil, or to do him injury in return. 
 
 Q. May he kill or maim him in self-defense ? 
 
 A. No. 
 
 Q. May he go with a complaint to the judge that he who 
 has wronged him may be punished ? 
 
 A. No. What he does through others, he is in reality 
 doing himself. 
 
 Q. Can he fight in conflict with foreign enemies or dis- 
 turbers of the peace ? 
 
 A. Certainly not. He cannot take any part in war or in 
 preparations for war. He cannot make use of a deadly 
 weapon. He cannot oppose injury to injury, whether he is 
 alone or with others, either in person or through other people. 
 
 Q. Can he voluntarily vote or furnish soldiers for the 
 government ? 
 
 A. He can do nothing of that kind if he wishes to be 
 faithful to Christ’s law. 
 
 Q. Can he voluntarily give money to aid a government 
 resting on military force, capital punishment, and violence 
 in general ? 
 
14 
 
 “ THE KINGDOM OF GOD 
 
 A. No, unless the money is destined for some special 
 object, right in itself, and good both in aim and means. 
 
 Q. Can he pay taxes to such a gove,rnment ? 
 
 A. No ; he ought not voluntarily to pay taxes, but he 
 ought not to resist the collecting of taxes. A tax is levied 
 by the government, and is exacted independently of the 
 will of the subject. It is impossible to resist it without 
 having recourse to violence of some kind. Since the 
 Christian cannot employ violence, he is obliged to offer his 
 property at once to the loss by violence inflicted on it by 
 the authorities. 
 
 Q. Can a Christian give a vote at elections, or take part 
 in government or law business? 
 
 A. No ; participation in election, government, or law 
 business is participation in government by force. 
 
 Q. Wherein lies the chief significance of the doctrine of 
 non-resistance ? 
 
 A. In the fact that it alone allows of the possibility of 
 eradicating evil from one’s own heart, and also from one’s 
 neighbor’s. This doctrine forbids doing that whereby evil 
 has endured for ages and multiplied in the world. He 
 who attacks another and injures him, kindles in the other 
 a feeling of hatred, the root of every evil. To injure 
 another because he has injured us, even with the aim of 
 overcoming evil, is doubling the harm for him and for one- 
 self ; it is begetting, or at least setting free and inciting, 
 that evil spirit which we should wish to drive out. Satan 
 can never be driven out by Satan. Error can never be 
 corrected by error, and evil cannot be vanquished by evil. 
 
 True non-resistance is the only real resistance to evil. 
 It is crushing the serpent’s head. It destroys and in the 
 end extirpates the evil feeling. 
 
 Q. But if that is the true meaning of the rule of non- 
 resistance, can it always be put into practice ? 
 
 A. It can be put into practice like every virtue enjoined 
 
IS WITHIN YOU." 
 
 15 
 
 by the law of God. A virtue cannot be practiced in all 
 circumstances without self-sacrifice, privation, suffering, 
 and in extreme cases loss of life itself. But he who esteems 
 life more than fulfilling the will of God is already dead to 
 
 the only true life. Trying to save his life he loses it. 
 
 Besides, generally speaking, where non-resistance costs the 
 sacrifice of a single life or of some material welfare, resist- 
 ance costs a thousand such sacrifices. 
 
 Non-resistance is Salvation ; Resistance is Ruin. 
 
 It is incomparably less dangerous to act justly than 
 unjustly, to submit to injuries than to resist them with 
 
 violence, less dangerous even in one’s relations to the 
 
 present life. If all men refused to resist evil by evil our 
 world would be happy. 
 
 Q. But so long as only a few act thus, what will happen 
 to them ? 
 
 A. If only one man acted thus, and all the rest agreed 
 to crucify him, would it not be nobler for him to die in the 
 glory of non-resisting love, praying for his enemies, than 
 to live to wear the crown of Caesar stained with the blood 
 of the slain ? However, one man, or a thousand men, 
 firmly resolved not to oppose evil by evil are far more free 
 from danger by violence than those who resort to violence, 
 whether among civilized or savage neighbors. The robber, 
 the murderer, and the cheat will leave them in peace, 
 sooner than those who oppose them with arms, and those 
 who take up the sword shall perish by the sword, but those 
 who seek after peace, and behave kindly and harmlessly, 
 forgiving and forgetting injuries, for the most part enjoy 
 peace, or, if they die, they die blessed. In this way, if all 
 kept the ordinance of non-resistance, there would obviously 
 be no evil nor crime. If the majority acted thus they 
 would establish the rule of love and good will even over 
 evil doers, never opposing evil with evil, and never resort- 
 ing to force. If there were a moderately large minority of 
 
1 6 “ THE KINGDOM OF GOD 
 
 such men, they would exercise such a salutary moral 
 influence on society that every cruel punishment would be 
 abolished, and violence and feud would be replaced by 
 peace and love. Even if there were only a small minority 
 of them, they would rarely experience anything worse than 
 the world’s contempt, and meantime the world, though 
 unconscious of it, and not grateful for it, would be con- 
 tinually becoming wiser and better for their unseen action 
 on it. And if in the worst case some members of the 
 minority were persecuted to death, in dying for the truth 
 the}’’ would have left behind them their doctrine, sanctified 
 by the blood of their martyrdom. Peace, then, to all who 
 seek peace, and may overruling love be the imperishable 
 heritage of every soul who obeys willingly Christ’s word, 
 “ Resist not evil.” 
 
 Adin Ballou. 
 
 For fifty years Ballou wrote and published books dealing 
 principally with the question of non-resistance to evil by 
 force. In these works, which are distinguished by the 
 clearness of their thought and eloquence of exposition, the 
 question is looked at from every possible side, and the 
 binding nature of this command on every Christian who 
 acknowledges the Bible as the revelation of God is firmly 
 established. All the ordinary objections to the doctrine of 
 non-resistance from the Old and New Testaments are 
 brought forward, such as the expulsion of the money- 
 changers from the Temple, and so on, and arguments 
 follow in disproof of them all. The practical reasonable- 
 ness of this rule of conduct is shown independently of 
 Scripture, and all the objections ordinarily made against 
 its practicability are stated and refuted. Thus one chapter 
 in a book of his treats of non-resistance in exceptional 
 cases, and he owns in this connection that if there were 
 cases in which the rule of non-resistance were impossible 
 
/S WITHIN YOU." 
 
 17 
 
 of application, it would prove that the law was not uni- 
 versally authoritative. Quoting these cases, he shows that 
 it is precisely in them that the application of the rule is 
 both necessary and reasonable. There is no aspect of the 
 question, either on his side or on his opponents’, which he 
 has not followed up in his writings. I mention all this to 
 show the unmistakable interest which such works ought to 
 have for men who make a profession of Christianity, and 
 because one would have thought Ballou’s work would 
 have been well known, and the ideas expressed by him 
 would have been either accepted or refuted ; but such has 
 not been the case. 
 
 The work of Garrison, the father, in his foundation of 
 the Society of Non-resistants and his Declaration, even 
 more than my correspondence with the Quakers, convinced 
 me of the fact that the departure of the ruling form of 
 Christianity from the law of Christ on non-resistance by 
 force is an error that has long been observed and pointed 
 out, and that men have labored, and are still laboring, to 
 correct. Ballou’s work confirmed me still more in this 
 view. But the fate of Garrison, still more that of Ballou, 
 in being completely unrecognized in spite of fifty years of 
 obstinate and persistent work in the same direction, con- 
 firmed me in the idea that there exists a kind of tacit but 
 steadfast conspiracy of silence about all such efforts. 
 
 Ballou died in August, 1890, and there was an obituary 
 notice of him in an American journal of Christian views 
 i^Religio -philosophical Journal, August 23). In this lauda- 
 tory notice it is recorded that Ballou was the spiritual 
 director of a parish, that he delivered from eight to nine 
 thousand sermons, married one thousand couples, and wrote 
 about five hundred articles ; but there is not a single word 
 said of the object to which he devoted his life ; even the 
 word “ non-resistance ” is not mentioned. Precisely as it 
 was with all the preaching of the Quakers for two hundred 
 
i8 
 
 “ THE KINGDOM OF GOD 
 
 years, and, too, with the efforts of Garrison the father, the 
 foundation of his society and journal, and his Declaration, 
 so it is with the life-work of Ballou. It seems just as though 
 it did not exist and never had existed. 
 
 We have an astounding example of the obscurity of 
 works which aim at expounding the doctrine of non-resist- 
 ance to evil by force, and at confuting those who do not 
 recognize this commandment, in the book of the Tsech 
 Helchitsky, which has only lately been noticed and has not 
 hitherto been printed. 
 
 Soon after the appearance of my book in German, I 
 received a letter from Prague, from a professor of the uni- 
 versity there, informing me of the existence of a work, 
 never yet printed, by Helchitsky, a Tsech of the fifteenth 
 century, entitled “ The Net of Faith.” In this work, the 
 professor told me, Helchitsky expressed precisely the same 
 view as to true and false Christianity as I had expressed 
 in my book “ What I Believe.” The professor wrote to 
 me that Helchitsky’s work was to be published for the first 
 time in the Tsech language in the Journal of The Petersburg 
 Academy of Science. Since I could not obtain the book 
 itself, I tried to make myself acquainted with what was 
 known of Helchitsky, and I gained the following informa- 
 tion from a German book sent me by the Prague professor 
 and from Pypin’s history of Tsech literature. This was 
 Pypin’s account : 
 
 “‘The Net of Faith’ is Christ’s teaching, which ought 
 to draw man up out of the dark depths of the sea of world- 
 liness and his own iniquity. True faith consists in believ- 
 ing God’s Word ; but now a time has come when men mis- 
 take the true faith for heresy, and therefore it is for the 
 reason to point out what the true faith consists in, if any- 
 one does not know this. It is hidden in darkness from 
 men, and they do not recognize the true law of Christ. 
 
 “To make this law plain, Helchitsky points to the 
 
IS WITHIN YOU. 
 
 19 
 
 primitive organization of Christian society — the organiza- 
 tion which, he says, is now regarded in the Roman Church 
 as an abominable heresy. This primitive Church was his 
 special ideal of social organization, founded on equality, 
 liberty, and fraternity. Christianity, in Helchitsky’s view, 
 still preserves these elements, and it is only necessary for 
 society to return to its pure doctrine to render unnecessary 
 every other form of social order in which kings and popes 
 are essential ; the law of love would alone be sufficient in 
 every case. 
 
 “ Historically, Helchitsky attributes the degeneration of 
 Christianity to the times of Constantine the Great, whom 
 the Pope Sylvester admitted into the Christian Church 
 with all his heathen morals and life. Constantine, in his 
 turn, endowed the Pope with worldly riches and power. 
 From that time forward these two ruling powers were con- 
 stantly aiding one another to strive for nothing but out- 
 ward glory. Divines and ecclesiastical dignitaries began 
 to concern themselves only about subduing the whole 
 world to their authority, incited men against one another 
 to murder and plunder, and in creed and life reduced 
 Christianity to a nullity. Helchitsky denies completely 
 the right to make war and to inflict the punishment of 
 death ; every soldier, even the ‘ knight,’ is only a violent 
 evil doer — a murderer.” 
 
 The same account is given by the German book, with 
 the addition of a few biographical details and some extracts 
 from Helchitsky’s writings. 
 
 Having learnt the drift of Helchitsky’s teaching in this 
 way, I awaited all the more impatiently the appearance of 
 “The Net of Faith ” in the journal of the Academy. But 
 one year passed, then two and three, and still the book did 
 not appear. It was only in 1888 that I learned that the 
 printing of the book, which had been begun, was stopped. 
 I obtained the proofs of what had been printed and read 
 
20 
 
 THE KINGDOM OF GOD 
 
 them through. It is a marvelous book from every point 
 of view. 
 
 Its general tenor is given with perfect accuracy by 
 Pypin. Helchitsky’s fundamental idea is that Christianity, 
 by allying itself with temporal power in the days of Con- 
 stantine, and by continuing to develop in such conditions, 
 has become completely distorted, and has ceased to be 
 Christian altogether. Helchitsky gave the title “The Net 
 of Faith ” to his book, taking as his motto the verse of the 
 Gospel about the calling of the disciples to be fishers of 
 men; and, developing this metaphor, he says: “Christ, 
 by means of his disciples, would have caught all the world 
 in his net of faith, but the greater fishes broke the net and 
 escaped out of it, and all the rest have slipped through the 
 holes made by the greater fishes, so that the net has 
 remained quite empty. The greater fishes who broke 
 the net are the rulers, emperors, popes, kings, who have 
 not renounced power, and instead of true Christianity have 
 put on what is simply a mask of it.” Helchitsky teaches 
 precisely what has been and is taught in these days by the 
 non-resistant Mennonites and Quakers, and in former times 
 by the Bogomilites, Paulicians, and many others. He 
 teaches that Christianity, expecting from its adherents 
 gentleness, meekness, peaceableness, forgiveness of injuries, 
 turning the other cheek when one is struck, and love for 
 enemies, is inconsistent. with the use of force, which is an 
 indispensable condition of authority. 
 
 The Christian, according to Helchitsky’s reasoning, not 
 only cannot be a ruler or a soldier ; he cannot take any 
 part in government nor in trade, or even be a landowner ; 
 he can only be an artisan or a husbandman. 
 
 This book is one of the few works attacking official 
 Christianity which has escaped being burned. All such 
 so-called heretical works were burned at the stake, to- 
 gether with their authors, so that there are few ancient 
 
IS WITHIN YOU. 
 
 21 
 
 works exposing the errors of official Christianity. The 
 book has a special interest for this reason alone. But 
 apart from its interest from every point of view, it is one 
 of the most remarkable products of thought for its depth 
 of aim, for the astounding strength and beauty of the 
 national language in which it is written, and for its an- 
 tiquity. And yet for more than four centuries it has 
 remained unprinted, and is still unknown, except to a few 
 learned .specialists. 
 
 One would have thought that all such works, whether of 
 the Quakers, of Garrison, of Ballou, or of Helchitsky, 
 asserting and proving as they do, on the principles of the 
 Gospel, that our modern world takes a false view of 
 Christ’s teaching, would have awakened interest, excite- 
 ment, talk, and discussion among spiritual teachers and 
 their flocks alike. 
 
 Works of this kind, dealing with the very essence of 
 Christian doctrine, ought, one would have thought, to have 
 been examined and accepted as true, or refuted and re- 
 jected. But nothing of the kind has occurred, and the 
 same fate has been repeated with all those works. Men 
 of the most diverse views, believers, and, what is surprising, 
 unbelieving liberals also, as though by agreement, all pre- 
 serve the same persistent silence about them, and all that 
 has been done by people to explain the true meaning of 
 Christ’s doctrine remains either ignored or forgotten. 
 
 But it is still more astonishing that two other books, of 
 which I heard on the appearance of my book, should be so 
 little known. I mean Dymond’s book “ On War,” published 
 for the first time in London in 1824, and Daniel Musser’s 
 book on “ Non-resistance,” written in 1864. It is particularly 
 astonishing that these books should be unknown, because, 
 apart from their intrinsic merits, both books treat not so 
 much of the theory as of the practical application of the 
 theory to life, of the attitude of Christianity to military 
 
22 
 
 THE KINGDOM OF GOD 
 
 ft 
 
 service, which is especially important and interesting now 
 in these days of universal conscription. 
 
 People will ask, perhaps : How ought a subject to behave 
 who believes that war is inconsistent with his religion while 
 the government demands from him that he should enter 
 military service ? 
 
 This question is, I think, a most vital one, and the 
 answer to it is specially important in these days of uni- 
 versal conscription. All — or at least the great majority of 
 the people — are Christians, and all men are called upon for 
 military service. How ought a man, as a Christian, to meet 
 this demand ? This is the gist of Dymond's answer : 
 
 “ His duty is humbly but steadfastly to refuse to serve.” 
 
 There are some people, who, without any definite reason- 
 ing about it, conclude straightway that the responsibility of 
 government measures rests entirely on those who resolve on 
 them, or that the governments and sovereigns decide the 
 question of what is good or bad for their subjects, and the 
 duty of the subjects is merely to obe3^ I think that argu- 
 ments of this kind only obscure men’s conscience. I can- 
 not take part in the councils of government, and therefore 
 I am not responsible for its misdeeds. Indeed, but we are 
 responsible for our own misdeeds. And the misdeeds of 
 our rulers become our own, if we, knowing that they are 
 misdeeds, assist in carrying them out. Those who suppose 
 that they are bound to obey the government, and that the 
 responsibility for the misdeeds they commit is transferred 
 from them to their rulers, deceive themselves. They say : 
 “We give our acts up to the will of others, and our acts 
 cannot be good or bad ; there is no merit in what is good 
 nor responsibility for what is evil in our actions, since they 
 are not done of our own will.” 
 
 It is remarkable that the very same thing is said in the 
 instructions to soldiers which they make them learn — that 
 is, that the officer is alone responsible for the consequences 
 
/S WITHIN YOU. 
 
 23 
 
 of his command. But this is not right. A man cannot 
 get rid of the responsibility for his own actions. And that 
 is clear from the following example. If your officer com- 
 mands you to kill your neighbor’s child, to kill your father 
 or your mother, would you obey ? If you would not obey, 
 the whole argument falls to the ground, for if you can 
 disobey the governors in one case, where do you draw 
 the line up to which you can obey them ? There is no 
 line other than that laid down by Christianity, and that 
 line is both reasonable and practicable. 
 
 And therefore we consider it the duty of every man who 
 thinks war inconsistent with Christianity, meekly but 
 firmly to refuse to serve in the army. And let those whose 
 lot it is to act thus, remember that the fulfillment of a great 
 duty rests with them. The destiny of humanity in the 
 world depends, so far as it depends on men at all, on their 
 fidelity to their religion. Let them confess their conviction, 
 and stand up for it, and not in words alone, but in suffer- 
 ings too, if need be. If you believe that Christ forbade 
 murder, pay no heed to the arguments nor to the com- 
 mands of those who call on you to bear a hand in it. By 
 such a steadfast refusal to make use of force, you call 
 down on yourselves the blessing promised to those “ who 
 hear these sayings and do them,” and the time will come 
 when the world will recognize you as having aided in the 
 reformation of mankind. 
 
 Musser’s book is called “ Non-resistance Asserted,” or 
 ” Kingdom of Christ and Kingdoms of this World Sepa- 
 rated.” This book is devoted to the same question, and 
 was written when the American Government was exacting 
 military service from its citizens at the time of the Civil 
 War. And it has, too, a value for all time, dealing with 
 the question how, in such circumstances, people should and 
 can refuse to enter military service. Here is the tenor of 
 the author’s introductory remarks ; “ It is well known that 
 
24 
 
 THE KINGDOM OF GOD 
 
 there are many persons in the United States who refuse to 
 fight on grounds of conscience. They are called the 
 ‘ defenseless,’ or ‘ non-resistant ’ Christians. These Chris- 
 tians refuse to defend their country, to bear arms, or at the 
 call of government to make war on its enemies. Till lately 
 this religions scruple seemed a valid excuse to the govern- 
 ment, and those who urged it were let off service. But at 
 the beginning of our Civil War public opinion was agitated 
 on this subject. It was natural that persons who con- 
 sidered it their duty to bear all the hardships and dangers 
 of war in defense of their country should feel resentment 
 against those persons who had for long shared with them 
 the advantages of the protection of the government, and 
 who now in time of need and danger would not share in 
 bearing the labors and dangers of its defense. It was even 
 natural that they should declare the attitude of such men 
 monstrous, irrational, and suspicious.” 
 
 A host of orators and writers, our author tells us, arose 
 to oppose this attitude, and tried to prove the sinfulness of 
 non-resistance, both from Scripture and on common-sense 
 grounds. And this was perfectly natural, and in many 
 cases the authors were right — right, that is, in regard to 
 persons who did not renounce the benefits they received 
 from the government and tried to avoid the hardships of 
 military service, but not right in regard to the principle of 
 non-resistance itself. Above all, our author proves the 
 binding nature of the rule of non-resistance for a Christian, 
 pointing out that this command is perfectly clear, and is 
 enjoined upon every Christian by Christ without possibility 
 of misinterpretation. “ Bethink yourselves whether it is 
 righteous to obey man more than God,” said Peter and 
 John. And this is precisely what ought to be the attitude 
 of every man who wishes to be Christian to the claim on 
 him for military service, when Christ has said, “ Resist not 
 evil by force.” As for the question of the principle itself, 
 
IS WITHIN you: 
 
 25 
 
 the author regards that as decided. As to the second 
 question, whether people have the right to refuse to serve 
 in the army who have not refused the benefits conferred by 
 a government resting on force, the author considers it in 
 detail, and arrives at the conclusion that a Christian follow- 
 ing the law of Christ, since he does not go to war, ought 
 not either to take advantage of any of the institutions of 
 government, courts of law, or elections, and that in his 
 private concerns he must not have recourse to the authori- 
 ties, the police, or the law. Further on in the book he 
 treats of the relation of the Old Testament to the New, the 
 value of government for those who are Christians, and 
 makes some observations on the doctrine of non-resistance 
 and the attacks made on it. The author concludes his 
 book by saying : “ Christians do not need government, and 
 therefore they cannot either obey it in what is contrary to 
 Christ’s teaching nor, still less, take part in it.” Christ took 
 his disciples out of the world, he says. They do not expect 
 worldly blessings and worldly happiness, but they expect 
 eternal life. The Spirit in whom they live makes them 
 contented and happy in every position. If the world 
 tolerates them, they are always happy. If the world will 
 not leave them in peace, they will go elsewhere, since they 
 are pilgrims on the earth and they have no fixed place of 
 habitation. They believe that “the dead may bury their 
 dead.” One thing only is needful for them, “ to follow 
 their Master.” 
 
 Even putting aside the question as to the principle laid 
 down in these two books as to the Christian’s duty in his 
 attitude to war, one cannot help perceiving the practical 
 importance and the urgent need of deciding the ques- 
 tion. 
 
 There are people, hundreds of thousands of Quakers, 
 Mennonites,all our Douhobortsi, Molokani, and others who 
 do not belong to any definite sect, who consider that the 
 
26 
 
 “ THE KINGDOM OF GOD 
 
 use of force — and, consequently, military service — is incon- 
 sistent with Christianity. Consequently there are every 
 year among us in Russia some men called upon for military 
 service who refuse to serve on the ground of their religious 
 convictions. Does the government let them off then? No. 
 Does it compel them to go, and in case of disobedience 
 punish them ? No. This was how the government 
 treated them in i8i8. Here is an extract from the diary 
 of Nicholas Myravyov of Kars, which was not passed by 
 the censor, and is not known in Russia : 
 
 “Tiflis, October 2, 1818. 
 
 “ In the morning the commandant told me that five 
 peasants belonging to a landowner in the Tamboff govern- 
 ment had lately been sent to Georgia. These men had 
 been sent for soldiers, but they would not serve ; they had 
 been several times flogged and made to run the gauntlet, 
 but they would submit readily to the cruelest tortures, and 
 even to death, rather than serve. ‘ Let us go,’ they said, 
 ‘and leave us alone ; we will not hurt anyone ; all men are 
 equal, and the Tzar is a man like us ; why should we 
 pay him tribute ; why should I expose my life to danger 
 to kill in battle some man who has done me no harm ? 
 You can cut us to pieces and we will not be soldiers. 
 He who has compassion on us will give us charity, but as 
 for the government rations, we have not had them and we 
 do not want to have them.’ These were the words of those 
 peasants, who declare that there are numbers like them in 
 Russia. They brought them four times before the Com- 
 mittee of Ministers, and at last decided to lay the matter 
 before the Tzar, who gave orders that they should be taken 
 to Georgia for correction, and commanded the commander- 
 in-chief to send him a report every month of their 
 gradual success in bringing these peasants to a better 
 mind.” 
 
IS WITHIN YOU: 
 
 27 
 
 How the correction ended is not known, as the whole 
 episode indeed was unknown,^ having been kept in profound 
 secrecy. 
 
 This was how the government behaved seventy-five 
 years ago — this is how it has behaved in a great number of 
 cases, studiously concealed from the people. And this is 
 how the government behaves now, except in the case of the 
 German Mennonites, living in the province of Kherson, 
 whose plea against military service is considered well 
 grounded. They are made to work oflf their term of serv- 
 ice in labor in the forests. 
 
 But in the recent cases of refusal on the part of Men- 
 nonites to serve in the army on religious grounds, the 
 government authorities have acted in the following 
 manner : 
 
 To begin with, they have recourse to every means of 
 coercion used in our times to “ correct ” the culprit and 
 bring him to “»a better mind,” and these measures are car- 
 ried out with the greatest secrecy. I know that in the case 
 of one man who declined to serve in 1884 in Moscow, the 
 official correspondence on the subject had two months after 
 his refusal accumulated into a big folio, and was kept ab- 
 solutely secret among the Ministry. 
 
 They usually begin by sending the culprit to the priests, 
 and the latter, to their shame be it said, always exhort him 
 to obedience. But since the exhortation in Christ’s name 
 to forswear Christ is for the most part unsuccessful, after 
 he has received the admonitions of the spiritual authorities, 
 they send him to the gendarmes, and the latter, finding, as 
 a rule, no political cause for offense in him, dispatch him 
 back again, and then he is sent to the learned men, to the 
 doctors, and to the madhouse. During all these vicissitudes 
 he is deprived of liberty and has to endure every kind of 
 humiliation and suffering as a convicted criminal. (All this 
 has been repeated in faur cases.) The doctors let him out 
 
28 
 
 “ THE KINGDOM OF GOD 
 
 of the madhouse, and then every kind of secret shift is em- 
 ployed to prevent him from going free — whereby others 
 would be encouraged to refuse to serve as he has done — 
 and at the same time to avoid leaving him among the 
 soldiers, for fear they too should learn from him that mili- 
 tary service is not at all their duty by the law of God, as 
 they are assured, but quite contrary to it. 
 
 The most convenient thing for the government would be 
 to kill the non-resistant by flogging him to death or some 
 other means, as was done in former days. But to put a 
 man openly to death because he believes in the creed we 
 all confess is impossible. To let a man alone who has 
 refused obedience is also impossible. And so the govern- 
 ment tries either to compel the man by ill-treatment to 
 renounce Christ, or in some way or other to get rid of him 
 unobserved, without openly putting him to death, and to 
 hide somehow both the action and the man himself from 
 other people. And so all kinds of shifts and wiles and cruel- 
 ties are set on foot against him. They either send him to 
 the frontier or provoke him to insubordination, and then 
 try him for breach of discipline and shut him up in the 
 prison of the disciplinary battalion, where they can ill treat 
 him freely unseen by anyone, or they declare him mad, and 
 lock him up in a lunatic asylum. They sent one man in 
 this way to Tashkend — that is, they pretended to transfer 
 him to the Tashkend army ; another to Omsk ; a third 
 they convicted of insubordination and shut up in prison ; 
 a fourth they sent to a lunatic asylum. 
 
 Everywhere the same story is repeated. Not only the 
 government, but the great majority of liberal, advanced 
 people, as they are called, studiously turn away from every- 
 thing that has been said, written, or done, or is being done 
 by men to prove the incompatibility of force in its most 
 awful, gross, and glaring form — in the form, that is, of an 
 army of soldiers prepared to murder anyone, whoever it 
 
IS WITHIN you. 
 
 29 
 
 may be — with the teachings of Christianity, or even of the 
 humanity which society professes as its creed. 
 
 So that the information I have gained of the attitude of 
 the higher ruling classes, not only in Russia but in Europe 
 and America, toward the elucidation of this question has 
 convinced me that there exists in these ruling classes a con- 
 sciously hostile attitude to true Christianity, which is shown 
 pre-eminently in their reticence in regard to all manifesta- 
 tions of it. 
 
 CHAPTER II. 
 
 CRITICISMS OF THE DOCTRINE OF NON-RESISTANCE TO 
 EVIL BY FORCE ON THE PART OF BELIEVERS AND OF 
 UNBELIEVERS. 
 
 Fate of the Book “ What I Believe ” — Evasive Character of Religious 
 Criticisms of Principles of my Book — ist Reply : Use of P’orce not 
 Opposed to Christianity — 2d Reply: Use of Force Necessary to 
 Restrain Evil Doers — 3d Reply : Duty of Using Force in Defense of 
 One’s Neighbor — 4th Reply : The Breach of the Command of Non- 
 resistance to be Regarded Simply as a Weakness — 5th Reply : Reply 
 Evaded by Making Believe that the Question has long been Decided 
 — To Devise such Subterfuges and to take Refuge Behind the Author- 
 ity of the Church, of Antiquity, and of Religion is all that Ecclesias- 
 tical Critics can do to get out of the Contradiction between Use of 
 Force and Christianity in Theory and in Practice — General Attitude 
 of the Ecclesiastical World and of the Authorities to Profession of 
 True Christianity — General Character of Russian Freethinking Critics 
 — Foreign Freethinking Critics — Mistaken Arguments of these Critics 
 the Result of Misunderstanding the True Meaning of Christ’s Teaching. 
 
 The impression I gained of a desire to conceal, to hush 
 up, what I had tried to express in my book, led me to judge 
 the book itself afresh. 
 
 On its appearance it had, as I had anticipated, been for- 
 bidden, and ought therefore by law to have been burnt. 
 But, at the same time, it was discussed among officials, and 
 
3 ° 
 
 “ THE KINGDOM OF GOD 
 
 circulated in a great number of manuscript and lithograph 
 copies, and in translations printed abroad. 
 
 And very quickly after the book, criticisms, both religious 
 and secular in character, made their appearance, and these 
 the government tolerated, and even encouraged. So that 
 the refutation of a book which no one was supposed to know 
 anything about was even chosen as the subject for theolog- 
 ical dissertations in the academies. 
 
 The criticisms of my book, Russian and foreign alike, fall 
 under two general divisions — the religious criticisms of men 
 who regard themselves as believers, and secular criticisms, 
 that is, those of freethinkers. 
 
 I will begin with the first class. In my book I made it an 
 accusation against the teachers of the Church that their 
 teaching is opposed to Christ’s commands clearly and defi- 
 nitely expressed in the Sermon on the Mount, and opposed 
 in especial to his command in regard to resistance to evil, 
 and that in this way they deprive Christ’s teaching of all 
 value. The Church authorities accept the teaching of the 
 Sermon on the Mount on non-resistance to evil by force as 
 divine revelation; and therefore one would have thought 
 that if they felt called upon to write about my book at all, 
 they would have found it inevitable before everything else 
 to reply to the principal point of my charge against them, 
 and to say plainly, do they or do they not admit the teach- 
 ing of the Sermon on the Mount and the commandment of 
 non-resistance to evil as binding on a Christian. And they 
 were bound to answer this question, not after the usual 
 fashion (/. e., “that although on the one side one cannot 
 absolutely deny, yet on the other side one cannot again fully 
 assent, all the more seeing that,’’ etc., etc.). No; they 
 should have answered the question as plainly as it was put 
 in my book — Did Christ really demand from his disciples 
 that they should carry out what he taught them in the Ser- 
 mon on the Mount? And can a Christian, then, or can he 
 
IS WITHIN YOU. 
 
 31 
 
 not, always remaining a Christian, go to law or make any 
 use of the law, or seek his own protection in the law? And 
 can the Christian, or can he not, remaining a Christian, take 
 part in the administration of government, using compulsion 
 against his neighbors? And — the most important question 
 hanging over the heads of all of us in these days of universal 
 military service — can the Christian, or can he not, remain- 
 ing a Christian, against Christ’s direct prohibition, promise 
 obedience in future actions directly opposed to his teaching? 
 And can he, by taking his share of service in the army, pre- 
 pare himself to murder men, and even actually murder them? 
 
 These questions were put plainly and directly, and seemed 
 to require a plain and direct answer ; but in all the criti- 
 cisms of my book there was no such plain and direct answer. 
 No; my book received precisely the same treatment as all 
 the attacks upon the teachers of the Church for their defec- 
 tion from the Law of Christ of which history from the days 
 of Constantine is full. 
 
 A very great deal was said in connection with my book 
 of my having incorrectly interpreted this and other passages 
 of the Gospel, of my being in error in not recognizing the 
 Trinity, the redemption, and the immortality of the soul. A 
 very great deal was said, but not a word about the one thing 
 which for every Christian is the most essential question in 
 life — how to reconcile the duty of forgiveness, meekness, 
 patience, and love for all, neighbors and enemies alike, 
 which is so clearly expressed in the words of our teacher, 
 and in the heart of each of us — how to reconcile this duty 
 with the obligation of using force in war upon men of our 
 own or a foreign people. 
 
 All that are worth calling answers to this question can be 
 brought under the following five heads. I have tried to 
 bring together in this connection all I could, not only from 
 the criticisms on my book, but from what has been written 
 in past times on this theme. 
 
32 
 
 “ THE KINGDOM OF GOD 
 
 The first and crudest form of reply consists in the bold 
 assertion that the use of force is not opposed by the teach- 
 ing of Christ; that it is permitted, and even enjoined, on 
 the Christian by the Old and New Testaments. 
 
 Assertions of this kind proceed, for the most part, from 
 men who have attained the highest ranks in the governing 
 or ecclesiastical hierarchy, and who are consequently per- 
 fectly assured that no one will dare to contradict their asser- 
 tion, and that if anyone does contradict it they will hear 
 nothing of the contradiction. These men have, for the 
 most part, through the intoxication of power, so lost the 
 right idea of what that Christianity is in the name of which 
 they hold their position that what is Christian in Chris- 
 tianity presents itself to them as heresy, while everything in 
 the Old and New Testaments which can be distorted into an 
 antichristian and heathen meaning they regard as the foun- 
 dation of Christianity. In support of their assertion that 
 Christianity is not opposed to the use of force, these men 
 usually, with the greatest audacity, bring together all the 
 most obscure passages from the Old and New Testaments, 
 interpreting them in the most unchristian way — the punish- 
 ment of Ananias and Sapphira, of Simon the Sorcerer, etc. 
 They quote all those sayings of Christ’s which can possibly 
 be interpreted as justification of cruelty: the expulsion from 
 the Temple; “It shall be more tolerable for the land of 
 Sodom than for this city,’’ etc., etc. According to these 
 people’s notions, a Christian government is not in the least 
 bound to be guided by the spirit of peace, forgiveness of 
 injuries, and love for enemies. 
 
 To refute such an assertion is useless, because the very 
 people who make this assertion refute themselves, or, rather, 
 renounce Christ, inventing a Christianity and a Christ of 
 their own in the place of him in whose name the Church 
 itself exists, as well as their office in it. If all men were to 
 learn that the Church professes to believe in a Christ of 
 
IS WITHIN YOU. 
 
 33 
 
 punishment and warfare, not of forgiveness, no one would 
 believe in the Church and it could not prove to anyone what 
 it is trying to prove. 
 
 The second, somewhat less gross, form of argument con- 
 sists in declaring that, though Christ did indeed preach that 
 we should turn the left cheek, and give the .cloak also, and 
 this is the highest moral duty, yet that there are wicked 
 men in the world, and if these wicked men were not 
 restrained by force, the whole world and all good men would 
 come to ruin through them. This argument I found for the 
 first time in John Chrysostom, and I show how he is mis- 
 taken in my book “What I Believe.’’ 
 
 This argument is ill grounded, because if we allow our- 
 selves to regard any men as intrinsically wicked men, then 
 in the first place we annul, by so doing, the whole idea of 
 the Christian teaching, according to which we are all equals 
 and brothers, as sons of one Father in heaven. Secondly, 
 it is ill founded, because even if to use force against wicked 
 men had been permitted by God, since it is impossible to 
 find a perfect and unfailing distinction by which one could 
 positively know the wicked from the good, so it would come 
 to all individual men and societies of men mutually regard- 
 ing each other as wicked men, as is the ca,se now. Thirdly, 
 even if it were possible to distinguish the wicked from the 
 good unfailingly, even then it would be impossible to kill or 
 injure or shut up in prison these wicked men, because there 
 would be no one in a Christian society to carry out such 
 punishment, since every Christian, as a Christian, has been 
 commanded to use no force against the wicked. 
 
 The third kind of answer, still more subtle than the pre- 
 ceding, consists in asserting that though the command of 
 non-resistance to evil by force is binding on the Christian 
 when the evil is directed against himself personally, it ceases 
 to be binding when the evil is directed against his neigh- 
 bors, and that then the Christian is not only not bound to 
 
34 
 
 “ THE KINGDOM OF GOD 
 
 fulfill the commandment, but is even bound to act in oppo- 
 sition to it in defense of his neighbors, and to use force 
 against transgressors by force. This assertion is an abso- 
 lute assumption, and one cannot find in all Christ’s teaching 
 any confirmation of such an argument. Such an argument 
 is not only a limitation, but a direct contradiction and nega- 
 tion of the commandment. If every man has the right to 
 have recourse to force in face of a danger threatening an- 
 other, the question of the use of force is reduced to a ques- 
 tion of the definition of danger for another. If my private 
 judgment is to decide the question of what is danger for 
 another, there is no occasion for the use of force which 
 could not be justified on the ground of danger threatening 
 some other man. They killed and burnt witches, they 
 killed aristocrats and girondists, they killed their enemies, 
 because those who were in authority regarded them as dan- 
 gerous for the people. 
 
 If this important limitation, which fundamentally under- 
 mines the whole value of the commandment, had entered 
 into Christ’s meaning, there must have been mention of it 
 somewhere. This restriction is made nowhere in our 
 Saviour’s life or preaching. On the contrary, warning is 
 given precisely against this treacherous and scandalous 
 restriction which nullifies the commandment. The error 
 and impossibility of such a limitation is shown in the Gospel 
 with special clearness in the account of the judgment of 
 Caiaphas, who makes precisely this distinction. He 
 acknowledged that it was wrong to punish the innocent 
 Jesus, but he saw in him a source of danger not for himself, 
 but for the whole people, and therefore he said: It is better 
 for one man to die, that the whole people perish not. And 
 the erroneousness of such a limitation is still more clearly 
 expressed in the words spoken to Peter w'hen he tried to 
 resist by force evil directed against Jesus (Matt. xxvi. 52). 
 Peter was not defending himself, but his beloved and 
 
IS WITHIN- YOU. 
 
 35 
 
 heavenly Master, And Christ at once reproved him for 
 this, saying, that he who takes up the sword shall perish by 
 the sword. 
 
 Besides, apologies for violence used against one’s neighbor 
 in defense of another neighbor from greater violence are 
 always untrustworthy, because when force is used against 
 one who has not yet carried out his evil intent, I can never 
 know which would be greater — the evil of my act of violence 
 or of the act I want to prevent. We kill the criminal that 
 society may be rid of him, and we never know whether the 
 criminal of to-day would not have been a changed man to- 
 morrow, and whether our punishment of him is not useless 
 cruelty. We shut up the dangerous — as we think — mem- 
 ber of society, but the next day this man might cease to be 
 dangerous and his imprisonment might be for nothing. I 
 see that a man I know to be a ruffian is pursuing a young 
 girl. I have a gun in my hand — I kill the ruffian and save 
 the girl. But the death or the wounding of the ruffian has 
 positively taken place, while what would have happened if 
 this had not been I cannot know. And what an immense 
 mass of evil must result, and indeed does result, from allow- 
 ing men to assume the right of anticipating what may happen. 
 Ninety-nine per cent, of the evil of the world is founded on 
 this reasoning— from the Inquisition to dynamite bombs, 
 and the executions or punishments of tens of thousands of 
 political criminals. 
 
 A fourth, still more refined, reply to the question. What 
 ought to be the Christian’s attitude to Christ's command of 
 non-resistance to evil by force? consists in declaring that 
 they do not deny the command of non-resistance to evil, 
 but recognize it ; but they only do not ascribe to this com- 
 mand the special exclusive value attached to it by sectarians. 
 To regard this command as the indispensable condition of 
 Christian life, as Garrison, Ballou, Dymond, the Quakers, 
 the Mennonites, and the Shakers do now, and as the Moravian 
 
36 
 
 “ THE KINGDOM OF GOD 
 
 brothers, the Waldenses, the Albigenses, the Bogomilites, 
 and the Paulicians did in the past, is a one-sided heresy. 
 This command has neither more nor less value than all the 
 other commands, and the man who through weakness trans- 
 gresses any command whatever, the command of non-resist- 
 ance included, does not cease to be a Christian if he hold the 
 true faith. This is a very skillful device, and many people 
 who wish to be deceived are easily deceived by it. The 
 device consists in reducing a direct conscious denial of a 
 command to a casual breach of it. But one need only com- 
 pare the attitude of the teachers of the Church to this and 
 to other commands which they really do recognize, to be 
 convinced that their attitude to this is completely different 
 from their attitude to other duties. 
 
 The command against fornication they do really recognize, 
 and consequently they do not admit that in any case forni- 
 cation can cease to be wrong. The Church preachers never 
 point out cases in which the command against fornication 
 can be broken, and always teach that we must avoid seduc- 
 tions which lead to temptation to fornication. But not so 
 with the command of non-resistance. All church preachers 
 recognize cases in which that command can be broken, and 
 teach the people accordingly. And they not only do not 
 teach that we should avoid temptations to break it, chief of 
 which is the military oath, but they themselves administer 
 it. The preachers of the Church never in any other case 
 advocate the breaking of any other commandment. But in 
 connection with the commandment of non-resistance they 
 openly teach that we must not understand it too literally, 
 but that there are conditions and circumstances in w'hich we 
 must do the direct opposite, that is, go to law, fight, punish. 
 So that occasions for fulfilling the commandment of non- 
 resistance to evil by force are taught for the most part as 
 occasions for not fulfilling it. The fulfillment of this com- 
 mand, they say, is very difficult and pertains only to per- 
 
IS WITHIN YOU." 
 
 37 
 
 fection. And how can it not be difficult, when the breach 
 of it is not only not forbidden, but law courts, prisons, can- 
 nons, guns, armies, and wars are under the immediate sanc- 
 tion of the Church? It cannot be true, then, that this 
 command is recognized by the preachers of the Church as 
 on a level with other commands. 
 
 The preachers of the Church clearly do not recognize it; 
 only not daring to acknowledge this, they try to conceal 
 their not recognizing it. 
 
 So much for the fourth reply. 
 
 The fifth kind of answer, which is the subtlest, the most 
 often used, and the most effective, consists in avoiding 
 answering, in making believe that this question is one which 
 has long ago been decided perfectly clearly and satisfac- 
 torily, and that it is not worth while to talk about it. This 
 method of reply is employed by all the more or less culti- 
 vated religious writers, that is to say, those who feel the 
 laws of Christ binding for themselves. Knowing that the 
 contradiction existing between the teaching of Christ which 
 we profess with our lips and the whole order of our lives 
 cannot be removed by words, and that touching upon it can 
 only make it more obvious, they, with more or less ingenuity, 
 evade it, pretending that the question of reconciling Chris- 
 tianity with the use of force has been decided already, or 
 does not exist at all.* 
 
 The majority of religious critics of my book use this fifth 
 method of replying to it. I could quote dozens of such 
 
 * I only know one work which differs somewhat from this general 
 definition, and that is not a criticism in the precise meaning of the word, 
 but an article treating of the same, subject and having my book in view. 
 I mean the pamphlet of Mr. Troizky (published at Kazan), “A Sermon for 
 the People.” The author obviously accepts Christ’s teaching in its true 
 meaning. Ke says that the prohibition of resistance to evil by force 
 means exactly what it does mean ; and the same with the prohibition of 
 swearing. Pie does not, as others do, deny the meaning of Christ’s 
 
38 
 
 THE KINGDOM OF GOD 
 
 critics, in all of whom, without exception, we find the same 
 thing repeated: everything is discussed except what consti- 
 tutes the principal subject of the book. As a characteristic 
 example of such criticisms, I will quote the article of a well- 
 known and ingenious English writer and preacher' — Farrar — 
 who, like many learned theologians, is a great master of the 
 art of circuitously evading a question. The article was pub- 
 lished in an American journal, the Foru 7 n^ in Ocober, 1888. 
 
 After conscientiously explaining in brief the contents of 
 my book, Farrar says: “Tolstoy came to the conclusion that 
 a coarse deceit had been palmed upon the world when these 
 words, ‘Resist not evil,’ were held by civil society to be 
 compatible with war, courts of justice, capital punishment, 
 divorce, oaths, national prejudice, and, indeed, with most 
 of the institutions of civil and social life. He now believes 
 that the kingdom of God would come if all men kept these 
 five commandments of Christ, viz.: i. Five in peace with 
 all men. 2. Be pure. 3. Take no oaths. 4. Resist not 
 evil. 5. Renounce national distinctions. 
 
 “Tolstoy,” he says, “rejects the inspiration of the Old 
 Testament; hence he rejects the chief doctrines of the 
 Church — that of the Atonement by blood, the Trinity, the 
 descent of the Holy Ghost on the Apostles, and his trans- 
 mission through the priesthood.” And he recognizes only 
 the words and commands of Christ. “But is this interpre- 
 tation of Christ a true one?” he says. “Are all men bound 
 to act as Tolstoy teaches— f. e., to carry out these five corn- 
 
 teaching, but unfortunately he does not draw from this admission the 
 inevitable deductions which present themselves spontaneously in our life 
 when we understand Christ’s teaching in that way. If we must not 
 oppose evil by force, nor swear, everyone naturally asks, “ How, then, 
 about military service ? and the oath of obedience ? ” To this question 
 the author gives no reply ; but it must be answered. And if he cannot 
 answer, then he would do better not to speak on the subject at all, as 
 such silence leads to error. 
 
IS WITHIiV YOU." 
 
 39 
 
 raandments of Christ?” You expect, then, that in answer 
 to this essential question, which is the only one that could 
 induce a man to write an article about the book, he will say 
 either that this interpretation of Christ’s teaching is true 
 and we ought to follow it, or he will say that such an inter- 
 pretation is untrue, will show why, and will give some other 
 correct interpretation of those words which I interpret incor- 
 rectly. But nothing of the kind is done. Farrar only 
 expresses his “belief” that, ‘‘though actuated by the noblest 
 sincerity. Count Tolstoy has been misled by partial and one- 
 sided interpretations of the meaning of the Gospel and the 
 mind and will of Christ.” What this error consists in is 
 not made clear; it is only said: ‘‘To enter into the proof of 
 this is impossible in this article, for I have already exceeded 
 the space at my command.” 
 
 And he concludes, in a tranquil spirit: 
 
 ‘‘Meanwhile, the reader who feels troubled lest it should 
 be his duty also to forsake all the conditions of his life and 
 to take up the position and work of a common laborer, may 
 rest for the present on the principle, securiis judicat orbis 
 terrarum. With few and rare exceptions,” he continues, 
 “the whole of Christendom, from the days of the Apostles 
 down to our own, has come to the firm conclusion that it 
 was the object of Christ to lay down great eternal principles, 
 but not to disturb the bases and revolutionize the institu- 
 tions of all human society, which themselves rest on divine 
 sanctions as well as on inevitable conditions. Were it my 
 object to prove how untenable is the doctrine of communism, 
 based by Count Tolstoy upon the divine paradoxes [jzV], 
 which can be interpreted only on historical principles in 
 accordance with the whole method of the teaching of Jesus, 
 it would require an ampler canvas than I have here at my 
 disposal.” What a pity he has not ‘‘an ampler canvas at 
 his disposal” ! And what a strange thing it is that for all 
 these last fifteen centuries no one has had ‘‘a canvas ample 
 
40 
 
 “ THE KINGDOM OF GOD 
 
 enough” to prove that Christ, whom vve profess to believe 
 in, says something utterly unlike what he does say! Still, 
 they could prove it if they wanted to. But it is not worth 
 while to prove what everyone knows; it is enough to say, 
 "securus jiidicat or bis terrarum." 
 
 And of this kind, without exception, are all the criticisms 
 of educated believers, who must, as such, understand the 
 danger of their position. The sole escape from it for them 
 lies in their hope that they may be able, by using the 
 authority of the Church, of antiquity, and of their sacred 
 office, to overawe the reader and draw him away from the 
 idea of reading the Gospel for himself and thinking out the 
 question in his own mind for himself. And in this they are 
 successful; for, indeed, how could the notion occur to any- 
 one that all that has been repeated from century to century 
 with such earnestness and solemnity by all those arch- 
 deacons, bishops, archbishops, holy synods, and popes, is 
 all of it a base lie and a calumny foisted upon Christ by 
 them for the sake of keeping safe the money they must have 
 to live luxuriously on the necks of other men? And it is a 
 lie and a calumny so transparent that the only way of keep- 
 ing it up consists in overawing people by their earnestness, 
 their conscientiousness. It is just what has taken place of 
 late years at recruiting sessions; at a table before the zert- 
 zal — the symbol of the Tzar’s authority — in the seat of 
 honor under the life-size portrait of the Tzar, sit dignified 
 old officials, wearing decorations, conversing freely and 
 easily, writing notes, summoning men before them, and giv- 
 ing orders. Here, wearing a cross on his breast, near them, 
 is a prosperous-looking old priest in a silken cassock, with 
 long gray hair flowing on to his cope, before a lectern who 
 wears the golden cross and has a Gospel bound in gold. 
 
 They summon Ivan Petroff. A young man comes in, 
 wretchedly, shabbily dressed, and in terror, the muscles of 
 his face working, his eyes bright and restless; and in a 
 
IS WITHIN YOU." 
 
 41 
 
 broken voice, hardly above a whisper, he says; “I — by 
 Christ’s law — as a Christian — I cannot.” ‘‘What is he 
 muttering?” asks the president, frowning impatiently 
 and raising his eyes from his book to listen. ‘‘Speak 
 louder,” the colonel with shining epaulets shouts to him. 
 
 ‘‘I — I as a Christian ” And at last it appears that the 
 
 young man refuses to serve in the army because he is a 
 Christian. ‘‘Don’t talk nonsense. Stand to be measured. 
 Doctor, may I trouble you to measure him. He is all 
 right?” “Yes.” ‘‘Reverend father, administer the oath 
 to him.” 
 
 No one is the least disturbed by what the poor scared 
 young man is muttering. They do not even pay attention 
 to it. ‘‘They all mutter something, but we’ve no time to 
 listen to it, we have to enroll so many.” 
 
 The recruit tries to say something still. ‘‘It’s opposed to 
 the law of Christ.” ‘‘Go along, go along; we know without 
 your help what is opposed to the law and what’s not; and 
 you soothe his mind, reverend father, soothe him. Next; 
 Vassily Nikitin.” And they lead the trembling youth aw’ay. 
 And it does not strike anyone — the guards, or Vassily Niki- 
 tin, whom they are bringing in, or any of the spectators of 
 this scene — that these inarticulate words of the young man, 
 at once suppressed by the authorities, contain the truth, and 
 that the loud, solemnly uttered sentences of the calm, self- 
 confident official and the priest are a lie and a decep- 
 tion. 
 
 Such is the impression produced not only by Farrar’s 
 article, but by all those solemn sermons, articles, and books 
 which make their appearance from all sides directly there is 
 anywhere a glimpse of truth expo.sing a predominant false- 
 hood. At once begins the series of long, clever, ingenious, 
 and solemn speeches and writings, which deal with ques- 
 tions nearly related to the subject, but skillfully avoid 
 touching the subject itself. 
 
42 
 
 “ THE KIHGDOM OF GOD 
 
 That is the essence of the fifth and most effective means 
 of getting out of the contradictions in which Church Chris- 
 tianity has placed itself, by professing its faith in Christ’s 
 teaching in words, while it denies it in its life, and teaches 
 people to do the same. 
 
 Those who justify themselves by the first method, directly, 
 crudely asserting that Christ sanctioned violence, wars, and 
 murder, repudiate Christ’s doctrine directly; those who find 
 their defense in the second, the third, or the fourth method 
 are confused and can easily be convicted of error; but this 
 last class, who do not argue, who do not condescend to 
 argue about it, but take shelter behind their own grandeur, 
 and make a show of all this having been decided by them or 
 at least by someone long ago, and no longer offering a possi- 
 bility of doubt to anyone — they seem safe from attack, and 
 will be beyond attack till men come to realize that they are 
 under the narcotic influence exerted on them by govern- 
 ments and churches, and are no longer affected by it. 
 
 Such was the attitude of the spiritual critics — i. e., those 
 professing faith in Christ — to my book. And their attitude 
 could not have been different. They are bound to take up 
 this attitude by the contradictory position in which they find 
 themselves between belief in the divinity of their Master and 
 disbelief in his clearest utterances, and they want to escape 
 from this contradiction. So that one cannot expect from 
 them free discussion of the very essence of the question — 
 that is, of the change in men’s life which must result from 
 applying Christ’s teaching to the existing order of the world. 
 Such free discussion I only expected- from worldly, free- 
 thinking critics who are not bound to Christ’s teaching in 
 any way, and can therefore take an independent view of it. 
 I had anticipated that freethinking writers would look at 
 Christ, not merely, like the Churchmen, as the founder of 
 a religion of personal salvation, but, to express it in their 
 language, as a reformer who laid down new principles of life 
 
IS WITHIN YOU. 
 
 43 
 
 and destroyed the old, and whose reforms are not yet com- 
 plete, but are still in progress even now. 
 
 Such a view of Christ and his teaching follows from my 
 book. But to my astonishment, out of the great number of 
 critics of my book there was not one, either Russian or for- 
 eign, who treated the subject from the side from which it 
 was approached in the book — that is, who criticised Christ’s 
 doctrines as philosophical, moral, and social principles, to 
 use their scientific expressions. This was not done in a 
 single criticism. The freethinking Russian critics taking 
 my book as though its whole contents could be reduced to 
 non-resistance to evil, and understanding the doctrine of 
 non-resistance to evil itself (no doubt for greater con- 
 venience in refuting it) as though it would prohibit every 
 kind of conflict with evil, fell vehemently upon this doctrine, 
 and for some years past have been very successfully proving 
 that Christ’s teaching is mistaken in so far as it forbids 
 resistance to evil. Their refutations of this hypothetical 
 doctrine of Christ were all the more successful since they 
 knew beforehand that their arguments could not be contested 
 or corrected, for the censorship, not having passed the book, 
 did not pass articles in its defense. 
 
 It is a remarkable thing that among us, where one cannot 
 say a word about the Holy Scriptures without the prohibi- 
 tion of the censorship, for some years past there have been 
 in all the journals constant attacks and criticisms on the 
 command of Christ simply and directly stated in Matt. v. 39, 
 The Russian advanced critics, obviously unaware of all that 
 has been done to elucidate the question of non-resistance, 
 and sometimes even imagining apparently that the rule of 
 non-resistance to evil had been invented by me personally, 
 fell foul of the very idea of it. They opposed it and 
 attacked it, and advancing with great heat arguments which 
 had long ago been analyzed and refuted from every point of 
 view, they demonstrated that a man ought invariably to 
 
44 
 
 “ THE KINGDOM OF GOD 
 
 defend (with violence) all the injured and oppressed, and 
 that thus the doctrine of non-resistance to evil is an immoral 
 doctrine. 
 
 To all Russian critics the whole import of Christ’s com- 
 mand seemed reducible to the fact that it would hinder them 
 from the active opposition to evil to which they are accus- 
 tomed. So that the principle of non-resistance to evil by 
 force has been attacked by two opposing camps: the con- 
 servatives, because this principle would hinder their activity 
 in resistance to evil as applied to the revolutionists, in per- 
 secution and punishment of them ; the revolutionists, too, 
 because this principle would hinder their resistance to evil 
 as applied to the conservatives and the overthrowing of 
 them. The conservatives were indignant at the doctrine of 
 non-resistance to evil by force hindering the energetic 
 destruction of the revolutionary elements, which may ruin 
 the national prosperity; the revolutionists were indignant at 
 the doctrine of non-resistance to evil by force hindering the 
 overthrow of the conservatives, who are ruining the national 
 prosperity. It is worthy of remark in this connection that 
 the revolutionists have attacked the principle of non- 
 resistance to evil by force, in spite of the fact that it is the 
 greatest terror and danger for every despotism. For ever 
 since the beginning of the world, the use of violence of every 
 kind, from the Inquisition to the Schlusselburg fortress, has 
 rested and still rests on the opposite principle of the neces- 
 sity of resisting evil by force. 
 
 Besides this, the Russian critics have pointed out the fact 
 that the application of the command of non-resistance to 
 practical life would turn mankind aside out of the path of 
 civilization along which it is moving. The path of civiliza- 
 tion on which mankind in Europe is moving is in their 
 opinion the one along which all mankind ought always to 
 move. 
 
 So much for the general character of the Russian critics. 
 
75 WITHIN YOU." 
 
 45 
 
 Foreign critics started from the same premises, but their 
 discussions of my book were somewhat different from those 
 of Russian critics, not only in being less bitter, and in 
 showing more culture, but even in the subject-matter. 
 
 In discussing my book and the Gospel teaching gener- 
 ally, as it is expressed in the Sermon on the Mount, the for- 
 eign critics maintained that such doctrine is not peculiarly 
 Christian (Christian doctrine is either Catholicism or Prot- 
 estantism according to their views) — the teaching of the 
 Sermon on the Mount is only a string of very pretty imprac- 
 ticable dreams du channant docteur., as Renan says, fit for 
 the simple and half-savage inhabitants of Galilee who lived 
 eighteen hundred years ago, and for the half-savage 
 Russian peasants — Sutaev and Bondarev — and the Russian 
 mystic Tolstoy, but not at all consistent with a high degree 
 of European culture. 
 
 The foreign freethinking critics have tried in a delicate 
 manner, without being offensive to me, to give the impres- 
 sion that my conviction that mankind could be guided by 
 such a naive doctrine as that of the Sermon on the Mount 
 proceeds from two causes : that such a conviction is partly 
 due to my want of knowledge, my ignorance of history, my 
 ignorance of all the vain attempts to apply the principles of 
 the Sermon on the Mount to life, which have been made in 
 history and have led to nothing; and partly it is due to my 
 failing to appreciate the full value of the lofty civilization 
 to which mankind has attained at present, with its Krupp 
 cannons, smokeless powder, colonization of Africa, Irish 
 Coercion Bill, parliamentary government, journalism, strikes, 
 and the Eiffel Tower. 
 
 So wrote de Vogiie and Leroy Beaulieu and Matthew 
 Arnold ; so wrote the American author Savage, and Inger- 
 soll, the popular freethinking American preacher, and many 
 others. 
 
 “Christ’s teaching is no use, because it is inconsistent 
 
46 
 
 THE KINGDOM OF GOD 
 
 with our industrial age,” says Ingersoll naively, expressing 
 in this utterance, with perfect directness and simplicity, the 
 exact notion of Christ’s teaching held by persons of refine- 
 ment and culture of our times. The teaching is no use for 
 our industrial age, precisely as though the existence of this 
 industrial age were a sacred fact which ought not to and 
 could not be changed. It is just as though drunkards 
 when advised how they could be brought to habits of so- 
 briety should answer that the advice is incompatible with 
 their habit of taking alcohol. 
 
 The arguments of all the freethinking critics, Russian 
 and foreign alike, different as they may be in tone and man- 
 ner of presentation, all amount essentially to the same 
 strange misapprehension — namely, that Christ’s teaching, 
 one of the consequences of which is non-resistance to 
 evil, is of no use to us because it requires a change of our 
 life. 
 
 Christ’s teaching is useless because, if it were carried 
 into practice, life could not go on as at present; we must 
 add: if we have begun by living sinfully, as we do live and 
 are accustomed to live. Not only is the question of non- 
 resistance to evil not discussed ; the very mention of the 
 fact that the duty of non-resistance enters into Christ’s 
 teaching is regarded as satisfactory proof of the impractica- 
 bility of the whole teaching. 
 
 Meanwhile one would have thought it was necessary to 
 point out at least some kind of solution of the following 
 question, since it is at the root of almost everything that 
 interests us. 
 
 The question amounts to this: In what way are we to 
 decide men’s disputes, when some men consider evil what 
 others consider good, and vice versa? And to reply that 
 that is evil which I think evil, in spite of the fact that my 
 opponent thinks it good, is not a solution of the difficulty. 
 There can only be two solutions: either to find a real 
 
IS WITHIN YOU I' 47 
 
 unquestionable criterion of what is evil or not to resist evil 
 by force. 
 
 The first course has been tried ever since the beginning 
 of historical times, and, as we all know, it has not hitherto 
 led to any successful results. 
 
 The second solution — not forcibly to resist what we con- 
 sider evil until we have found a universal criterion — that is 
 the solution given by Christ. 
 
 We may consider the answer given by Christ unsatis- 
 factory ; we may replace it by another and better, by find- 
 ing a criterion by which evil could be defined for all men 
 unanimously and simultaneously; we may simply, like sav- 
 age nations, not recognize the existence of the question. 
 But we cannot treat the question as the learned critics of 
 Christianity do. They pretend either that no such question 
 exists at all or that the question is solved by granting to 
 certain persons or assemblies of persons the right to define 
 evil and to resist it by force. But w'e know all the while 
 that granting such a right to certain persons does not decide 
 the question (still less so w'hen we are ourselves the certain 
 persons), since there are always people who do not recog- 
 nize this right in the authorized persons or assemblies. 
 
 But this assumption, that what seems evil to us is really 
 evil, shows a complete misunderstanding of the question, 
 and lies at the root of the argument of freethinking critics 
 about the Christian religion. In this way, then, the discus- 
 sions of my book on the part of Churchmen and freethink- 
 ing critics alike showed me that the majority of men simply 
 do not understand either Christ’s teaching or the questions 
 which Christ’s teaching solves. 
 
48 
 
 “ THE KINGDOM OF GOD 
 
 CHAPTER III. 
 
 CHRISTIANITY MISUNDERSTOOD BY BELIEVERS. 
 
 Meaning of Christian Doctrine, Understood by a Minority, has Become 
 Completely Incomprehensible for the Majority of Men — Reason of this 
 to be Found in Misinterpretation of Christianity and Mistaken Con- 
 viction of Believers and Unbelievers Alike that they Understand it — 
 The Meaning of Christianity Obscured for Believers by the Church — 
 The First Appearance of Christ’s Teaching — Its Essence and Differ- 
 ence from Heathen Religions — Christianity not Fully Comprehended 
 at the Beginning, Became More and More Clear to those who Accepted 
 it from its Correspondence with Truth — Simultaneously with this 
 Arose the Claim to Possession of the Authentic Meaning of the Doc- 
 trine Based on the Miraculous Nature of its Transmission — Assembly 
 of Disciples as Described in the Acts — The Authoritative Claim 
 to the Sole Possession of the True Meaning of Christ’s Teaching 
 Supported by Miraculous Evidence has Led by Logical Develop- 
 ment to the Creeds of the Churches — A Church Could Not be Founded 
 by Christ — Definitions of a Church According to the Catechisms — 
 The Churches have Always been Several in Number and Hostile to 
 One Another — What is Heresy — The Work of G. Arnold on Heresies — 
 Heresies the Manifestations of Progress in the Churches — Churches 
 Cause Dissension among Men, and are Always Hostile to Christianity 
 — Account of the Work Done by the Russian Church — Matt, xxiii. 23 — 
 The Sermon on the Mount or the Creed — The Orthodox Church 
 Conceals from the People the True Meaning of Christianity — The 
 Same Thing is Done by the Other Churches — All the External Con- 
 ditions of Modern Life are such as to Destroy the Doctrine of the 
 Church, and therefore the Churches use Every Effort to Support their 
 Doctrines. 
 
 Thus the information I received, after my book came 
 out, went to show that the Christian doctrine, in its direct 
 and simple sense, was understood, and had always been 
 understood, by a minority of men, while the critics, eccle- 
 siastical and freethinking alike, denied the possibility of 
 taking Christ’s teaching in its direct sense. All this con- 
 vinced me that while on one hand the true understanding 
 
IS WITHIN YOU. 
 
 49 
 
 of this doctrine had never been lost to a minority, but had 
 been established more and more clearly, on the other hand 
 the meaning of it had been more and more obscured for 
 the majority. So that at last such a depth of obscurity has 
 been reached that men do not take in their direct sense 
 even the simplest precepts, expressed in the simplest words, 
 in the Gospel. 
 
 Christ's teaching is not generally understood in its true, 
 simple, and direct sense even in these days, when the light 
 of the Gospel has penetrated even to the darkest recesses 
 of human consciousness ; when, in the words of Christ, that 
 which was spoken in the ear is proclaimed from the house- 
 tops ; and when the Gospel is influencing every side of 
 human life — domestic, economic, civic, legislative, and 
 international. This lack of true understanding of Christ’s 
 words at such a time would be inexplicable, if there were 
 not causes to account for it. 
 
 One of these causes is iJhe fact that believers and 
 unbelievers alike are firmly persuaded that they have' 
 understood Christ’s teaching a long time, and that they 
 understand it so fully, indubitably, and conclusively that it 
 can have no other significance than the one they attribute 
 to it. And the reason of this conviction is that the false 
 interpretation and consequent misapprehension of the 
 Gospel is an error of such long standing Even the 
 strongest current of water cannot add a drop to a cup 
 which is already full. 
 
 The most difficult subjects can be explained to the most 
 slow-witted man if he has not formed any idea of them 
 already ; but the simplest thing cannot be made clear to 
 the most intelligent man if he is firmly persuaded that he 
 knows already, without a shadow of doubt, what is laid 
 before him. 
 
 The Christian doctrine is presented to the men of our 
 world to-day as a doctrine which everyone has known so 
 
5 ° 
 
 “ THE KINGDOM OF GOD 
 
 long and accepted so unhesitatingly in all its minutest 
 details that it cannot be understood in any other way than 
 it is understood now.^J 
 
 f ' Christianity is understood now by all who profess the 
 doctrines of the Church as a supernatural miraculous 
 revelation of everything which is repeated inxthe CreecQ 
 By unbelievers it is regarded as an illustration of man’s 
 craving for a belief in the supernatural, which mankind has 
 now outgrown, as an historical phenomenon which has 
 received full expression in Catholicism, Greek Orthodoxy, 
 and Protestantism, and has no longer any living signifi- 
 cance for us. LThe significance of the Gospel is hidden 
 from believers by the Church, from unbelievers by Science.^ 
 
 I will speak first of the former. Eighteen hundred years'^ 
 ago there appeared in the midst of the heathen Roman 
 world a strange new doctrine, unlike any of the old reli- 
 gions, and attributed to a man, Christ. 
 
 This new doctrine was in both form and content abso- 
 lutely new to the Jewish world in which it originated, and 
 still more to the Roman world in which it was preached 
 and diffused. 
 
 In the midst of the elaborate religious observances of 
 Judaism, in which, in the words of Isaiah, law was laid 
 upon law, and in the midst of the Roman legal system 
 worked out to the highest point of perfection, a new doc- 
 trine appeared, which denied not only every deity, and all 
 fear and worship of them, but even all human institutions 
 and all necessity for them. |]]ln place of all the rules of the 
 old religions, this doctrine sets up only a type of inward per- 
 i/ fection, truth, and love in the person of Christ, and — as a 
 result of this inward perfection being attained by men — 
 also the outward perfection foretold by the Prophets — the 
 kingdom of God, when all men will cease to learn to make 
 war, when all shall be taught of God and united in love, 
 and the lion will lie down with the lamb. Instead of the 
 
75 WITHIN YOU." 
 
 51 
 
 threats of punishment which all the old laws of religions 
 and governments alike laid down for non-fulfillment of their 
 rules, instead of promises of rewards for fulfillment of 
 them, this doctrine called men to it only because it was the 
 trutl^ John vii. 17 : “If any man will do His will, he shall 
 know of the doctrine whether it be of God.” John viii. 
 46 : “ If I say the truth, why do ye not believe me ? But 
 ye seek to kill me, a man that hath told you the truth. Ye 
 shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free. 
 God is a spirit, and they that worship him must worship 
 him in spirit and in truth. niu c;auin<r<; and vp 
 
 know of my sayings whether 
 
 this doctrine were offered except its truth, the correspond- 
 ence of the doctrine with the truth. The whole teaching 
 consisted in the recognition of truth and following it, 
 in a greater and greater attainment of truth, and a closer 
 and closer following of it in the acts of life. There are 
 no acts in this doctrine which could justify a man and make 
 him saved. There is only the image of truth to guide'him, 
 for inward perfection in the person of Christ, and for out- 
 ward perfection in the establishment of the kingdom of 
 God. The fulfillment of this teaching consists only in 
 walking in the chosen way, in getting nearer to inward per- 
 fection in the imitation of Christ, and outward perfection 
 in the establishment of the kingdom of God. The greater 
 or less blessedness of a man depends, according to this 
 doctrine, not on the degree of perfection to which he has 
 attained, but on the greater or less swiftness with which he 
 is pursuing^ 
 
 The progress toward perfection of the publican 
 Zaccheus, of the woman that was a sinner, of the 
 robber on the cross, is a greater state of blessedness, 
 according to this doctrine, than the stationary righteous- 
 ness of the Pharisee. The lost sheep is dearer than ninety- 
 nine that were not lost. The prodigal son, the piece of 
 
52 
 
 THE KINGDOM OF GOD 
 
 money that was lost and found again, are dearer, more 
 precious to God than those which have not been lost. 
 
 Every condition, according to this doctrine, is only 
 a particular step in the attainment of inward and outward 
 perfection, and therefore has no significance of itself. 
 Blessedness consists in progress toward perfection ; to 
 stand still in any condition whatever means the cessation 
 of this blessedness. 
 
 “Let not thy left hand know what thy right hand 
 doeth.” “ No man having put his hand to the plow and 
 looking back is fit for the kingdom of God.” “ Rejoice 
 not that the spirits are subject to you, but seek rather 
 that your names be written in heaven.” “ Be ye perfect, 
 even as your Father in heaven is perfect.” “ Seek ye first 
 the kingdom of heaven and its righteousness.” 
 
 The fulfillment of this precept is only to be found in 
 uninterrupted progress toward the attainment of ever 
 higher truth, toward establishing more and more firmly 
 an ever greater love within oneself, and establishing more 
 and more widely the kingdom of God outside oneself. 
 
 It is obvious that, appearing as it did in the midst of 
 the Jewish and heathen world, such teaching could not be 
 accepted by the majority of men, who were living a life 
 absolutely different from what was required by it. It is 
 obvious, too, that even for those by whom it was accepted, 
 it was so absolutely opposed to all their old views that it 
 could not be comprehensible in its full significance. 
 
 It has been only by a succession of misunderstandings, 
 errors, partial explanations, and the corrections and 
 additions of generations that the meaning of the Christian 
 doctrine has grown continuall}' more and more clear to 
 men. The Christian view of life has exerted an influence 
 on the Jewish and heathen, and the heathen and Jewish 
 view of life has, too, exerted an influence on the Christian. 
 And Christianity, as the living force, has gained more and 
 
IS WITHIN YOU." 
 
 S3 
 
 more upon the extinct Judaism and heathenism, and has 
 grown continually clearer and clearer, as it freed itself 
 from the admixture of falsehood which had overlaid it. 
 Men went further and further in the attainment of the 
 meaning of Christianity, and realized it more and more 
 in life. 
 
 The longer mankind lived, the clearer and clearer 
 became the meaning of Christianity, as must always be the 
 case with every theory of life. 
 
 Succeeding generations corrected the errors of their 
 predecessors, and grew ever nearer and nearer to a com- 
 prehension of the true meaning. It was thus from the 
 very earliest times of Christianity. And so, too, from the 
 earliest times of Christianity there were men who began to 
 assert on their own authority that the meaning they at- 
 tribute to the doctrine is the only true one, and as proof 
 bring forward supernatural occurrences in support of the 
 correctness of their interpretation. 
 
 This was the principal cause at first of the misunder- 
 standing of the doctrine, and afterward of the complete 
 distortion of it. 
 
 was supposed that Christ’s teaching was transmitted 
 to men not like every other truth, but in a special miracu- 
 lous way. Thus the truth of the teaching was not proved 
 by its correspondence with the needs of the mind and the 
 whole nature of man, but by the miraculous manner of its 
 transmission, which was advanced as an irrefutable proof 
 of the truth of the interpretation put on it. This hypothesis 
 originated from misunderstanding of the teaching, and its 
 result was to make it impossible to understand it rightlya 
 
 And this happened first in the earliest times, when tne 
 doctrine was still not so fully understood and often inter- 
 preted wrongly, as we see by the Gospels and the Acts. 
 The less the doctrine was understood, the more obscure it 
 appeared and the more necessary were external proofs of 
 
54 
 
 “ THE KINGDOM OF GOD 
 
 its truth. The proposition that we ought not to do unto 
 others as we would not they should do unto us, did not 
 need to be proved by miracles and needed no exercise of 
 faith, because this proposition is in itself convincing and in 
 harmony with man's mind and nature ; but the proposition 
 that Christ was God had to be proved by miracles com- 
 pletely beyond our comprehension. 
 
 'The more the understanding of Christ’s teaching was 
 obscured, the more the miraculous was introduced into it ; 
 and the more the miraculous was introduced into it, the 
 more the doctrine was strained from its meaning and the 
 more obscure it became ; and the more it was strained 
 from its meaning and the more obscure it became, the more 
 strongly its infallibility had to be asserted, and the less com- 
 prehensible the doctrine becam^ 
 
 One can see by the Gospels, the Acts, and the Epistles 
 how from the earliest times the non-comprehension of the 
 doctrine called forth the need for proofs through the miracu- 
 lous and incomprehensible. 
 
 The first example in the book of Acts is the assembly 
 which gathered together in Jerusalem to decide the ques- 
 tion which had arisen, whether to baptize or not the uncir- 
 cumcised and those who had eaten of food sacrificed to 
 idols. 
 
 The very fact of this question being raised showed that 
 those who discussed it did not understand the teaching of 
 Christ, who rejected ail outward observances — ablutions, 
 purifications, fasts, and sabbaths. It was plainly said. 
 
 Not that which goeth into a man’s mouth, but that which 
 Cometh out of a man’s mouth, defileth him,” and therefore 
 the question of baptizing the uncircumcised could only 
 have arisen among men who, though they loved their 
 Master and dimly felt the grandeur of his teaching, still 
 did not understand the teaching itself very clearly. And 
 this was the fact. 
 
IS IVITHIiV YOU." 
 
 55 
 
 Just in proportion to the failure of the members of the 
 assembly to understand the doctrine was their need of 
 external confirmation of their incomplete interpretation of 
 it. And then to settle this question, the very asking of 
 which proved their misunderstanding of the doctrine, there 
 was uttered in this assembly, as is described in the Acts, 
 that strange phrase, which was for the first time found 
 necessary to give external confirmation to certain asser- 
 tions, and which has been productive of so much evil. 
 
 That is, it was asserted that the correctness of what 
 they had decided was guaranteed by the miraculous partici- 
 pation of the Holy Gho.st, that is, of God, in their decision. 
 But the assertion that the Holy Ghost, that is, God, spoke 
 through the Apostles, in its turn wanted proof. And thus 
 it was necessary, to confirm this, that the Holy Ghost 
 should descend at Pentecost in tongues of fire upon those 
 who made this assertion. (In the account of it, the de- 
 scent of the Holy Ghost precedes the assembly, but the 
 book of Acts was written much later than both events.) 
 But the descent of the Holy Ghost too had to be proved 
 for those who had not seen the tongues of fire (though it is 
 not easy to understand why a tongue of fire burning above 
 a man’s head should prove that what that man is going to 
 say will be infallibly the truth). And so arose the neces- 
 sity for still more miracles and changes, raisings of the 
 dead to life, and strikings of the living dead, and all those 
 marvels which have been a stumbling-block to men, of 
 which the Acts is full, and which, far from ever convincing 
 one of the truth of the Christian doctrine, can only repel 
 men from it. The result of such a means of confirming 
 the truth was that the more these confirmations of truth 
 by tales of miracles were heaped up one after another, the 
 more the doctrine was distorted from its original meaning, 
 and the more incomprehensible it became. 
 
 Thus it was from the earliest times, and so it went on, 
 
56 
 
 “ THE KINGDOM OF GOD 
 
 constantly increasing, till it reached in our day the logical 
 climax of the dogmas of transubstantiatioii and the in- 
 fallibility of the Pope, or of the bishops, or of Scripture, 
 and of requiring a blind faith rendered incomprehensible 
 and utterly meaningless, not in God, but in Christ, not in 
 a doctrine, but in a person, as in Catholicism, or in persons, 
 as in Greek Orthodoxy, or in a book, as in Protestantism. 
 The more widely Christianity was diffused, and the greater 
 the number of people unprepared for it who were brought 
 under its sway, the less it was understood, the more abso- 
 lutely was its infallibility insisted on, and the less possible 
 it became to understand the true meaning of the doctrine. 
 In the times of Constantine the whole interpretation of the 
 doctrine had been already reduced to a rhum^ — sup- 
 ported by the temporal authority — of the disputes that had 
 taken place in the Council — to a creed which reckoned off 
 — I believe in so and so, and so and so, and so and so to 
 the end — to one holy. Apostolic Church, which means the 
 infallibility of those persons who call themselves the 
 Church. So that it all amounts to a man no longer believ- 
 ing in God nor Christ, as they are revealed to him, but 
 believing in what the Church orders him to believe in. 
 
 But the Church is holy ; the Church was founded by 
 Christ. God could not leave men to interpret his teaching 
 at random — therefore he founded the Church. All those 
 statements are so utterly untrue and unfounded that one is 
 ashamed to refute them. Nowhere nor in anything, except 
 in the assertion of the Church, can we find that God or 
 Christ founded anything like what Churchmen understand 
 by the Church. In the Gospels there is a warning against 
 the Church, as it is an external authority, a warning most 
 clear and obvious in the passage where it is said that 
 Christ’s followers should “ call no man master.” But 
 nowhere is anything said of the foundation of what 
 Churchmen call the Church. 
 
IS WITHIN your 
 
 57 
 
 The word church is used twice in the Gospels — once in 
 the sense of an assembly of men to decide a dispute, the 
 other time in connection with the obscure utterance about 
 a stone — Peter, and the gates of hell. From these two 
 passages in which the word church is used, in the significa- 
 tion merely of an assembly, has been deduced all that we 
 now understand by the Church. 
 
 [^t Christ could not have founded the Church, that is, 
 what we now understand by that word. For nothing like 
 the idea of the Church as we know it now, with its sacra- 
 ments, miracles, and above all its claim to infallibility, is to 
 be found either in Christ’s words or in the ideas of the men 
 of that time.^ 
 
 The factFnat men called what was formed afterward by 
 the same word as Christ used for something totally different, 
 does not give them the right to assert that Christ founded 
 the one, true Church. 
 
 Besides, if Christ had really founded such an institution 
 as the Church for the foundation of all his teaching and the 
 whole faith, he would certainly have described this institu- 
 tion clearly and definitely, and would have given the only 
 true Church, besides tales of miracles, which are used to 
 support every kind of superstition, some tokens so unmis- 
 takable that no doubt of its genuineness could ever have 
 arisen. But nothing of the sort was done by him. And 
 there have been and still are different institutions, each 
 calling itself the true Church. 
 
 The Catholic catechism says: “L’Eglise est la soci^td 
 des fideles dtablie par notre Seigneur Jesus Christ, repandue 
 sur toute la terre et soumise a I’authoritd des pasteurs legi- 
 times, principalement notre Saint Pere le Pape,” * under- 
 standing by the words “ pasteurs legitimes ” an association 
 
 * “ The Church is the society of the faithful, established by our Lord 
 Jesus Christ, spread over the whole earth, and subject to the authority 
 of its lawful pastors, and chief of them our Holy Father the Pope.” 
 
58 
 
 THE KINGDOM OF GOD 
 
 of men having the Pope at its head, and consisting of certain 
 individuals bound together by a certain organization. 
 
 The Greek Orthodox catechism says : “ The Church is 
 a society founded upon earth by Jesus Christ, which is 
 united into one whole, by one divine doctrine and by sacra- 
 ments, under the rule and guidance of a priesthood appointed 
 by God,” meaning by the “ priesthood appointed by God ” 
 the Greek Orthodox priesthood, consisting of certain indi- 
 viduals who happen to be in such or such positions. 
 
 The Lutheran catechism says : “ The Church is holy 
 Christianity, or the collection of all believers under Christ, 
 their head, to whom the Holy Ghost through the Gospels 
 and sacraments promises, communicates, and administers 
 heavenly salvation,” meaning that the Catholic Church is 
 lost in error, and that the true means of salvation is in 
 Lutheranism. 
 
 For Catholics the Church of God coincides with the 
 Roman priesthood and the Pope. For the Greek Orthodox 
 believer the Church of God coincides with the establishment 
 and priesthood of Russia.* 
 
 For Lutherans the Church of God coincides with a body 
 of men who recognize the authority of the Bible and 
 Luther’s catechism. 
 
 Ordinarily, when speaking of the rise of Christianity, 
 
 * Homyakov’s definition of the Church, which was received with some 
 favor among Russians, does not improve matters, if we are to agree with 
 Homyakov in considering the Greek Orthodo.x Church as the one true 
 Church. Homyakov asserts that a church is a collection of men (all 
 without distinction of clergy and laymen) united together by love, and 
 that only to men united by love is the truth revealed (let us love each 
 other, that in the unity of thought, etc.), and that such a church is the 
 church which, in the first place, recognizes the Nicene Creed, and in 
 the second place does not, after the division of the churches, recognize 
 the popes and new dogmas. But with such a definition of the church, 
 there is still more difficulty in reconciling, as Homyakov tries to do, the 
 church united by love with the church that recognizes the Nicene Creed 
 
IS WITHIN you: 
 
 59 
 
 men belonging to one of the existing churches use the 
 word church in the singular, as though there were and had 
 been only one church. But this is absolutely incorrect. 
 The Church, as an institution which asserted that it pos- 
 sessed infallible truth, did not make its appearance singly ; 
 there were at least two churches directly this claim was 
 made. 
 
 While believers were agreed among themselves and the 
 body was one, it had no need to declare itself as a church. 
 It was only when believers were split up into opposing 
 parties, renouncing one another, that it seemed necessary 
 to each party to confirm their own truth by ascribing to 
 themselves infallibility. The conception of one church 
 only arose when there were two sides divided and disputing, 
 who each called the other side heres}’-, and recognized their 
 own side only as the infallible church. 
 
 If we knew that there was a church which decided in the 
 year 51 to receive the uncircumcised, it is only so because 
 there was another church — of the Judaists — who decided 
 to keep the uncircumcised out. 
 
 If there is a Catholic Church now which asserts its own 
 infallibility, that is only because there are churches — 
 Greco-Russian, Old Orthodox, and Lutheran — each assert- 
 ing its own infallibility and denying that of all other 
 churches. So that the one Church is only a fantastic 
 
 and the doctrine of Photius. So that Homyakov’s assertion that this 
 church, united by love, and consequently holy, is the same church as 
 the Greek Orthodox priesthood profess faith in, is even more arbitrary 
 than the assertions of the Catholics or the Orthodox. If we admit the 
 idea of a church in the sense Homyakov gives to it — that is, a body of 
 men bound together by love and truth — then all that any man can predi- 
 cate in regard to this body, if such an one exists, is its love and truth, 
 but there can be no outer signs by which one could reckon oneself or 
 another as a member of this holy body, nor by which one could put any- 
 one outside it ; so that no institution having an e.xternal existence can 
 correspond to this idea. 
 
6o 
 
 THE KINGDOM OF GOD 
 
 imagination which has not the least trace of reality about 
 it. 
 
 As a real historical fact there has existed, and still exist, 
 several bodies of men, each asserting that it is the one 
 Church, founded by Christ, and that all the others who call 
 themselves churches are only sects and heresies. 
 
 The catechisms of the churches of the most world-wide 
 influence — the Catholic, the Old Orthodox, and the 
 Lutheran — openly assert this. 
 
 In the Catholic catechism it is said : “ Quels sont ceux 
 qui sont hors de reglise ? Les infideles, les heretiques, les 
 schismatiques.” * The so-called Greek Orthodox are 
 regarded as schismatics, the Lutherans as heretics ; so 
 that according to the Catholic catechism the only people in 
 the Church are Catholics. 
 
 In the so-called Orthodox catechism it is said : By the 
 one Christian Church is understood the Orthodox, which 
 remains fully in accord with the Universal Church. As 
 for the Roman Church and other sects (the Lutherans and 
 the rest they do not even dignify by the name of church), 
 they cannot be included in the one true Church, since they 
 have themselves separated from it. 
 
 According to this definition the Catholics and Lutherans 
 are outside the Church, and there are only Orthodox in the 
 Church. 
 
 The Lutheran catechism says : “ Die wahre Kirche wild 
 darein erkannt, dass in ihr das Wort Gottes lauter und rein 
 ohne Menschenzusatze gelehrt und die Sacramente treu 
 nach Christ! Einsetzung gewahret werden.” f 
 
 According to this definition all those who have added 
 
 * “ Who are those who are outside the Church ? Infidels, heretics, and 
 schismatics.” 
 
 f “ The true Church will be known by the Word of God being studied 
 clear and unmixed with man’s additions and the sacraments being main- 
 tained faithful to Christ’s teaching.” 
 
/S WITHIN YOU." 
 
 6i 
 
 anything to the teaching of Christ and the apostles, as the 
 Catholic and Greek churches have done, are outside the 
 Church. x\nd in the Church there are only Protestants. 
 
 The Catholics assert that the Holy Ghost has been trans- 
 mitted without a break in their priesthood. The Orthodox 
 assert that the same Holy Ghost has been transmitted 
 without a break in their priesthood. The Arians asserted 
 that the Holy Ghost was transmitted in their priesthood 
 (they asserted this with just as much right as the churches 
 in authority now). The Protestants of every kind — 
 Lutherans, Reformed Church, Presbyterians, Methodists, 
 Swedenborgians, Mormons — assert that the Holy Ghost is 
 only present in their communities. If the Catholics assert 
 that the Holy Ghost, at the time of the division of the 
 Church into Arian and Greek, left the Church that fell 
 away and remained in the one true Church, with precisely 
 the same right the Protestants of every denomination can 
 assert that at the time of the separation of their Church 
 from the Catholic the Holy Ghost left the Catholic and 
 passed into the Church they professed. And this is just 
 what they do. 
 
 Every church traces its creed through an uninterrupted 
 transmission from Christ and the Apostles. And truly 
 every Christian creed that has been derived from Christ 
 must have come down to the present generation through a 
 certain transmission. But that does not prove that it alone 
 of all that has been transmitted, excluding all the rest, can 
 be the sole truth, admitting of no doubt. 
 
 Every branch in a tree comes from the root in unbroken 
 connection ; but the fact that each branch conies from the 
 one root, does not prove at all that each branch was the 
 only one. It is precisely the same with the Church. Every 
 church presents exactly the same proofs of the succession, 
 and even the same miracles, in support of its authenticity, 
 as every other So that there is but one strict and exact 
 
62 
 
 “ THE KINGDOM OF GOD 
 
 definition of what is a church (not of something fantastic 
 which we would wish it to be, but of what it is and has 
 been in reality) — a church is a body of men who claim for 
 themselves that they are in complete and sole possession 
 of the truth. TAnd these bodies, having in course of time, 
 aided by the support of the temporal authorities, developed 
 into powerful institutions, have been the principal obstacles 
 to the diffusion of a true comprehension of the teaching of 
 Christ. 
 
 It could not be otherwise. The chief peculiarity which 
 distinguished Christ’s teaching from previous religions 
 consisted in the fact that those who accepted it strove 
 ever more and more to comprehend and realize its teach- 
 ing. But the Church doctrine asserted its own complete 
 and final comprehension and realization of it. 
 
 Strange though it may seem to us who have been 
 brought up in the erroneous view of the Church as a 
 Christian institution, and in contempt for heresy, yet the 
 fact is that only in what was called heresy was there any 
 true movement, that is, true Christianity, and that it only- 
 ceased to be so when those heresies stopped short in their 
 movement and also petrified into the fixed forms of a 
 church. 
 
 And, indeed, what is a heresy ? Read all the theologi- 
 cal works one after another. In all of them heresy is the 
 subject which first presents itself for definition ; since 
 every theological work deals with the true doctrine of 
 Christ as distinguished from the erroneous doctrines 
 which surround it, that is, heresies. Yet you will not find 
 anywhere anything like a definition of heresy. 
 
 The treatment of this subject by the learned historian of 
 Christianity, E. tie Pressense, in his “ Histoire du Dogme” 
 (Paris, 1869), under the heading “ Ubi Christus, ibi 
 Ecclesia,” may serve as an illustration of the complete 
 absence of anything like a definition of what is understood 
 
IS WITHIN YOU: 
 
 ^3 
 
 by the word heresy. Here is what he says in his intro- 
 duction (p. 3) : “ Je sais que Ton nous conteste le droit de 
 qualifier ainsi [that is, to call heresies] les tendances qui 
 furent si vivement combattues par les premiers Pferes. La 
 designation meme d’heresie semble une atteinte portee a la 
 liberte de conscience et de pensee. Nous ne pouvons 
 partager ce scrupule, car il n’irait k rien moins qu’^ enlever 
 au Christianisme tout caractere distinctif.” * 
 
 And though he tells us that after Constantine’s time the 
 Church did actually abuse its power by designating those 
 who dissented from it as heretics and persecuting them, 
 yet he says, when speaking of early times: “ L’eglise est 
 une Fibre association r il y a tout profit k se sdparer d’elle. 
 La pol^mique contre I’erreur n’a d’autres ressources que la 
 pensee et le sentiment. Un type doctrinal uniforme n’a 
 pas encore 6te ^labord ; les divergences secondaires se pro- 
 duisent en Orient et en Occident avec une entiere liberty ; 
 la theologie n’est point liee a d’invariables formules. Si au 
 sein de cette diversite apparait un fonds commun de croy- 
 ances, n’est-on pas en droit d’y voir non pas un syst^me 
 formule et compost par les representants d’une autorit^ 
 d’ecole, mais la foi elle-meme dans son instinct le plus s(tr 
 et sa manifestation la plus spontanee ? Si cette meme una- 
 nimite qui se revele dans les croyances essentielles, se 
 retrouve pour repousser telles ou telles tendances, ne 
 serons-nous pas en droit de conclure que ces tendances 
 ^talent en desacord flagrant avec les principes fondamentaux 
 dn christianisme ? Cette pr^somption ne se transformera- 
 t-elle pas en certitude si nous reconnai.ssons dans la doctrine 
 universellement repouss^e par I’Eglise les traits caract^ris- 
 
 * “ I know that our right to qualify thus the tendencies which were so 
 actively opposed by the early Fathers is contested. The very use of the 
 word heresy seems an attack upon liberty of conscience and thought. 
 We cannot share this scruple ; for it would amount to nothing less than 
 depriving Christianity of all distinctive character.” 
 
64 
 
 “ THE KINGDOM OF GOD 
 
 tiques de Tune des religions du passe ? Pour dire que le 
 gnosticisme ou I’ebionitisme sont les formes legitimes de la 
 pensee chretienne il faut dire hardiment qu’il n’y a pas de 
 pensee chretienne, ni de caractere specifique qui la fasse 
 reconnaitre. Sous pretexte de I’dlargir, on la dissout. 
 Personne au temps de Platon n’eGt ose couvrir de son nom 
 une doctrine qui n’eut pas fait place a la theorie des iddes ; 
 et Ton eht excite les justes moqueries de la Grece, en 
 voulant faire d’Epicure ou de Zenon un disciple de I’Acade* 
 mie. Reconnaissons done que s’il existe une religion ou 
 une doctrine qui s’appelle christianisme, elle peut avoir ses 
 heresies.” * 
 
 The author’s whole argument amounts to this ; that 
 every opinion which differs from the code of dogmas we 
 
 * “ The Church is a free association ; there is much to be gained by 
 separation from it. Conflict with error has no weapons other than 
 thought and feeling. One uniform type of doctrine has not yet been 
 elaborated ; divergencies in secondary matters arise freely in East and 
 West ; theology is not wedded to invariable formulas. If in the midst 
 of this diversity a mass of beliefs common to all is apparent, is one not 
 justified in seeing in it, not a formulated system, framed by the repre- 
 sentatives of pedantic authority, but faith itself in its surest instinct and 
 its most spontaneous manifestation ? If the same unanimity which is 
 revealed in essential points of belief is found also in rejecting certain 
 tendencies, are we not justified in concluding that these tendencies were 
 in flagrant opposition to the fundamental principles of Christianity ? And 
 will not this presumption be transformed into certainty if we recognize in 
 the doctrine universally rejected by the Church the characteristic features 
 of one of the religions of the past ? To say that gnosticism or ebionitism 
 are legitimate forms of Christian thought, one must boldly deny the 
 existence of Christian thought at all, or any specific character by which 
 it could be recognized. While ostensibly widening its realm, one un- 
 dermines it. No one in the time of Plato would have ventured to give his 
 name to a doctrine in which the theory of ideas had no place, and one 
 would deservedly have excited the ridicule of Greece by trying to pass 
 off Epicurus or Zeno as a disciple of the Academy. Let us recognize, 
 then, that if a religion or a doctrine exists which is called Christianity, 
 it may have its heresies.” 
 
75 WITHIN- YOU." 
 
 65 
 
 believe in at a given time, is heresy. But of course at any 
 given time and place men always believe in something or 
 other ; and this belief in something, indefinite at any place, 
 at some time, cannot be a criterion of truth. 
 
 It all amounts to this : since ubi Christus ibi Ecclesia, 
 then Christus is where we are. 
 
 Every so-called heresy, regarding, as it does, its own 
 creed as the truth, can just as easily find in Church history 
 a series of illustrations of its own creed, can use all Pres- 
 sense’s arguments on its own behalf, and can call its own 
 creed the one truly Christian creed. And that is just what 
 all heresies do and have always done. 
 
 The only definition of heresy (the word aipeffi?, means 
 a part) is .this : the name given by a body of men to any 
 opinion which rejects a part of the Creed professed by that 
 body. The more frequent meaning, more often ascribed 
 to the word heresy, is — that of an opinion which rejects the 
 Church doctrine founded and supported by the temporal 
 authorities. 
 
 There is a remarkable and voluminous work, very little 
 known, “ Unpartheyische Kirchen- und Ketzer-Historie,” 
 1729, by Gottfried Arnold, which deals with precisely this 
 subject, and points out all the unlawfulness, the arbitrari- 
 ness, the senselessness, and the cruelty of using the word 
 heretic in the sense of reprobate. This book is an attempt 
 to write the history of Christianity in the form of a history 
 of heresy. 
 
 In the introduction the author propounds a series of 
 questions : (i) Of those who make heretics ; (2) Of those 
 whom they made heretics ; (3) Of heretical subjects them- 
 selves ; (4) Of the method of making heretics ; and (5) Of 
 the object and result of making heretics. 
 
 On each of these points he propounds ten more ques- 
 tions, the answers to which he gives later on from the 
 works of well-known theologians. But he leaves the reader 
 
66 
 
 " THE KINGDOM OF COD 
 
 to draw for himself the principal conclusion from the 
 expositions in the whole book. As examples of these 
 questions, in which the answers are to some extent included 
 also, I will quote the following. Under the 4th head, of 
 the manner in which heretics are made, he says, in one of 
 the questions (in the 7th) : 
 
 “ Does not all history show that the greatest makers of 
 heretics and masters of that craft were just these wise men, 
 from whom the Father hid his secrets, that is, the hypo- 
 crites, the Pharisees, and lawyers, men utterly godless and 
 perverted (Question 20-21)? And in the corrupt times of 
 Christianity were not these very men cast out, denounced 
 by the hypocrites and envious, who were endowed by God 
 with great gifts and who would in the days of pure Christi- 
 anity have been held in high honor ? And, on the other 
 hand, would not the men who, in the decline of Christianity 
 raised themselves above all, and regarded themselves as the 
 teachers of the purest Christianity, would not these very 
 men, in the times of the apostles and disciples of Christ, 
 have been regarded as the most shameless heretics and 
 anti-Christians ? ” 
 
 He expounds, among other things in these questions, the 
 theory that any verbal expression of faith, such as was 
 demanded by the Church, and the departure from which 
 was reckoned as heresy, could never fully cover the exact 
 religious ideas of a believer, and that therefore the demand 
 for an expression of faith in certain words was ever pro- 
 ductive of heresy, and he says, in Question 21 : 
 
 “ And if heavenly things and thoughts present themselves 
 to a man’s mind as so great and so profound that he does 
 not find corresponding words to express them, ought one to 
 call him a heretic, because he cannot express his idea with 
 perfect exactness ? ” And in Question 33 : 
 
 “And is not the fact that there was no heresy in the 
 earliest days due to the fact that the Christians did not 
 
IS WITHIN YOU. 
 
 67 
 
 judge one another by verbal expressions, but by deed and 
 by heart, since they had perfect liberty to express their 
 ideas without the dread of being called heretics ; was it 
 not the easiest and most ordinary ecclesiastical proceeding, 
 if the clergy wanted to get rid of or to ruin anyone, for 
 them to cast suspicion on the person’s belief, and to throw 
 a cloak of heresy upon him, and by this means to procure 
 his condemnation and removal ? 
 
 “True though it may be that there were sins and errors 
 among the so-called heretics, it is no less true and evident,’’ 
 he says farther on, “ from the innumerable examples quoted 
 here (/. e., in the history of the Church and of heresy), that 
 there was not a single sincere and conscientious man of any 
 importance whom the Churchmen would not from envy or 
 other causes have ruined.’’ 
 
 Thus, almost two hundred years ago, the real meaning 
 of heresy was understood. And notwithstanding that, the 
 same conception of it has gone on existing up to now. 
 And it cannot fail to exist so long as the conception of a 
 church exists. Heresy is the obverse side of the Church. 
 Wherever there is a church, there must be the conception 
 of heresy. A church is a body of men who assert that 
 they are in possession of infallible truth. Heresy is the 
 opinion of the men who do not admit the infallibility of 
 the Church’s truth. 
 
 Heresy makes its appearance in the Church. It is the 
 effort to break through the petrified authority of the 
 Church. All effort after a living comprehension of the 
 doctrine has been made by heretics. 'I’ertullian, Origen, 
 Augustine, Luther, Huss, Savonarola, Helchitsky, and the 
 rest were heretics. It could not be otherwise. 
 
 The follower of Christ, whose service means an ever- 
 growing understanding of his teaching, and an ever-closer 
 fulfillment of it, in progress toward perfection, cannot, just 
 because he is a follower of Christ, claim for himself or any 
 
68 
 
 ” THE KINGDOM OF GOD 
 
 other that he understands Christ’s teaching fully and fulfills 
 it. Still less can he claim this for any body of men. 
 
 To whatever degree of understanding and perfection the 
 follower of Christ may have attained, he always feels the 
 insufficiency of his understanding and fulfillment of it, 
 and is always striving toward a fuller understanding and 
 fulfillment. And therefore, to assert of one’s self or of any 
 body of men, that one is or they are in possession of per- 
 fect understanding and fulfillment of Christ’s word, is to 
 renounce the very spirit of Christ’s teaching. 
 
 Strange as it may seem, the churches as churches have 
 always been, and cannot but be, institutions not only alien 
 in spirit to Christ’s teaching, but even directly antagonistic 
 to it. With good reason Voltaire calls the Church Vinfanie; 
 with good reason have all or almost all so-called sects of 
 Christians recognized the Church as the scarlet woman 
 foretold in the Apocalypse ; with good reason is the his- 
 tory of the Church the history of the greatest cruelties and 
 horrors. 
 
 The churches as churches are not, as many people sup- 
 pose, institutions which have Christian principles for their 
 basis, even though they may have strayed a little away 
 from the straight path. The churches as churches, as 
 bodies which assert their own infallibility, are institutions 
 opposed to Christianity. There is not only nothing in 
 common between the churches as such and Christianity, 
 except the name, but they represent two principles funda- 
 mentally opposed and antagonistic to one another. One 
 represents pride, violence, self-assertion, stagnation, and 
 death ; the other, meekness, penitence, humility, progress, 
 and life. 
 
 We cannot serve these two masters ; we have to choose 
 between them. 
 
 The servants of the churches of all denominations, 
 especially of later times, try to show themselves champions 
 
IS WITHIN YOU." 
 
 69 
 
 of progress in Christianity. They make concessions, wish 
 to correct the abuses that have slipped into the Church, 
 and maintain that one cannot, on account of these abuses, 
 deny the principle itself of a Christian church, which alone 
 can bind all men together in unity and be a mediator 
 between men and God. But this is all a mistake. Not 
 only have the churches never bound men together in unity ; 
 they have always been one of the principal causes of 
 division between men, of their hatred of one another, of 
 wars, battles, inquisitions, massacres of St. Bartholomew, 
 and so on. And the churches have never served as media- 
 tors between men and God. Such mediation is not wanted, 
 and was directly forbidden by Christ, who has revealed his 
 teaching directly and immediately to each man. But the 
 churches set up dead forms in the place of God, and far 
 from revealing God, they obscure him from men’s sight. 
 The churches, which originated from misunderstanding of 
 Christ’s teaching and have maintained this misunderstand- 
 ing by their immovability, cannot but persecute and refuse 
 to recognize all true understanding of Christ’s words. 
 They try to conceal this, but in vain ; for every step for- 
 ward along the path pointed out for us by Christ is a step 
 toward their destruction. 
 
 To hear and to read the sermons and articles in which 
 Church writers of later times of all denominations speak of 
 Christian truths and virtues ; to hear or read these skillful 
 arguments that have been elaborated during centuries, and 
 exhortations and professions, which sometimes seem like 
 sincere professions, one is ready to doubt whether the 
 churches can be antagonistic to Christianity. “ It cannot 
 be,” one says, “ that these people who can point to such 
 men as Chrysostom, Fenelon, Butler, and others professing 
 the Christian faith, were antagonistic to Christianity.” 
 One is tempted to say, “The churches may have strayed 
 away from Christianity, they may be in error, but they can- 
 
70 
 
 ” THE KINGDOM OF GOD 
 
 not be hostile to it.” But we must look to the fruit to 
 judge the tree, as Christ taught us. And if we see that 
 their fruits were evil, that the results of their activity were 
 antagonistic to Christianity, we cannot but admit that how- 
 ever good the men were — the work of the Church in which 
 these men took part was not Christian. The goodness and 
 worth of these men who served the churches was the good- 
 ness and worth of the men, and not of the institution they 
 served. All the good men, such as Francis of Assisi, and 
 Francis of Sales, our Tihon Zadonsky, Thomas a Kempis, 
 and others, were good men in spite of their serving an 
 institution hostile to Christianit}'^, and they would have 
 been still better if they had not been under the influence of 
 the error which they were serving. 
 
 But why should we speak of the past and judge from the 
 past, which may have been misrepresented and misunder- 
 stood by us ? The churches, with their principles and their 
 practice, are not a thing of the past. The churches are 
 before us to-day, and we can judge of them to some pur- 
 pose by their practical activity, their influence on men. 
 
 What is the practical work of the churches to-day? 
 What is their influence upon men ? What is done by the 
 churches among us, among the Catholics and the Protes- 
 tants of all denominations — what is their practical work ? 
 and what are the results of their practical work ? 
 
 The practice of our Russian so-called Orthodox Church 
 is plain to all. It is an enormous fact which there is no 
 possibility of hiding and about which there can be no dis- 
 puting. 
 
 What constitutes the practical work of this Russian 
 Church, this immense, intensely active institution, which 
 consists of a regiment of half a million men and costs the 
 people tens of millions of rubles? 
 
 The practical business of the Church consists in instill- 
 ing by every conceivable means into the mass of one hun- 
 
IS WITHIN- YOU. 
 
 71 
 
 dred millions of the Russian people those extinct relics of 
 beliefs for which there is nowadays no kind of justification, 
 “ in which scarcely anyone now believes, and often not 
 even those whose duty it is to diffuse these false beliefs.” 
 To instill into the people the formulas of Byzantine 
 theology, of the Trinity, of the Mother of God, of Sacra- 
 ments, of Grace, and so on, extinct conceptions, foreign to 
 us, and having no kind of meaning for men of our times, 
 forms only one part of the work of the Russian Church. 
 Another part of its practice consists in the maintenance of 
 idol-worship in the most literal meaning of the word ; in 
 the veneration of holy relics, and of ikons, the offering 
 of sacrifices to them, and the expectation of their answers 
 to prayer. I am not going to speak of what is preached 
 and what is written by clergy of scientific or liberal tenden- 
 cies in the theological journals. I am going to speak of 
 what is actually done by the clergy through the wide 
 expanse of the Russian land among a people of one hun- 
 dred millions. What do they, diligently, assiduously, 
 everywhere alike, without intermission, teach the people ? 
 What do they demand from the people in virtue of their 
 (so-called) Christian faith ? 
 
 I will begin from the beginning with the birth of a child. 
 At the birth of a child they teach them that they must 
 recite a prayer over the child and mother to purify them, 
 as though without this prayer the mother of a newborn 
 child were unclean. To do this the priest holds the child 
 in his arms before the images of the saints (called by the 
 people plainly gods) and reads words of exorcizing power, 
 and this purifies the mother. Then it is suggested to the 
 parents, and even exacted of them, under fear of punish- 
 ment for non-fulfillment, that the child must be baptized ; 
 that is, be dipped by the priest three times into the water, 
 while certain words, understood by no one, are read aloud, 
 and certain actions, still less understood, are performed ; 
 
72 
 
 THE KINGDOM OF GOD 
 
 various parts of the body are rubbed with oil, and the hair 
 is cut, while the sponsors blow and spit at an imaginary 
 devil. All this is necessary to purify the child and to 
 make him a Christian. Then it is instilled into the parents 
 that they ought to administer the sacrament to the child, 
 that is, give him, in the guise of bread and wine, a portion 
 of Christ’s body to eat, as a result of which the child 
 receives the grace of God within it, and so on. Then it 
 is suggested that the child as it grows up must be taught to 
 pray. To pray means to place himself directly before the 
 wooden boards on which are painted the faces of Christ, the 
 Mother of God, and the saints, to bow his head and his 
 whole body, and to touch his forehead, his shoulders and 
 his stomach with his right hand, holding his fingers in a 
 certain position, and to utter some words of Slavonic, the 
 most usual of which as taught to all children are ; Mother 
 of God, virgin, rejoice thee, etc., etc. 
 
 Then it is instilled into the child as it is brought up that 
 at the sight of any church or ikon he must repeat the same 
 action — i. e., cross himself. Then it is instilled into him 
 that on holidays (holidays are the days on which Christ was 
 born, though no one knows when that was, on which he 
 was circumcised, on which the Mother of God died, on 
 which the cross was carried in procession, on which ikons 
 have been set up, on which a lunatic saw a vision, and so 
 on) — on holidays he must dress himself in his best clothes 
 and go to church, and must buy candles and place them 
 there before the images of the saints. Then he must give 
 offerings and prayers for the dead, and little loaves to be 
 cut up into three-cornered pieces, and must pray many 
 times for the health and prosperity of the Tzar and the 
 bishops, and for himself and his own affairs, and then kiss 
 the cross and the hand of the priest. 
 
 Besides these observances, it is instilled into him that at 
 least once a year he must confess. To confess means to 
 
75 WITHIN YOU. 
 
 73 
 
 go to the church and to tell the priest his sins, on the 
 theory that this informing a stranger of his sins completely 
 purifies him from them. And after that he must eat with 
 a little spoon a morsel of bread with wine, which will 
 purify him still more. Next it is instilled into him that if 
 a man and woman want their physical union to be sancti- 
 fied they must go to church, put on metal crowns, drink 
 certain potions, walk three times round a table to the 
 sound of singing, and that then the physical union of a 
 man and woman becomes sacred and altogether different 
 from all other such unions. 
 
 Further it is instilled into him in his life that he must 
 observe the following rules : not to eat butter or milk on 
 certain days, and on certain other days to sing Te Deums 
 and requiems for the dead, on holidays to entertain the 
 priest and give him money, and several times in the year to 
 bring the ikons from the church, and to carry them slung 
 on his shoulders through the fields and houses. It is in- 
 stilled into him that on his death-bed a man must not fail 
 to eat bread and wine with a spoon, and that it will be still 
 better if he has time to be rubbed with sacred oil. This 
 will guarantee his welfare in the future life. After his death 
 it is instilled into his relatives that it is a good thing for 
 the salvation of the dead man to place a printed paper of 
 prayers in his hands ; it is a good thing further to read 
 aloud a certain book over the dead body, and to pronounce 
 the dead man’s name in church at a certain time. All this 
 is regarded as faith obligatory on everyone. 
 
 But if anyone wants to take particular care of his soul, 
 then according to this faith he is instructed that the great- 
 est security of the salvation of the soul in the world is at- 
 tained by offering money to the churches and monasteries, 
 and engaging the holy men by this means to pray for him. 
 Entering monasteries too, and kissing relics and miraculous 
 ikons, are further means of salvation for the soul. 
 
74 
 
 “ THE KINGDOM OF GOD 
 
 According to this faith ikons and relics communicate a 
 special sanctity, power, and grace, and even proximity to 
 these objects, touching them, kissing them, putting candles 
 before them, crawling under them while they are being 
 carried along, are all efficacious for salvation, as well as 
 Te Deums repeated before these holy things. 
 
 So this, and nothing else, is the faith called Orthodox, 
 that is the actual faith which, under the guise of Chris- 
 tianity, has been with all the forces of the Church, and is 
 now with especial zeal, instilled into the people. 
 
 And let no one say that the Orthodox teachers place the 
 essential part of their teaching in something else, and that 
 all these are only ancient forms, which it is not thought 
 necessary to do away with. That is false. This, and noth- 
 ing but this, is the faith taught through the whole of Ru.ssia 
 by the whole of the Russian clergy, and of late years with 
 especial zeal. There is nothing else taught. Something 
 different may be talked of and written of in the capitals .; 
 but among the hundred millions of the people this is what 
 is done, this is what is taught, and nothing more. Church- 
 men may talk of something else, but this is what they teach 
 by every means in their power. 
 
 All this, and the worship of relics and of ikons, has been 
 introduced into works of theology and into the catechisms. 
 Thus they teach it to the people in theory and in practice, 
 using every resource of authority, solemnity, pomp, and 
 violence to impress them. They compel the people, by 
 overawing them, to believe in this, and jealously guard this 
 faith from any attempt to free the people from these bar- 
 barous superstitions. 
 
 As I said when I published my book, Christ’s teaching 
 and his very words about non-resistance to evil were for 
 many years a subject for ridicule and low jesting in my 
 eyes, and Churchmen, far from opposing it, even encour- 
 aged this scoffing at sacred things. But try the experiment 
 
/S WITHIN you: 
 
 75 
 
 of saying a disrespectful word about a hideous idol which is 
 carried sacrilegiously about Moscow by drunken men under 
 the name of the ikon of the Iversky virgin, and you will 
 raise a groan of indignation from these same Churchmen. 
 All that they preach is an external observance of the rites 
 of idolatry. And let it not be said that the one does not 
 hinder the other, that “ These ought ye to have done, and 
 not to leave the other undone.” “All, therefore, whatso- 
 ever they bid you observe, that observe and do ; but do 
 not ye after their works : for they say, and do not” (Matt, 
 xxiii. 23, 3). 
 
 This was spoken of the Pharisees, who fulfilled all the 
 external observances prescribed by the law, and therefore 
 the words “ whatsoever they bid you observe, that observe 
 and do,” refer to works of mercy and goodness, and the 
 words “ do not ye after their works, for they say and do 
 not,” refer to their observance of ceremonies and their 
 neglect of good works, and have exactly the opposite mean- 
 ing to that which the Churchmen try to give to the passage, 
 interpreting it as an injunction to observe ceremonies. Ex^ 
 ternal observances and the service of truth and goodness 
 are for the most part difficult to combine ; the one ex- 
 cludes the other. So it was with the Pharisees, so it is 
 now with Church Christians. 
 
 If a man can be saved by the redemption, by sacraments, 
 and by prayer, then he does not need good works. 
 
 fhe Sermon on the Mount, or the Creed. One cannot 
 believe in both. And Churchmen have chosen the latt^ 
 The Creed is taught and is read as a prayer in the churches, 
 but the Sermon on the Mount is excluded even from the 
 Gospel passages read in the churches, so that the congre- 
 gation never hears it in church, except on those days when 
 the whole of the Gospel is read. Indeed, it could not be 
 otherwise. j^Peo ple who believe in a wicked and senseless 
 God — who has cursed the human race and devoted his own 
 
76 
 
 THE KINGDOM OF GOD 
 
 Son to sacrifice, and a part of mankind to eternal torment 
 — cannot believe in the God of love. The man who be- 
 lieves in a God, in a Christ coming again in glory to judge 
 and to punish the quick and the dead, cannot believe in 
 the Christ who bade us turn the left cheek, juc^e not, for- 
 give those that wrong us, and love our enemies. [ The man 
 who believes in the inspiration of the Old Testament and 
 the sacred character of David, who commanded on his 
 deathbed the murder of an old man who had cursed him, 
 and whom he could not kill himself because he was bound 
 by an oath to him, and the similar atrocities of which the 
 Old Testament is full, cannot believe in the holy love of 
 Christ. The man who believes in the Church’s doctrine of 
 the compatibility of warfare and capital punishment with 
 Christianity cannot believe in the brotherhood of all men. 
 
 ^nd what is most important of all — the man who believes 
 in salvation through faith in the redemption or the sacra- 
 ments, cannot devote all his powers to realizing Christ’s 
 moral teaching in his lilS 
 
 The man who has been instructed by the Church in the 
 profane doctrine that a man cannot be saved by his own 
 nowers, but that there is another means of salvation, will 
 infallibly rely upon this means and not on his own powers, 
 which, they assure him, it is sinful to trust in. 
 
 The teaching of every Church, with its redemption and 
 sacraments, e.xcludes the teaching of Christ ; most of all 
 the teaching of the Orthodox Church with its idolatrous 
 observances. 
 
 “ But the people have always believed of their own 
 accord as they believe now,” will be said in answer to this. 
 “ The whole history of the Russian people proves it. One 
 cannot deprive the people of their traditions.” This state- 
 ment, too, is misleading. The people did certainly at one 
 time believe in something like what the Church believes in 
 now, though it w'as far from being the same thing. In 
 
IS WITHIN you:' 
 
 77 
 
 spite of their superstitious regard for ikons, house- 
 spirits, relics, and festivals with wreaths of birch leaves, 
 there has still always been in the people a profound moral 
 and living understanding of Christianity, which there has 
 never been in the Church as a whole, and which is only 
 met with in its best representatives. But the people, not- 
 withstanding all the prejudices instilled into them by the 
 government and the Church, have in their best representa- 
 tives long outgrown that crude stage of understanding, a 
 fact which is proved by the springing up everywhere of the 
 rationalist sects with which Russia is swarming to-day, and 
 on which Churchmen are now carrying on an ineffectual 
 warfare. The people are advancing to a consciousness of 
 the moral, living side of Christianity. And then the Church 
 comes forward, not borrowing from the people, but zealously 
 instilling into them the petrified formalities of an extinct 
 paganism, and striving to thrust them back again into the 
 darkness from which they are emerging with such effort. 
 
 “ We teach the people nothing new, nothing but what they 
 believe, only in a more perfect form,” say the Churchmen. 
 This is just what the man did who tied up the full-grown 
 chicken and thrust it back into the shell it had come 
 out of. 
 
 I have often been irritated, though it would be comic if 
 the consequences were not so awful, by observing how men 
 shut one another in a delusion and cannot get out of this 
 magic circle. 
 
 The first question, the first doubt of a Russian who is 
 beginning to think, is a question about the ikons, and still 
 more the miraculous relics: Is it true that they are genuine, 
 and that miracles are worked through them ? Hundreds 
 of thousands of men put this question to themselves, and 
 their principal difficulty in answering it is the fact that 
 bishops, metropolitans, and all men in positions of authority 
 kiss the relics and wonder-working ikons. Ask the bishops 
 
78 
 
 “ THE KINGDOM OF GOD 
 
 and men in positions of authority why they do so, and they 
 will say they do it for the sake of the people, while the 
 people kiss them because the bishops and men in authority 
 do so. 
 
 In spite of all the external varnish of modernitr^ learning, 
 and spirituality which the members of the Church begin 
 nowadays to assume in their works, their articles, their 
 theological journals, and their sermons, the practical work 
 of the Russian Church consists of nothing more than keep- 
 ing the people in their present condition of coarse and 
 savage idolatry, and tvorse still, strengthening and diffusing 
 superstition and religious ignorance, and suppressing that 
 living understanding of Christianity which exists in the 
 people side by side with idolatry. 
 
 1 remember once being present in the monks’ bookshop 
 of the Optchy Hermitage while an old peasant was choos- 
 ing books for his grandson, who could read. A monk 
 pressed on him accounts of relics, holidays, miraculous 
 ikons, a psalter, etc. I asked the old man, “ Has he the 
 Gospel?” “No.” “ Give him the Gospel in Russian,” I 
 
 said to the monk. “ That will not do for him,” answered 
 the monk. There you have an epitome of the work of our 
 Church. 
 
 But this is only in barbarous Russia, the European and 
 American reader will observe. And such an observation 
 is just, but only so far as it refers to the government, which 
 aids the Church in its task of stultification and corruption 
 in Russia. 
 
 It is true that there is nowhere in Europe a government 
 so despotic and so closely allied with the ruling Church. 
 And therefore the share of the temporal power in the cor- 
 ruption of the people is greatest in Russia. But it is untrue 
 that the Russian Church in its influence on the people is in 
 any respect different from any other church. 
 
 The churches are everywhere the same, and if the 
 
/S WITHIN YOU. 
 
 79 
 
 Catholic, the Anglican, or the Lutheran Church has not at 
 hand a government as compliant as the Russian, it is not 
 due to any indisposition to profit by such a government. 
 
 The Church as a church, whatever it may be — Catholic, 
 Anglican, Lutheran, Presbyterian — every church, in so far 
 as it is a church, cannot but strive for the same object as 
 the Russian Church. That object is to conceal the real 
 meaning of Christ’s teaching and to replace it by their 
 own, which lays no obligation on them, e.Kcludes the pos- 
 sibility of understanding the true teaching of Christ, and 
 what is the chief consideration, justifies the existence of 
 priests supported at the people’s expense. 
 
 What else has Catholicism done, what else is it doing in 
 its prohibition of reading the Gospel, and in its demand for 
 unreasoning submission to Church authorities and to an 
 infallible Pope ? Is the religion of Catholicism any other 
 than that of the Russian Church ? There is the same 
 external ritual, the same relics, miracles, and wonder-work, 
 ing images of Notre Dame, and the same processions ; 
 the same loftily vague discussions of Christianity in books 
 and sermons, and when it comes to practice, the same sup- 
 porting of the present idolatry. And is not the same thing 
 done in Anglicanism, Lutheranism, and every denomination 
 of Protestantism which has been formed into a church? 
 There is the same duty laid on their congregations to 
 believe in the dogmas expressed in the fourth century, 
 which have lost all meaning for men of our times, and the 
 same duty of idolatrous worship, if not of relics and ikons, 
 then of the Sabbath Day and the letter of the Bible. There 
 is always the same activity directed to concealing the real 
 duties of Christianity, and to putting in their place an 
 external respectability and cant, as it is so well described 
 by the English, who are peculiarly oppressed by it. In 
 Protestantism this tendency is specially remarkable because 
 it has not the excuse of antiquity. And does not exactly 
 
8o 
 
 THE KINGDOM OF GOD 
 
 the same thing show itself even in contemporary reviv- 
 alism — the revived Calvinism and Evangelicalism, to which 
 the Salvation Army owes its origin ? 
 
 Uniform is the attitude of all the churches to the teach- 
 ing of Christ, whose name they assume for their own 
 advantage. 
 
 The inconsistency of all church forms of religion with 
 the teaching of Christ is, of course, the reason why special 
 efforts are necessary to conceal this inconsistency from 
 people. Truly, we need only imagine ourselves in the 
 position of any grown-up man, not necessarily educated, 
 even the simplest man of the present day, who has picked 
 up the ideas that are everywhere in the air nowadays of 
 geology, physics, chemistry, cosmography, or history, when 
 he, for the first time, consciously compares them with the 
 articles of belief instilled into him in childhood, and main- 
 tained by the churches — that God created the world in six 
 days, and light before the sun ; that Noah shut up all the 
 animals in his ark, and so on ; that Jesus is also God the 
 Son, who created all before time was ; that this God came 
 down upon earth to atone for Adam’s sin ; that he rose 
 again, ascended into heaven, and sitteth on the right hand of 
 the Father, and will come in the clouds to judge the world, 
 and so on. All these propositions, elaborated by men of 
 the fourth century, had a certain meaning for men of that 
 time, but for men of to-day they have no meaning what- 
 ever. Men of the present day can repeat these words with 
 their lips, but believe them they cannot. For such sen- 
 tences as that God lives in heaven, that the heavens opened 
 and a voice from somewhere said something, that Christ 
 rose again, and ascended somewhere in heaven, and again 
 will come from somewhere on the clouds, and so on, have 
 no meaning for us. 
 
 A man who regarded the heavens as a solid, finite vault 
 could believe or disbelieve that God created the heavens. 
 
IS WITHIN YOU." 
 
 that the heavens opened, that Christ ascended into heaven, 
 but for us all these phrases have no sense whatever. Men 
 of the present can only believe, as indeed they do, that they 
 ought to believe in this ; but believe it they cannot, because 
 it has no meaning for them. 
 
 Even if all these phrases ought to be interpreted in a 
 figurative sense and are allegories, we know that in the 
 first place all Churchmen are not agreed about it, but, on 
 the contrary, the majority stick to understanding the Holy 
 Scripture in its literal sense ; and secondly, that these 
 allegorical interpretations are very varied and are not sup- 
 ported by any evidence. 
 
 But even if a man wants to force himself to believe in 
 tlie doctrines of the Church just as they are taught to him, 
 the universal diffusion of education and of the Gospel and 
 of communication between people of different forms of 
 religion presents a still more insurmountable obstacle to 
 his doing so. 
 
 A man of the present day need only buy a Gospel for 
 three copecks and read through the plain words, admitting 
 of no misinterpretation, that Christ said to the Samaritan 
 woman “ that the Father seeketh not worshipers at 
 Jerusalem, nor in this mountain nor in that, but wor- 
 shipers in spirit and in truth,” or the saying that “the 
 Christian must not pray like the heathen, nor for show, but 
 secretly, that is, in his closet,” or that Christ’s follower 
 must call no man master or father — he need only read 
 these words to be thoroughly convinced that the Church 
 pastors, who call themselves teachers in opposition to 
 Christ’s precept, and dispute among themselves, constitute 
 no kind of authority, and that what the Churchmen teach 
 us is not Christianity. Less even than that is necessary. 
 Even if a man nowadays did continue to believe in miracles 
 and did not read the Gospel, mere association with people 
 of different forms of religion and faith, which happens so 
 
82 
 
 THE KIHGDOM OF GOD 
 
 easily in these days, compels him to doubt of the truth of 
 his own faith. It was all very well when a man did not see 
 men of any other form of religion than his own ; he believed 
 that his form of religion was the one true one. But a 
 thinking man has only to come into contact — as constantly 
 happens in these days — with people, equally good and bad, 
 of different denominations, who condemn each other’s 
 beliefs, to doubt of the truth of the belief he professes him- 
 self. In these days only a man who is absolutely ignorant 
 or absolutely indifferent to the vital questions with which 
 religion deals, can remain in the faith of the Church. 
 
 What deceptions and what strenuous efforts the churches 
 must employ to continue, in spite of all these tendencies 
 subversive of the faith, to build churches, to perform masses, 
 to preach, to teach, to convert, and, most of all, to receive 
 for it all immense emoluments, as do all these priests, 
 pastors, incumbents, superintendents, abbots, archdeacons, 
 bishops, and archbishops. They need special supernatural 
 efforts. And the churches do, with ever-increasing inten- 
 sity and zeal, make such efforts. With us in Russia, 
 besides other means, they employ simple brute force, as 
 there the temporal power is willing to obey the Church. 
 Men who refuse an external assent to the faith, and say so 
 openly, are either directly punished or deprived of their 
 rights ; men who strictly keep the external forms of 
 religion are rewarded and given privileges. 
 
 That is how the Orthodox clergy proceed ; but indeed 
 all churches without exception avail themselves of every 
 means for the purpose — one of the most important of which 
 is what is now called hypnotism. 
 
 Every art, from architecture to poetry, is brought into 
 requisition to work its effect on men’s s’ouls and to reduce 
 them to a state of stupefaction, and this effect is constantly 
 produced. This use of hypnotizing influence on men to 
 bring them to a state of stupefaction is especially apparent 
 
IS WITHIN you:' 
 
 83 
 
 in the proceedings of the Salvation Arm}>-, who employ new 
 practices to which we are unaccustomed ; trumpets, drums, 
 songs, flags, costumes, marching, dancing, tears, and 
 dramatic performances. 
 
 But this only displeases us because these are new 
 practices. Were not the old practices in churches essen- 
 tially the same, with their special lighting, gold, splendor, 
 candies, choirs, organ, bells, vestments, intoning, etc.? 
 
 But however powerful this hypnotic influence may be, it 
 is not the chief nor the most pernicious activity of the 
 Church. The chief and most pernicious work of the 
 Church is that which is directed to the deception of 
 children — these very children of whom Christ said : “Woe 
 to him that offendeth one of these little ones.” From the 
 very first awakening of the consciousness of the child they 
 begin to deceive him, to instill into him with the utmost 
 solemnity what they do not themselves believe in, and they 
 continue to instill it into him till the deception has by 
 habit grown into the child’s nature. They studiously de- 
 ceive the child on the most important subject in life, and 
 when the deception has so grown into his life that it would 
 be difficult to uproot it, then they reveal to him the whole 
 world of science and reality, which cannot by any means be 
 reconciled with the beliefs that have been instilled into 
 him, leaving it to him to find his way as best he can out of 
 these contradictions. 
 
 If one set oneself the task of trying to confuse a man 
 so that he could not think clearl}’’ nor free himself from the 
 perple.\ity of two opposing theories of life which had been 
 instilled into him from childhood, one could not invent any 
 means more effectual than the treatment of every young 
 man educated in our so-called Christian society. 
 
 It is terrible to think what the churches do to men. But 
 if one imagines oneself in the position of the men who 
 constitute the Church, we see they could not act differ- 
 
84 
 
 THE KINGDOM OF GOD 
 
 ent!}'. The churches are placed in a dilemma : the 
 Sermon on the Mount or the Nicene Creed — the one 
 excludes the other. If a man sincerely believes in the 
 Sermon on the Mount, the Nicene Creed must inevitably 
 lose all meaning and significance for him, and the Church 
 and its representatives together with it. If a man believes 
 in the Nicene Creed, that is, in the Church, that is, in those 
 who call themselves its representativ.es, the Sermon on the 
 Mount becomes superfluous for him. And therefore the 
 churches cannot but make every possible effort to obscure 
 the meaning of the Sermon on the Mount, and to attract 
 men to themselves. It is only due to the intense zeal of 
 the churches in this direction that the influence of the 
 churches has lasted hitherto. 
 
 I Let the Church stop its work of hypnotizing the masses, 
 and deceiving children even for the briefest interval of 
 time, and men would begin to understand Christ’s teach- 
 ing. But this understanding will be the end of the 
 churches and all their influence. And therefore the 
 churches will not for an instant relax their zeal in the 
 •J business of hypnotizing grown-up people and deceiving 
 children. This, then, is the work of the churches ; to 
 instill a false interpretation of Christ’s teaching into men, 
 , and to prevent a true interpretation of it for the majority 
 / of so-called believers. 
 
/S WITHIN YOU. 
 
 8S 
 
 CHAPTER IV. 
 
 CHRISTIANITY MISUNDERSTOOD BY MEN OF SCIENCE. 
 
 Attitude of Men of Science to Religions in General — What Religion is, 
 and What is its Significance for the Life of Humanity — Three Concep- 
 tions of Life — Christian Religion the Expression of the Divine Con- 
 ception of Life — Misinterpretation of Christianity by Men of Science, 
 who Study it in its External Manifestations Due to their Criticising it 
 from Standpoint of Social Conception of Life — Opinion, Resulting 
 from this Misinterpretation, that Christ’s Moral Teaching is Exagger- 
 ated and Cannot be put into Practice — Expression of Divine Conception 
 of Life in the Gospel — False Ideas of Men of Science on Christianity 
 Proceed from their Conviction that they have an Infallible Method of 
 Criticism — From which come Two Misconceptions in Regard to Chris- 
 tian Doctrine — First Misconception, that the Teaching Cannot be put 
 into Practice, Due to the Christian Religion Directing Life in a Way 
 Different from that of the Social Theory of Life — Christianity holds 
 up Ideal, does not lay down Rules — To the Animal Force of Man 
 Christ Adds the Consciousness of a Divine Force — Christianity Seems 
 to Destroy Possibility of Life only when the Ideal held up is Mistaken 
 for Rule — Ideal Must Not be Lowered — Life, According to Christ’s 
 Teaching, is Movement — The Ideal and the Precepts — Second Mis- 
 conception Shown in Replacing Love and Service of God by Love and 
 Service of Humanity — Men of Science Imagine their Doctrine of 
 Service of Humanity and Christianity are Identical — Doctrine of 
 Service of Humanity Based on Social Conception of Life — Love for 
 Humanity, Logically Deduced from Love of Self, has No Meaning 
 because Humanity is a Fiction — Christian Love Deduced from Love 
 of God, Finds its Object in the whole World, not in Humanity Alone 
 — Christianity Teaches Man to Live in Accordance with his Divine 
 Nature — It Shows that the Essence of the Soul of Man is Love, and 
 that his Happiness Ensues from Love of God, whom he Recognizes as 
 Love within himself. 
 
 Now I will speak of the other view of Christianity which 
 hinders the true understanding of it — the scientific view. 
 
 Churchmen substitute for Christianity the version they 
 have framed of it for themselves, and this view of Chris- 
 tianity they regard as the one infallibly true one. 
 
86 
 
 “ THE KINGDOM OF GOD 
 
 Men of science regard as Cliristianity only the tenets 
 held by the different churches in the past and present ; and 
 finding that tliese tenets have lost all the significance of 
 Christianity, they accept it as a religion which has out- 
 lived its age. 
 
 To see clearly how impossible it is to understand the 
 Christian teaching from such a point of view, one must 
 form for oneself an idea of the place actually held by 
 religions in general, by the Christian religion in particular, 
 in the life of mankind, and of the significance attributed 
 to them by science. 
 
 Just as the individual man cannot live without having 
 some theory of the meaning of his life, and is always, 
 though often unconsciously, framing his conduct in accord- 
 ance with the meaning he attributes to his life, so too asso- 
 ciations of men living in similar conditions — nations — can- 
 not but have theories of the meaning of their associated 
 life and conduct ensuing from those theories. And as the 
 individual man, when he attains a fresh stage of growth, 
 inevitably changes his philosophy of life, and the grown- 
 up man sees a different meaning in it from the child, 
 so too associations of men — nations — are bound to 
 change their philosophy of life and the conduct ensuing 
 from their philosophy, to correspond with their develop, 
 ment. 
 
 The difference, as regards this, between the individual 
 man and humanity as a whole, lies in the fact that the 
 individual, in forming the view of life proper to the new 
 period of life on which he is entering and the conduct 
 resulting from it, benefits by the experience of men who 
 have lived before him, who have already passed through 
 the stage of growth upon which he is entering. But 
 humanity cannot have this aid, because it is always moving 
 along a hitherto untrodden track, and has no one to ask 
 how to understand life, and to act in the conditions on 
 
IS WITHIN YOU." 87 
 
 which it is entering and through which no one has ever 
 passed before. 
 
 Nevertheless, just as a man with wife and children can- 
 not continue to look at life as he looked at it when he was 
 a child, so too in the face of the various changes that are 
 taking place, the greater density of population, the estab- 
 lishment of communication between different peoples, the 
 improvements of the methods of the struggle with nature, 
 and the accumulation of knowledge, humanity cannot con- 
 tinue to look at life as of old, and it must frame a new 
 theory of life, from which conduct may follow adapted 
 to the new conditions on which it has entered and is 
 entering. 
 
 To meet this need humanity has the special power of 
 producing men who give a new meaning to the whole of 
 human life— a theory of life from which follow new forms 
 of activity quite different from all preceding them. The 
 formation of this philosophy of life appropriate to 
 humanity in the new conditions on which it is entering, and 
 of the practice resulting from it, is what is called religion. 
 
 And therefore, in the first place, religion is not, as 
 science imagines, a manifestation which at one time cor- 
 responded with the development of humanity, but is after- 
 ward outgrown by it. It is a manifestation always inherent 
 in the life of humanity, and is as indispensable, as inherent 
 in humanity at the present time as at any other. Secondly, 
 religion is always the theory of the practice of the future 
 and not of the past, and therefore it is clear that investiga- 
 tion of past manifestations cannot in any case grasp the 
 essence of religion. 
 
 The essence of every religious teaching lies not in the 
 desire for a symbolic expression of the forces of nature, 
 nor in the dread of these forces, nor in the craving for 
 the marvelous, nor in the external forms in which it is 
 manifested, as men of science imagine ; the essence of 
 
88 
 
 THE KINGDOM OF COD 
 
 religion lies in the faculty of men of foreseeing and point- 
 ing out the path of life along which humanity must move 
 in the discovery of a new theory of life, as a result of which 
 the whole future conduct of humanity is changed and dif- 
 ferent from all that has been before. 
 
 This faculty of foreseeing the path along which humanity 
 must move, is common in a greater or less degree to all 
 men. But in all times there have been men in whom this 
 faculty was especially strong, and these men have given 
 clear and definite expression to what all men felt vaguely, 
 and formed a new philosophy of life from which new lines 
 of action followed for hundreds and thousands of years. 
 
 Of such philosophies of life we know three ; two have 
 already been passed through by humanity, and the third is 
 that we are passing through now in Christianity. These 
 philosophies of life are three in number, and only three, 
 not because we have arbitrarily brought the various 
 theories of life together under these three heads, but 
 because all men’s actions are always based on one of these 
 three views of life — because we cannot view life otherwise 
 than in these three ways. 
 
 These three views of life are as follows : First, embrac- 
 ing the individual, or the animal view of life ; second, 
 embracing the society, or the pagan view of life ; third, 
 embracing the whole world, or the divine view of life. 
 
 In the first theory of life a man’s life is limited to his one 
 individuality ; the aim of life is the satisfaction of the will 
 of this individuality. In the second theory of life a man’s 
 life is limited not to his own individuality, but to certain 
 societies and classes of individuals : to the tribe, the family, 
 the clan, the nation ; the aim of life is limited to the satis- 
 faction of the will of those associations of individuals. In 
 the third theory of life a man’s life is limited not to socie- 
 ties and classes of individuals, but extends to the principle 
 and source of life — to God. 
 
/S WITHIN YOU." 89 
 
 These three conceptions of life form the foundation of 
 all the religions that exist or have existed. 
 
 The savage recognizes life only in himself and his per- 
 sonal desires. His interest in life is concentrated on him- 
 self alone. The highest happiness for him is the fullest 
 satisfaction of his desires. The motive power of his life is 
 personal enjoyment. His religion consists in propitiating 
 his deity and in worshiping his gods, whom he imagines as 
 persons living only for their personal aims. 
 
 The civilized pagan recognizes life not in himself alone, 
 but in societies of men — in the tribe, the clan, the family, 
 the kingdom — and sacrifices his personal good for these 
 societies. The motive power of his life is glory. His 
 religion consists in the exaltation of the glory of those who 
 are allied to him — the founders of his family, his ancestors, 
 his rulers — and in worshiping gods who are exclusively pro- 
 tectors of his clan, his family, his nation, his government.* 
 
 The man who holds the divine theory of life recognizes 
 life not in his own individuality, and not in societies of 
 individualities (in the family, the clan, the nation, the tribe, 
 or the government), but in the eternal undying source of 
 life — in God ; and to fulfill the will of God he is ready to 
 sacrifice his individual and family and social welfare. The 
 motor power of his life is love. And his religion is the 
 worship in deed and in truth of the principle of the whole — 
 God. 
 
 The whole historic existence of mankind is nothing else 
 than the gradual transition from the personal, animal con- 
 
 * The fact that so many varied forms of existence, as the life of the 
 family, of the tribe, of the clan, of the state, and even the life of human- 
 ity theoretically conceived by the Positivists, are founded on this social 
 or pagan theory of life, does not destroy the unity of this theory of life. 
 All these varied forms of life are founded on the same conception, that 
 the life of the individual is not a sufficient aim of life — that the meaning 
 of life can be found only in societies of individuals. 
 
90 
 
 *’ THE TaNGDOM OF GOD 
 
 ception of life to the social conception of life, and from the 
 social conception of life to the divine conception of life. 
 The whole history of the ancient peoples, lasting through 
 thousands of years and ending with the history of Rome, is 
 the history of the transition from the animal, personal view 
 of life to the social view of life. The whole of history 
 from the time of the Roman Empire and the appearance of 
 Christianity is the history of the transition, through Avhich 
 we are still passing now, from the social view of life to the 
 divine view of life. 
 
 This view of life is the last, and founded upon it is the 
 Christian teaching, which is a guide for the whole of our 
 life and lies at the root of all our activity, practical and 
 theoretic. Yet men of what is falsely called science, 
 pseudo-scientific men, looking at it only in* its e.xternals, 
 regard it as something outgrown and having • no- value 
 for us. 
 
 Reducing it to its dogmatic side only — to the doctrines 
 of the Trinity, the redemption, the miracles, the Church, 
 the sacraments, and so on — men of science regard it as 
 only one of an immense number of religions which have 
 arisen among mankind, and now, they say, having played 
 out its part in history, it is outliving its own age and fading 
 away before the light of science and of true enlightenment. 
 
 AVe come here upon what, in a large proportion of cases, 
 forms the source of the grossest errors of mankind. Men 
 on a lower level of understanding, when brought into 
 contact with phenomena of a higher order, instead of 
 making efforts to understand them, to raise themselves up 
 to the point of view from which they must look at the sub- 
 ject, judge it from their lower standpoint, and the less they 
 understand what they are talking about, the more con- 
 fidently and unhesitatingly they pass judgment on it. 
 
 To the majority of learned men, looking at the living, 
 moral teaching of Christ from the lower standpoint of the 
 
/S WITHIN YOU." 
 
 91 
 
 State conception of life, this doctrine appears as nothing but 
 a very indefinite and incongruous combination of Indian 
 asceticism, Stoic and Neoplatonic philosophy, and insub- 
 stantial anti-social visions, which have no serious sig- 
 nificance for our times. Its whole meaning is con- 
 centrated for them in its external manifestations — in 
 Catholicism, Protestantism, in certain dogmas, or in the 
 conflict with the temporal power. Estimating the value of 
 Christianity by these phenomena is like a deaf man’s judg- 
 ing of the character and quality of music by seeing the 
 movements of the musicians. 
 
 The result of this is that all these scientific men, from 
 Kant, Strauss, Spencer, and Renan down, do not under- 
 stand the meaning of Christ’s sayings, do not under- 
 stand the significance, the object,.or the reason of their 
 utterance, do not understand even the question to which 
 they form the answer. Yet, without even taking the pains 
 to enter into their meaning, they refuse, if unfavorably dis- 
 posed, to recognize any reasonableness in his doctrines ; or 
 if they want to treat them indulgently, they condescend, 
 from the height of their superiority, to correct them, on the 
 supposition that Christ meant to express precisely their own 
 ideas, but did not succeed in doing so. They behave to 
 his teaching much as self-assertive people talk to those 
 whom they consider beneath them, often supplying their 
 companions’ words : “ Yes, you mean to say this and 
 that.” This correction is always with the aim of reduc- 
 ing the teaching of the higher, divine conception of life 
 to the level of the lower, state conception of life. 
 
 They usually say that the moral teaching of Christianity 
 is very fine, but overexaggerated ; that to make it quite 
 right we must reject all in it that is superfluous and un- 
 necessary to our manner of life. “ And the doctrine that 
 asks too much, and requires what cannot be performed, is 
 worse than that which requires of men what is possible and 
 
92 
 
 THE KINGDOM OF GOD 
 
 consistent with their powers,” these learned interpreters of 
 Christianity maintain, repeating what was long ago asserted, 
 and could not but be asserted, by those who crucified the 
 Teacher because they did not understand him — the Jews. 
 
 It seems that in the judgment of the learned men of our 
 time the Hebrew law — a tooth for a tooth, and an eye for 
 an eye — is a law of just retaliation, known to mankind five 
 thousand years before the law of holiness which Christ 
 taught in its place. 
 
 It seems that all that has been done by those men who 
 understood Christ’s teaching literally and lived in accord- 
 ance with such an understanding of it, all that has been 
 said and done by all true Christians, by all the Christian 
 saints, all that is now reforming the world in the shape of 
 socialism and communism — is simply exaggeration, not 
 worth talking about. 
 
 After eighteen hundred years of education in Christianity 
 the civilized world, as represented by its most advanced 
 thinkers, holds the conviction that the Christian religion is 
 a religion of dogmas ; that its teaching in relation to life is 
 unreasonable, and is an exaggeration, subversive of the 
 real lawful obligations of morality consistent with the 
 nature of man ; and that very doctrine of retribution which 
 Christ rejected, and in place of which he put his teaching, 
 is more practically useful for us. 
 
 To learned men the doctrine of non-resistance to evil by 
 force is exaggerated and even irrational. Christianity is 
 much better without it, they think, not observing closely 
 what Christianity, as represented by them, amounts to. 
 
 They do not see that to say that the doctrine of non- 
 resistance to evil is an exaggeration in Christ’s teaching is 
 just like saying that the statement of the equality of the 
 radii of a circle is an exaggeration in the definition of a 
 circle. And those who speak thus are acting precisely like 
 a man who, having no idea of what a circle is, should declare 
 
75 WITHIN YOU. 
 
 93 
 
 that this requirement, that every point of the circumference 
 should be an equal distance from the center, is exaggerated. 
 To advocate the rejection of Christ’s command of non- 
 resistance to evil, or its adaptation to the needs of life, 
 implies a misunderstanding of the teaching of Christ. 
 
 And those who do so certainly do not understand it. 
 They do not understand that this teaching is the institution 
 of a new theory of life, corresponding to the new conditions 
 on which men have entered now for eighteen hundred 
 years, and also the definition of the new conduct of life 
 which results from it. They do not believe that Christ 
 meant to say what he said ; or he seems to them to have 
 said what he said in the Sermon on the Mount and in other 
 places accidentally, or through his lack of intelligence or 
 of cultivation.* 
 
 Matt. vi. 25-34: “Therefore I say unto you, Take no 
 thought for your life, what ye shall eat, or what ye shall 
 
 * Here, for example, is a characteristic view of that kind from the 
 
 American journal the (October, 1890): “New Basis of Church 
 
 Life.”* Treating of the significance of the Sermon on the Mount and non- 
 resistance to evil in particular, the author, being under no necessity, like 
 the Churchmen, to hide its significance, sa)'s : 
 
 * ‘ Christ in fact preached complete communism and anarchy ; but one 
 must learn to regard Christ always in his historical and psychological 
 significance. Like every advocate of the love of humanity, Christ went 
 to the furthest extreme in his teaching. Every step forward toward the 
 moral perfection of humanity is always guided by men who see nothing 
 but their vocation. Christ, in no disparaging sense be it said, had the 
 typical temperament of such a reformer. And therefore we must remem- 
 ber that his precepts cannot be understood literally as a complete 
 philosophy of life. We ought to analyze his words with respect for 
 them, but in the spirit of criticism, accepting what is true,” etc. 
 
 Christ would have been happy to say what he ought, but he was not 
 able to express himself as exactly and clearly as we can in the spirit of 
 criticism, and therefore let us correct him. All that he said about 
 meekness, sacrifice, lowliness, not caring for the morrow, was said by 
 accident, through lack of knowing how to express himself scientifically. 
 
94 
 
 THE KINGDOM OF GOD 
 
 drink ; nor yet for your bod)', what ye shall put on. Is not 
 the life more than meat, and the body than raiment ? Be- 
 hold the fowls of the air; for they sow not, neither do they 
 reap, nor gather into barns; yet your heavenly Father 
 feedelh them. Are ye not much better than they ? Which of 
 you by taking thought can add one cubit unto his stature ? 
 And why take ye thought for raiment ? Consider the lilies of 
 the field how they grow ; they toil not, neither do they spin ; 
 and yet I say unto you. That even Solomon in all his glory 
 was not arrayed like one of these. Wherefore, if God so 
 clothe the grass of the field, which to-day is, and to-morrow 
 is cast into the oven, shall he not much more clothe 
 you, O ye of little faith ? Therefore take no thought, saying, 
 What shall we eat ? or. What shall we drink ? or. Where- 
 withal shall we be clothed ? (For after ail these things do 
 the Gentiles seek), for your heavenly Father knoweth that 
 ye have need of all these things. But seek ye first the king- 
 dom of God, and his righteousness, and all these things 
 shall be added unto you. Take therefore no thought for 
 the morrow ; for the morrow shall take thought for the 
 things of itself. Sufficient unto the day is the evil thereof.” 
 Luke xii. 33-34 : “ Sell that ye have, and give alms ; pro- 
 vide yourselves bags which wax not old, a treasure in the 
 heavens that faileth not, where no thief approacheth, neither 
 moth corrupteth. For where your treasure is, there will 
 your heart be also.” Sell all thou hast and follow me ; and 
 he who will not leave father, or mother, or children, or 
 brothers, or fields, or house, he cannot be my disciple. 
 Deny thyself, take up thy cross each day and follow me. 
 My meat is to do the will of him that sent me, and to per- 
 form his works. Not my will, but thine be done ; not 
 what I will, but as thou wilt. Life is to do not one's will, 
 but the will of God. 
 
 All these principles appear to men who regard them 
 from the standpoint of a lower conception of life as the 
 
/S WITHIN YOU. 
 
 95 
 
 expression of an impulsive enthusiasm, having no direct 
 application to life. These principles, however, follow from 
 the Christian theory of life, just as logically as the prin- 
 ciples of paying a part of one’s private gains to the com- 
 monwealth and of sacrificing one’s life in defense of one’s 
 country follow from the state theory of life. 
 
 As the man of the stale conception of life said to 
 savage; Reflect, bethink yourself ! The life of your in 
 viduality cannot be true life, because that life is pitiful and 
 passing. But the life of a society and succession of indi- 
 viduals, family, clan, tribe, or state, goes on living, and 
 therefore a man must sacrifice his own individuality for the 
 life of the family or the state. In exactly the same way the 
 Christian doctrine says to the man of the social, state con- 
 ception of life. Repent ye — }.iEravo2,£T£ — i. c., bethink your- 
 self, or you will be ruined. Understand that this casual, 
 personal life which now comes into being and to-morrow is 
 no more can have no permanence, that no external means, 
 no construction of it can give it consecutiveness and per- 
 manence. Take thought and understand that the life you 
 are living is not real life — the life of the famil}’’, of society, 
 of the state will not save you from annihilation. The true, 
 the rational life is only possible for man according to the 
 measure in which he can participate, not in the family or 
 the state, but in the source of life — the Father ; according 
 to the measure in which he can merge his life in the life of 
 
 the Father. Such is undoubtedly the Christian conception 
 
 of life, visible in every utterance of the Gospel. 
 
 
 One may not share this view of life, one may reject it, 
 one may show its inaccuracy and its erroneousness, but we 
 cannot judge of the Christian teaching without mastering 
 this view of life. Still less can one criticise a subject on a 
 higher plane from a lower point of view. From the base- 
 ment one cannot judge of the effect of the spire. But this 
 is just what the learned critics of the day try to do. For 
 
96 
 
 “ THE KINGDOM OF GOD 
 
 they share the erroneous idea of the orthodox believers 
 that they are in possession of certain infallible means for 
 investigating a subject. They fancy if they apply their 
 so-called scientific methods of criticism, there can be no 
 doubt of their conclusion being correct. 
 
 This testing the subject by the fancied infallible method 
 of science is the principal obstacle to understanding the 
 Christian religion for unbelievers, for so-called educated 
 people. From this follow all the mistakes made by scientific 
 men about the Christian religion, and especially two strange 
 misconceptions which, more than everything else, hinder 
 them from a correct understanding of it. One of these 
 misconceptions is that the Christian moral teaching cannot 
 be carried out, and that therefore it has either no force at 
 all — that is, it should not be accepted as the rule of con- 
 duct — or it must be transformed, adapted to the limits 
 within which its fulfillment is possible in our society. 
 Another misconception is that the Christian doctrine of 
 love of God, and therefore of his service, is an obscure, 
 mystic principle, which gives no definite object for love, 
 and should therefore be replaced by the more exact and 
 comprehensible principles of love for men and the service 
 of humanity. 
 
 The first misconception in regard to the impossibility of 
 following the principle is the result of men of the state con- 
 ception of life unconsciously taking that conception as the 
 standard by which the Christian religion directs men, and 
 taking the Christian principle of perfection as the rule by 
 which that life is to be ordered ; they think and say that to 
 follow Christ’s teaching is impossible, because the complete 
 fulfilment of all that is required by this teaching would put 
 an end to life. “ If a man were to carry out all that Christ 
 teaches, he would destroy his own life ; and if all men 
 carried it out, then the human race would come to an end,” 
 they say. 
 
TS WITHIN YOU." 
 
 97 
 
 If we take no thought for the morrow, what we shall - 
 eat and what we shall drink, and wherewithal we shall be 
 clothed, do not defend our life, nor resist evil by force, lay - 
 down our life for others, and observe perfect chastity, the 
 human race cannot exist yjthey say. 
 
 And they are Berfectly right if they take the principle of 
 perfection given ^ Christ’s teaching as a rule which every- 
 one is bound to fulfill, just as in the state principles of life 
 everyone is bound to carry out the rule of paying taxes, 
 supporting the law, and so on. 
 
 The misconception is based precisely on the fact that 
 the teaching of Christ guides men differently from the way 
 in which the precepts founded on the lower conception of 
 life guide men. The precepts of the state conception of 
 life only guide men by requiring of them an exact fulfill- 
 ment of rules or laws, [^hrist’s teaching guides men by 
 pointing them to the infinite perfection of their heavenly v 
 Father, to which every man independently and voluntarily 
 struggles, whatever the degree of his imperfection in the 
 presentTT 
 
 The misunderstanding of men who judge of the Christian 
 principle from the point of view of the state principle, con- 
 sists in the fact that on the supposition that the perfection 
 which Christ points to, can be fully attained, they ask 
 themselves (just as they ask the same question on the sup- 
 position that state laws will be carried out) what will be 
 the result of all this being carried out ? 'This supposition ^ 
 cannot be made, because the perfection h^d up to Chris- 
 tians is infinite and can never be attained ; and Christ lays 
 down his principle, having in view the fact that absolute 
 perfection can never be attained, but that striving toward 
 absolute, infinite perfection will continually increase the 
 blessedness of men, and that this blessedness may be 
 increased to infinity thereby. 
 
 Christ is teaching not ang'els, but men, living and moving 
 
98 
 
 “ THE KINGDOM OF COD 
 
 ill the animal life. And so to this animal force of move- 
 ment Christ, as it were, applies the new force — the recog- 
 nition of Divine perfection — and thereby directs the move- 
 ment by the resultant of these two forces. 
 
 To suppose that human life is going in the direction to 
 which Christ pointed it, is just like supposing that a little 
 boat afloat on a rapid river, and directing its course almost 
 exactly against the current, will progress in that direction. 
 
 Christ recognizes the existence of both sides of the 
 parallelogram, of both eternal indestructible forces of 
 which the life of man is compounded ; the force of his 
 animal nature and the force of the consciousness of kin- 
 ship to God. Saying nothing of the animal force which 
 asserts itself, remains always the same, and is therefore 
 independent of human will, Christ speaks only of the 
 Divine force, calling upon a man to know it more closely, 
 to set it more free from all that retards it, and to carry it 
 to a higher degree of intensity. 
 
 In the process of liberating, of strengthening this force, 
 the true life of man, according to Christ’s teaching, con- 
 sists, The true life, according to preceding religions, 
 consists in carrying out rules, the law ; according to 
 Christ’s teaching it consists in an ever closer approxima- 
 tion to the divine perfection held up before every man, and 
 recognized within himself by every man, in an ever closer 
 and closer approach to the perfect fusion of his will in the 
 will of God, that fusion toward which man strives, and the 
 attainment of which would be the destruction of the life we 
 know. 
 
 The divine perfection is the asymptote of human life to 
 which it is always striving, and always approaching, though 
 it can only be reached in infinity. 
 
 The Christian religion seems to exclude the possibility of 
 life only when men mistake the pointing to an ideal as the 
 laying down of a rule. It is only then that the principles 
 
75 WITHIN YOU: 
 
 99 
 
 presented in Christ’s teaching appear to be destructive of ; 
 life. These principles, on the contrary, are the only ones •• 
 that make true life possible. Without these principles true J 
 life could not be possible. 
 
 “ One ought not to expect so much,” is what people 
 usually say in discussing the requirements of the Christian 
 religion. “ One cannot expect to take absolutely no 
 thought for the morrow, as is said in the Gospel, but 
 only not to take too much thought for it ; one cannot give 
 away all to the poor, but one must give away a certain 
 definite part ; one need not aim at virginity, but one must 
 avoid debauchery ; one need not forsake wife and children, 
 but one must not give too great a place to them in one’s 
 heart,” and so on. 
 
 But to speak like this is just like telling a man who is 
 struggling on a swift river and is directing his course 
 against the current, that it is impossible to cross the river 
 rowing against the current, and that to cross it he must 
 float in the direction of the point he wants to reach. 
 
 In reality, in order to reach the place to which he wants 
 to go, he must row with all his strength toward a point 
 much higher up. 
 
 To let go the requirements of the ideal means not only 
 to diminish the possibility of perfection, but to make an 
 end of the ideal itself. Xhe ideal that has power over men 
 is not an ideal invented by someone, but the ideal that 
 every man carries within his soul. Only this ideal of com- 
 plete infinite perfection has power over men, and stimulates 
 them to action. A moderate perfection loses its power of 
 influencing men’s hearts. , 
 
 Christ’s teaching only has power when it demands abso- 
 lute perfection — that is, the fusion of the divine nature 
 which exists in every man’s soul with the will of God — the 
 union of the Son with the Father. Life according to 
 Christ’s teaching consists of nothing but this setting free 
 
lOO 
 
 “ THE KINGDOM OF GOD 
 
 of the Son of God, existing in every man, from the animal, 
 and in bringing him closer to the Father. 
 
 The animal existence of a man does not constitute 
 human life alone. Life, according to the will of God only, 
 is also not human life. Human life is a combination of the 
 animal life and the divine life. And the more this com- 
 bination approaches to the divine life, the more life there 
 is in it. 
 
 Life, according to the Christian religion, is a progress 
 toward the divine perfection. No one condition, accord- 
 ing to this doctrine, can be higher or lower than another. 
 Every condition, according to this doctrine, is only a par- 
 ticular stage, of no consequence in itself, on the way toward 
 unattainable perfection, and therefore in itself it does not 
 imply a greater or lesser degree of life. Increase of life, 
 according to this, consists in nothing but the quickening of 
 the progress toward perfection. And therefore the prog- 
 ress toward perfection of the publican Zaccheus, of the 
 woman that was a sinner, and of the robber on the cross, 
 implies a higher degree of life than the stagnant righteous- 
 ness of the Pharisee. And therefore for this religion there 
 cannot be rules which it is obligatory to obey. The man 
 who is at a lower level but is moving onward toward per- 
 fection is living a more moral, a better life, is more fully 
 carrying out Christ’s teaching, than the man on a much 
 higher level of morality who is not moving onward toward 
 perfection. 
 
 It is in this sense that the lost sheep is dearer to the 
 Father than those that were not lost. The prodigal son, 
 the piece of money lost and found again, were more 
 precious than those that were not lost. 
 
 The fulfillment of Christ’s teaching consists in moving 
 away from self toward God. It is obvious that there can- 
 not be definite laws and rules for this fulfillment of the 
 teaching. Every degree of perfection and every degree of 
 
75 WITHIN YOU." 
 
 lOI 
 
 imperfection are equal in it ; no obedience to laws consti- 
 tutes a fulfillment of this doctrine, and therefore for it there 
 can be no binding rules and laws. 
 
 From this fundamental distinction between the religion 
 of Christ and all preceding religions based on the state 
 conception of life, follows a corresponding difference in the 
 special precepts of the state theory and the Christian pre- 
 cepts. The precepts of the state theory of life insist for 
 the most part on certain practical prescribed acts, by which 
 men are justified and secure of being right. The Christian 
 precepts (the commandment of love is not a precept in the 
 strict sense of the word, but the e.xpression of the very 
 essence of the religion) are the five commandments of the 
 Sermon on the Mount — all negative in character. They 
 show only what at a certain stage of development of 
 humanity men may not do. 
 
 These commandments are, as it were, signposts on the 
 endless road to perfection, toward which humanity is mov- 
 ing, showing the point of perfection which is possible at a 
 certain period in the development of humanity. 
 
 Christ has given expression in the Sermon on the Mount 
 to the eternal ideal toward which men are spontaneously 
 struggling, and also the degree of attainment of it to which 
 men may reach in our times. 
 
 [Tile ideal is not to desire to do ill to anyone, not to pro- 
 voke ill will, to love all men. The precept, showing the 
 level below which we cannot fall in the attainment of this 
 ideal, is the prohibition of evil speaking. And that is the 
 first command. 
 
 The ideal is perfect chastit}'', even in thought. > The pre- 
 cept, showing the level below which we cannot fall in the 
 attainment of this ideal, is that of purity of married life, 
 avoidance of debauchery. That is the second command. 
 
 The ideal is to take no thought for the future, to live in 
 the present moment. The precept, showing the level below 
 
102 
 
 THE KINGDOM OF GOD 
 
 which we cannot fall, is the prohibition of swearing, of 
 promising anything in the future. And that is the third 
 command. 
 
 The ideal is never for any purpose to use force. The 
 precept, showing the level below which we cannot fall is 
 that of returning good for evil, being patient under wrong, 
 giving the cloak also. That is the fourth command. 
 
 The ideal is to love the enemies who hate us. The pre- 
 cept, showing the level below which we cannot fall, is not 
 to do evil to our enemies, to speak well of them, and to 
 make no difference between them and our neighborsrj 
 
 All these precepts are indicationsof what, on our journey 
 to perfection, we are already fully able to avoid, and what 
 we must labor to attain now, and what we ought by degrees 
 to translate into instinctive and unconscious habits. But 
 these precepts, far from constituting the whole of Christ’s 
 teaching and exhausting it, are simply stages on the way to 
 perfection. These precepts must and will be followed by 
 higher and higher precepts on the way to the perfection 
 held up by the religion. 
 
 And therefore it is essentially a part of the Christian 
 religion to make demands higher than those expressed in 
 its precepts ; and by no means to diminish the demands 
 either of the ideal itself, or of the precepts, as people 
 imagine who judge it from the standpoint of the social con- 
 ception of life. 
 
 So much for one misunderstanding of the scientific men, 
 in relation to the import and aim of Christ’s teaching. 
 Another misunderstanding arising from the same source 
 consists in substituting love for men, the service of human- 
 ity, for the Christian principles of love for God and his 
 service. 
 
 The Christian doctrine to love God and serve him, and 
 only as a result of that love to love and serve one’s neigh- 
 bor, seems to scientific men obscure, mystic, and arbitrary. 
 
IS WITHIN YOU." 
 
 103 
 
 And they would absolutely exclude the obligation of love 
 and service of God, holding that the doctrine of love for 
 men, for humanity alone, is far more clear, tangible, and 
 reasonable. 
 
 Scientific men teach in theory that the only good and 
 rational life is that which is devoted to the service of the 
 whole of humanity. That is for them the import of the 
 Christian doctrine, and to that they reduce Christ’s teach- 
 ing. They seek confirmation of their own doctrine in the 
 Gospel, on the supposition that the two doctrines are really 
 the same. 
 
 This idea is an absolutely mistaken one. The Christian 
 doctrine has nothing in common with the doctrine of the 
 Positivists, Communists, and all the apostles of the univer- 
 sal brotherhood of mankind, based on the general advantage 
 of such a brotherhood. They differ from one another espe- 
 cially in Christianity’s having a firm and clear basis in the 
 human soul, while love for humanity is only a theoretical 
 deduction from analogy. 
 
 The doctrine of love for humanity alone is based on the 
 social conception of life. 
 
 The essence of the social conception of life consists in 
 the transference of the aim of the individual life to the life 
 of societies of individuals : family, clan, tribe, or state. 
 This transference is accomplished easily and naturally in 
 its earliest forms, in the transference of the aim of life from 
 the individual to the family and the clan. The transference 
 to the tribe or the nation is more difficult and requires 
 special training. And the transference of the sentiment 
 to the state is the furthest limit which the process can 
 reach. 
 
 To love one’s self is natural to everyone, and no one needs 
 any encouragement to do so. To love one’s clan who sup- 
 port and protect one, to love one’s wife, the joy and help of 
 one’s existence, one’s children, the hope and consolation of 
 
104 
 
 “ THE KINGDOM OF COD 
 
 one’s life, and one’s parents, who have given one life and 
 education, is natural. And such love, though far from 
 being so strong as love of self, is met with pretty often. 
 
 To love— for one’s own sake, through personal pride — 
 one’s tribe, one’s nation, though not so natural, is neverthe- 
 less common. Love of one’s own people who are of the 
 same blood, the same tongue, and the same religion as one’s 
 self is possible, though far from being so strong as love of 
 self, or even love of family or clan. But love for a state, 
 such as Turkey, Germany, England, Austria, or Russia is a 
 thing almost impossible. And though it is zealously in- 
 culated, it is only an imagined sentiment ; it has no exist- 
 ence in reality. And at that limit man’s power of trans- 
 ferring his interest ceases, and he cannot feel any direct 
 sentiment for that fictitious entity. The Positivist.s, how- 
 ever, and all the apostles of fraternity on scientific principles, 
 without taking into consideration the weakening of senti- 
 ment in proportion to the extension of its object, draw 
 further deductions in theory in the same direction. “ Since,” 
 they say, “ it was for the advantage of the individual to 
 extend his personal interest to the family, the tribe, and sub- 
 sequently to the nation and the state, it would be still more 
 advantageous to extend his interest in societies of men to 
 the whole of mankind, and so all to live for humanity just 
 as men live for the family or the state.” 
 
 Theoretically it follows, indeed, having extended the 
 love and interest for the personality to the family, the tribe, 
 and thence to the nation and the state, it would be perfectly 
 logical for men to save themselves the strife and calami- 
 ties which result from the division of mankind into nations 
 and states by extending their love to the whole of human- 
 ity. This would be most logical, and theoretically nothing 
 would appear more natural to its advocates, who do not 
 observe that love is a sentiment which may or may not be 
 felt, but which it is useless to advocate ; and moreover, 
 
IS WITHIN- YOU." t 05 
 
 that love must have an object, and that humanity is not an 
 object. It is nothing but a fiction. 
 
 The family, the tribe, even the state were not invented 
 by men, but formed themselves spontaneously, like ant- 
 hills or swarms of bees, and have a real existence. The 
 man who, for the sake of his own animal personality, loves 
 his family, knows whom he loves : Anna, Dolly, John, 
 Peter, and so on. The man who loves his tribe and lakes 
 pride in it, knows that he loves all the Guelphs or all the 
 Ghibellines ; the man who loves the state knows that he 
 loves France bounded by the Rhine, and the Pyrenees, and 
 its principal city Paris, and its history and so on. But the 
 man who loves humanity — what does he love? There is 
 such a thing as a state, as a nation ; there is the abstract 
 conception of man ; but humanity as a concrete idea does 
 not, and cannot exist. 
 
 Humanity! Where is the definition of humanity? 
 Where does it end and where does it begin ? Does human- 
 ity end with the savage, the idiot, the dipsomaniac, or the 
 madman ? If we draw a line excluding from humanity its 
 lowest representatives, where are we to draw the line? 
 Shall we exclude the negroes like the Americans, or the 
 Hindoos like some Englishmen, or the Jews like some 
 others? If we include all men without exception, why 
 should we not include also the higher animals, many of 
 whom are superior to the lowest specimens of the human 
 race. 
 
 We know nothing of humanity as an eternal object, and 
 we know nothing of its limits. Humanity is a fiction, and 
 it is impossible to love it. It would, doubtless, be very 
 advantageous if men could love humanity just as they love 
 their family. It would be very advantageous, as Commun- 
 ists advocate, to replace the competitive, individualistic 
 organization of men’s activity by a social universal organi- 
 zation, so that each would be for all and all for each. 
 
Io 6 “ the kingdom of GOD 
 
 Only there are no motives to lead men to do this. The 
 Positivists, the Communists, and all the apostles of frater- 
 nity on scientific principles advocate the extension to the 
 whole of humanity of the love men feel for themselves, 
 their families, and the state. They forget that the love 
 which they are discussing is a personal love, which might 
 expand in a rarefied form to embrace a man’s native 
 country, but which disappears before it can embrace an 
 artificial state such as Austria, England, or Turkey, and 
 which we cannot even conceive of in relation to all human- 
 ity, an absolutely mystic conception. 
 
 “ A man loves himself (his animal personality), he loves 
 his family, he even loves his native country. Why should 
 he not love humanity .? That would be such an excellent 
 thing. And by the way, it is precisely what is taught by 
 Christianity.” So think the advocates of Positivist, Com- 
 monistic, or Socialistic fraternity. 
 
 It would indeed be an excellent thing. But it can never 
 be, for the love that is based on a personal or social con- 
 ception of life can never rise beyond love for the slate. 
 
 The fallacy of the argument lies in the fact that the 
 social conception of life, on which love for family and 
 nation is founded, rests itself on love of self, and that love 
 grows weaker and weaker as it is extended from self to 
 family, tribe, nationality, and state ; and in the state we 
 reach the furthest limit beyond which it cannot go. 
 
 The necessity of extending the sphere of love is beyond 
 dispute. But in reality the possibility of this love is de- 
 stroyed by the necessity of extending its object indefinitely. 
 And thus the insufficiency of personal human love is made 
 manifest. 
 
 And here the advocates of Positivist, Communistic, 
 Socialistic fraternity propose to draw upon Christian love 
 to make up the default of this bankrupt human love ; but 
 Christian love only in its results, not in its foundations. 
 
IS WITHIN YOU." 107 
 
 They propose love for humanity alone, apart from love for 
 God. 
 
 But such a love cannot exist. There is no motive to 
 produce it. Christian love is the result only of the Chris- 
 tian conception of life, in which the aim of life is to love 
 and serve God. 
 
 The social conception of life has led men, by a natural 
 transition from love of self and then of family, tribe, nation, 
 and state, to a consciousness of the necessity of love for 
 humanity, a conception which has no definite limits and 
 extends to all living things. And this necessity for love 
 of what awakens no kind of sentiment in a man is a con- 
 tradiction which cannot be solved by the social theory of 
 life. 
 
 The Christian doctrine in its full significance can alone 
 solve it, by giving a new meaning to life. Christianity 
 recognizes love of self, of family, of nation, and of humanity, 
 and not only of humanity, but of everything living, every- 
 thing existing ; it recognizes the necessity of an infinite 
 extension of the sphere of love. But the object of this 
 love is not found outside self in societies of individuals, 
 nor in the external world, but within self, in the divine 
 self whose essence is that very love, which the animal self 
 is brought to feel the need of through its consciousness of 
 its own perishable nature. 
 
 The difference between the Christian doctrine and those 
 which preceded it is that the social doctrine said : “ Live in 
 opposition to your nature [understanding by this only the 
 animal nature], make it subject to the external law of 
 family, society, and state.” Christianity says : “ Live 
 according to your nature [understanding by this the divine 
 nature] ; do not make it subject to anything — neither you 
 (an animal self) nor that of others — and you will attain the 
 very aim to which you are striving when you subject your 
 external self.” 
 
io8 
 
 “ THE KINGDOM OF GOD 
 
 The Christian doctrine brings a man to the elementary 
 consciousness of self, only not of the animal self, but of 
 the divine self, the divine spark, the self as the Son of God, 
 as much God as the Father himself, though confined in an 
 animal husk. The consciousness of being the Son of God, 
 whose chief characteristic is love, satisfies the need for the 
 extension of the sphere of love to which tlie man of the 
 social conception of life had been brought. For the latter, 
 the welfare of the personality demanded an ever-widening 
 extension of the sphere of love ; love was a necessity and 
 was confined to certain objects — self, famil}’’, societ}-. With 
 the Christian conception of life, love is not a necessity and 
 is confined to no object ; it is the essential faculty of the 
 human soul. \Man loves not because it is his interest to 
 love this or that, but because love is the essence of his soul, 
 because he cannot but love. 
 
 The Christian doctrine shows man that the essence of 
 his soul is love — that his happiness depends not on loving 
 this or that object, but on loving the principle of the whole 
 — God, whom he recognizes within himself as love, and 
 therefore he loves all things and all mej^ 
 
 In this is the fundamental difference between the Chris- 
 tian doctrine and the doctrine of the Positivists, and all 
 the theorizers about universal brotherhood on non-christian 
 principles. 
 
 Such are the two principal misunderstandings relating to 
 the Christian religion, from which the greater number of 
 false reasonings about it proceed. The first consists in 
 the belief that Christ’s teaching instructs men, like all pre- 
 vious religions, by rules, which they are bound to follow, 
 and that these rules cannot be fulfilled. The second is the 
 idea that the whole purport of Christianity is to teach men 
 to live advantageously together, as one family, and that to 
 attain this we need only follow the rule of love to humanity, 
 dismissing all thought of love of God altogether. 
 
IS WITHIN YOU. 
 
 109 
 
 The mistaken notion of scientific men that the essence 
 of Christianity consists in the supernatural, and that its 
 moral teaching is impracticable, constitutes another reason 
 of the failure of men of the present day to understand 
 Christianity. 
 
 CHAPTER V. 
 
 CONTRADICTION BETWEEN OUR LIFE AND OUR CHRISTIAN 
 CONSCIENCE. 
 
 Men Think they can Accept Christianity without Altering th.eir Life — 
 Pagan Conception of Life does not Correspond with Present Stage of 
 Development of Humanity, and Christian Conception Alone Can Accord 
 with it — Christian Conception of Life not yet Understood by Men, but 
 the Progress of Life itself will’ Lead them Inevitably to Adopt it — The 
 Requirements of a New Theory of Life Always Seem Incomprehensible, 
 Mystic, and Supernatural — So Seem the Requirements of the Christian 
 Theory of Life to the Majority of Men — The Absorption of the Christian 
 Conception of Life will Inevitably be Brought About as the Result of 
 Material and Spiritual Causes — The Fact of Men Knowing the Require- 
 ments of the Higher View of Life, and yet Continuing to Preserve 
 Inferior Organizations of Life, Leads to Contradictions and Sufferings 
 which Embitter Existence and Must Result in its Transformation — The 
 Contradictions of our Life — The Economic Contradiction and the 
 Suffering Induced by it for Rich and Poor Alike — The Political Con- 
 tradiction and the Sufferings Induced by Obedience to the Laws cf the 
 State — The International Contradiction and the Recognition of it by 
 Contemporaries: Komarovsky, Ferri, Booth, Passy, Lawson, Wilson, 
 Bartlett, Defourney, Moneta — The Striking Character of the Military 
 Contradiction. 
 
 There are many reasons why Christ’s teaching is not 
 understood. One reason is that people suppose they have 
 understood it when they have decided, as the Churchmen 
 do, that it was revealed by supernatural means, or when 
 they have studied, as the scientific men do, the external 
 forms in which it has been manifested. Another reason is 
 
1 lO 
 
 THE KINGDOM OF GOD 
 
 the mistaken notion that it is impracticable, and ought to 
 be replaced by the doctrine of love for humanity. But the 
 principal reason, which is the source of all the other mis- 
 taken ideas about it, is the notion that Christianity is a doc- 
 trine which can be accepted or rejected without any change 
 of life. 
 
 Men who are used to the existing order of things, who 
 like it and dread its being changed, try to take the doc- 
 trine as a collection of revelations and rules which one can 
 accept without their modifying one’s life. While Christ’s 
 teaching is not only a doctrine which gives rules which a 
 man must follow, it unfolds a new meaning in life, and 
 defines a whole world of human activity quite different 
 from all that has preceded it and appropriate to the period 
 on which man is entering. 
 
 The life of humanity changes and advances, like the life 
 of the individual, by stages, and every stage has a theory 
 of life appropriate to it, which is inevitably absorbed by 
 men. Those who do not absorb it consciously, absorb it 
 unconsciously. It is the same with the changes in the 
 beliefs of peoples and of all humanity as it is with the 
 changes of belief of individuals. If the father of a family 
 continues to be guided in his conduct by his childish con- 
 ceptions of life, life becomes so difficult for him that he 
 involuntarily seeks another philosophy and readily absorbs 
 that which is appropriate to his age. 
 
 That is just what is happening now to humanity at this 
 time of transition through which we are passing, from the 
 pagan conception of life to the Christian. The socialized 
 man of the present day is brought by experience of life 
 itself to the necessity of abandoning the pagan conception 
 of life, which is inappropriate to the present stage of 
 humanity, and of submitting to the obligation of the 
 Christian doctrines, the truths of which, however cor- 
 rupt and misinterpreted, are still known to him, and alone 
 
is WITHIN TOUT ill 
 
 offer him a solution of the contradictions surrounding 
 him. 
 
 If the requirements of the Christian doctrine seem 
 strange and even alarming to the man of the social theory 
 of life, no less strange, incomprehensible, and alarming to 
 the savage of ancient times seemed the requirements of the 
 social doctrine when it was not fully understood and could 
 not be foreseen in its results. 
 
 “ It is unreasonable,” said the savage, “ to sacrifice my 
 peace of mind or my life in defense of something incom- 
 prehensible, impalpable, and conventional — family, tribe, or 
 nation ; and above all it is unsafe to put oneself at the dis- 
 posal of the power of others.” 
 
 But the time came when the savage, on one hand, felt, 
 though vaguely, the value of the social conception of life, 
 and of its chief motor power, social censure, or social 
 approbation — glory, and when, on the other hand, the diffi- 
 culties of his personal life became so great that he could 
 not continue to believe in the value of his old theory of life. 
 Then he accepted the social, state theory of life and sub- 
 mitted to it. 
 
 That is just what the man of the social theory of life is 
 passing through now. 
 
 “ It is unreasonable,” says the socialized man, “ to sacri- 
 fice my welfare and that of my family and my country in 
 order to fulfill some higher law, which requires me to re- 
 nounce my most natural and virtuous feelings of love of 
 self, of family, of kindred, and of country ; and above all, 
 it is unsafe to part with the security of life afforded by the 
 organization of government.” 
 
 But the time is coming when, on one hand, the vague 
 consciousness in his soul of the higher law, of love to God 
 and his neighbor, and, on the other hand, the suffering, 
 resulting from the contradictions of life, will force the man 
 to reject the social theory and to assimilate the new one 
 
1 12 
 
 “ THE KINGDOM OE GOD 
 
 prepared ready for him, which solves all the contradictions 
 and removes all his sufferings — the Christian theory of life. 
 And this time has now come. 
 
 We, who thousands of years ago passed through the 
 transition, from the personal, animal view of life to the 
 socialized view, imagine that that transition was an inevita- 
 ble and natural one ; but this transition through which we 
 have been passing for the last eighteen hundred years 
 seems arbitrary, unnatural, and alarming. But we only 
 fancy this because that first transition has been so fully 
 completed that the practice attained by it has become un- 
 conscious and instinctive in us, while the present transition 
 is not yet over and we have to complete it consciously. 
 
 It took ages, thousands of years, for the social conception 
 of life to permeate men’s consciousness. It went through 
 various forms and has now passed into the region of the 
 instinctive through inheritance, education, and habit. And 
 therefore it seems natural to us. But five thousand years 
 ago it seemed as unnatural and alarming to men as the 
 Christian doctrine in its true sense seems to-day. 
 
 We think to-day that the requirements of the Christian 
 doctrine — of universal brotherhood, suppression of national 
 distinctions, abolition of private property, and the strange 
 injunction of non-resistance to evil by force — demand what 
 is impossible. But it was just the same thousands of years 
 ago, with every social or even family duty, such as the duty 
 of parents to support their children, of the young to main- 
 tain the old, of fidelity in marriage. Still more strange, and 
 even unreasonable, seemed the state duties of submitting to 
 the appointed authority, and paying taxes, and fighting in 
 defense of the country, and so on. All such requirements 
 seem simple, comprehensible, and natural to us to-da\% and 
 we see nothing mysterious oralarming in them. But three 
 or five thousand years ago they seemed to require what was 
 impossible. 
 
/S WITHIN YOU." 
 
 ”3 
 
 The social conception of life served as the basis of reli- 
 gion because at the time when it was first presented to men 
 it seemed to them absolutely incomprehensible, mystic, and 
 supernatural. Now that we Iiave outlived that phase of the 
 life of humanity, we understand the rational grounds for 
 uniting men in families, communities, and states. But in 
 antiquity the duties involved by such association were pre- 
 sented under cover of the supernatural and were confirmed 
 by it. 
 
 The patriarchal religions exalted the family, the tribe, the 
 nation. State religions deified emperors and states. Even 
 now most ignorant people — like our peasants, who call the 
 Tzar an earthly god — obey state laws, not through any 
 rational recognition of their necessity, nor because they 
 have any conception of the meaning of state, but through a 
 religious sentiment. ^ 
 
 In precisely the same way the Christian doctrine is pre- 
 sented to men of the social or heathen theory of life to-day, 
 in the guise of a supernatural religion, though there is in 
 reality nothing mysterious, mystic, or supernatural about it. 
 It is simply the theory of life which is appropriate to the 
 Resent degree of material development, the present stage 
 of growth of humanity, and which must therefore inevitably 
 be accepted. 
 
 The time will come — it is already coming — when the 
 Christian principles of equality and fraternity, community 
 of property, non-resistance of evil by force, will appear just 
 as natural and simple as the principles of family or social 
 life seem to us now. 
 
 Humanity can no more go backward in its development 
 than the individual man. Men have outlived the social, 
 family, and state conceptions of life. Now they must 
 go forward and assimilate the next and higher concep- 
 tion of life, which is what is now taking place. This 
 change is brought about in two ways : consciously 
 
THE KINGDOM OF GOD 
 
 I14 
 
 through spiritual causes, and unconsciously through mate- 
 rial causes. 
 
 Just as the individual man very rarely changes his way 
 of life at the dictates of his reason alone, but generally 
 continues to live as before, in spite of the new interests and 
 aims revealed to him by his reason, and only alters his way 
 of living when it has become absolutely opposed to his 
 conscience, and consequently intolerable to him ; so, too, 
 humanity, long after it has learnt through its religions the 
 new interests and aims of life, toward which it must strive, 
 continues in the majority of its representatives to live as 
 before, and is only brought to accept the new conception by 
 finding it impossible to go on living its old life as before. 
 
 Though the need of a change of life is preached by the 
 religious leaders and recognized and realized by the most 
 intelligent men, the majority, in spite of their reverential 
 attitude to their leaders, that is, their faith in their teach- 
 ing, continue to be guided by the old theory of life in their 
 present complex existence. As though the father of a 
 family, knowing how he ought to behave at his age, should 
 yet continue through habit and thoughtlessness to live in 
 the same childish way as he did in boyhood. 
 
 That is just what is happening in the transition of 
 humanity from one stage to another, through which we are 
 passing now. YHumanity has outgrown its social stage and 
 Clias entered upon a new period^ It recognizes the doctrine 
 which ought to be made the basis of life in this new period. 
 But through inertia it continues to keep up the old forms 
 of life. From this inconsistency between the new concep- 
 tion of life and practical life follows a whole succession of 
 contradictions and sufferings which embitter our life and 
 ^jiecessitate its alteration. 
 
 I One need only compare the practice of life with the 
 I theory of it, to be dismayed at the glaring antagonism 
 j between our conditions of life and our conscience, 
 
75 WITHIN YOU." 
 
 "5 
 
 Our whole life is in flat contradiction with all we know, 
 and with all we regard as necessary and right. This con- 
 tradiction runs through everything, in economic life, in 
 political life, and in international life. As though we had 
 forgotten what we knew and put away for a time the 
 principles we believe in (we cannot help still believing in 
 them because they are the only foundation we have to base 
 our life on) we do the very opposite of all that our con- 
 science and our common sense require of us. 
 
 We are guided in economical, political, and international 
 questions by the principles which were appropriate to men 
 of three or five thousand years ago, though they are directly 
 opposed to our conscience and the conditions of life in 
 which we are placed to-day. 
 
 It was very well for the man of ancient times to live in a 
 society based on the division of mankind into masters and 
 slaves, because he believed that such a distinction was 
 decreed by God and must always exist. But is such a 
 belief possible in these days? 
 
 The man of antiquity could believe he had the right to 
 enjoy the good things of this world at the expense of other 
 men, and to keep them in misery for generations, since he 
 believed that men came from different origins, were base or 
 noble in blood, children of Ham or of Japhet. The greatest 
 sages of the world, the teachers of humanity, Plato and 
 Aristotle, justified the existence of slaves and demonstrated 
 the lawfulness of slavery ; and even three centuries ago, 
 the men who described an imaginary society of the future, 
 Utopia, could not conceive of it without slaves. 
 
 Men of ancient and medieval times believed, firmly 
 believed, that men are not equal, that the only true men 
 are Persians, or Greeks, or Romans, or Franks. But we 
 cannot believe that now. And people who sacrifice them- 
 selves for the principles of aristocracy and of patriotism 
 to-day, don’t believe and can’t believe what they assert. 
 
“ THE KINGDOM OF COD 
 
 ii6 
 
 Wc all know and cannot help knowing — even though we 
 may never have heard the idea clearly expressed, may never 
 have read of it, and may never have put it into words, still 
 through unconsciously imbibing the Christian sentiments 
 that are in the air — with our whole heart we know and can. 
 not escape knowing the fundamental truth of the Christian 
 doctrine, that we are all sons of one Father, wherever we 
 may live and whatever language we may speak ; we are all 
 brothers and are subject to the same law of love implanted 
 by our common Father in our hearts. 
 
 Whatever the opinions and degree of education of a man 
 of to-day, whatever his shade of liberalism, whatever his 
 school of philosophy, or of science, or of economics, 
 however ignorant or superstitious he may be, every man 
 of the present day knows that all men have an equal 
 right to life and the good things of life, and that one set 
 of people are no better nor worse than another, that all 
 are equal. Everyone knows this, beyond doubt ; every- 
 one feels it in his whole being. Yet at the same time 
 everyone sees all round him the division of men into two 
 castes — the one, laboring, oppressed, poor, and suffering, 
 the other idle, oppressing, luxurious, and profligate. And 
 everyone not only sees this, but voluntarily or involun- 
 tarily, in one way or another, he takes part in maintaining 
 this distinction whicli his conscience condemns. And he 
 cannot help suffering from the consciousness of this con- 
 tradiction and his share in it. 
 
 Whether he be master or slave, the man of to-day can- 
 not help constantly feeling the painful opposition between 
 his conscience and actual life, and the miseries resulting 
 from it. 
 
 The toiling masses, the immense majority of mankind 
 who are suffering under the incessant, meaningless, and 
 hopeless toil and privation in which their whole life is 
 swallowed up, still find their keenest suffering in the glaring 
 
IS WITHIN YOU. 
 
 117 
 
 contrast between what is and what ought to be, according 
 to all the beliefs held by themselves, and those who have 
 brought them to that condition and keep them in it. 
 
 They know that they are in slavery and condemned to 
 privation and darkness to minister to the lusts of the 
 minority who keep them down. They know it, and they 
 say so plainly. And this knowledge increases their suffer- 
 ings and constitutes its bitterest sting. 
 
 The slave of antiquity knew that he was a slave by nature, 
 but our laborer, while he feels he is a slave, knows that he 
 ought not to be, and so he tastes the agony of Tantalus, 
 forever desiring and never gaining what might and ought 
 to be his. 
 
 The sufferings of the working classes, springing from the 
 contradiction between what is and what ought to be, are 
 increased tenfold by the envy and hatred engendered by 
 their consciousness of it. 
 
 The laborer of the present day would not cease to suffer 
 even if his toil were much lighter than that of the slave of 
 ancient times, even if he gained an eight-hour working 
 day and a wage of three dollars a day. For he is working 
 at the manufacture of things which he will not enjoy, 
 working not by his own will for his own benefit, but through 
 necessity, to satisfy the desires of luxurious and idle people 
 in general, and for the profit of a single rich man, the 
 owner of a factory or workshop in particular. And he 
 knows that all this is going on in a world in which it is a 
 recognized scientific principle that labor alone creates 
 wealth, and that to profit by the labor of others is immoral, 
 dishonest, and punishable by law ; in a world, moreover, 
 which professes to believe Christ’s doctrine that we are all 
 brothers, and that true merit and dignity is to be found in 
 serving one’s neighbor, not in exploiting him. All this he 
 knows, and he cannot but suffer keenly from the sharp 
 contrast between what is and what ought to be. 
 
ii8 
 
 THE KINGDOM OF GOD 
 
 i i 
 
 “According to all principles, according to all I know, 
 and what everyone professes,” the workman says to himself. 
 “I ought to be free, equal to everyone else, and loved; 
 and I am — a slave, humiliated and hated.” And he too is 
 filled with hatred and tries to find means to escape from 
 his position, to shake off the enemy who is over-riding him, 
 and to oppress him in turn. People say, “ Workmen have 
 no business to try to become capitalists, the poor to try to 
 put themselves in the place of the rich.” That is a mis- 
 take. The workingmen and the poor would be wrong if 
 they tried to do so in a world in which slaves and masters 
 were regarded as different species created by God ; but 
 they are living in a world which professes the faith of the 
 Gospel, that all are alike sons of God, and so brothers and 
 equal. And however men may try to conceal it, one of 
 the first conditions of Christian life is love, not in words 
 but in deeds. 
 
 The man of the so-called educated classes lives in still 
 more glaring inconsistency and suffering. Every educated 
 man, if he believes in anything, believes in the brotherhood 
 of all men, or at least he has a sentiment of humanity, or 
 else of justice, or else he believes in sciei;ce. And all the 
 while he knows that his whole life is framed on principles 
 in direct opposition to it all, to all the principles of Christi- 
 anity, humanity, justice, and science. 
 
 Pie knows that all the habits in which he has been brought 
 up, and which he could not give up without suffering, can 
 only be satisfied through the exhausting, often fatal, toil of 
 oppressed laborers, that is, through the most obvious and 
 brutal violation of the principles of Christianit\% humanity, 
 and justice, and even of science (that is, economic science). 
 He advocates the principles of fraternity, humanity, justice, 
 and science, and yet he lives so that he is dependent on the 
 oppression of the working classes, rvhich he denounces, and 
 his whole life is based on the advantages gained, by theif 
 
IS WITIim YOU." 
 
 119 
 
 oppression. Moreover he is directing every effort to main- 
 taining this state of things so flatly opposed to all his beliefs. 
 
 We are all brothers — and yet every morning a brother or 
 a sister must empty the bedroom slops for me. We are all 
 brothers, but every morning I must have a cigar, a sweet- 
 meat, an ice, and such things, which my brothers and sisters 
 have been wasting their health in manufacturing, and I en- 
 joy these things and demand them. We are all brothers, 
 yet I live by working in a bank, or mercantile house, or shop 
 at making all goods dearer for my brothers. We are all 
 brothers, but I live on a salary paid me for prosecuting, 
 judging, and condemning the thief or the prostitute whose 
 existence the whole tenor of my life tends to bring about, 
 and who I know ought not to be punished but reformed. 
 We are all brothers, but I live on the salary I gain by col- 
 lecting taxes from needy laborers to be spent on the luxur- 
 ies of the rich and idle. We are all brothers, but I take a 
 stipend for preaching a false Christian religion, which I do 
 not myself believe in, and which only serves to hinder men 
 from understanding true Christianity. I take a stipend as 
 priest or bishop for deceiving men in the matter of the 
 greatest importance to them. We are all brothers, but I 
 will not give the poor the benefit of my educational, medical, 
 or literary labors except for money. We are all brothers, 
 yet I take a salary for being ready to commit murder, for 
 teaching men to murder, or making firearms, gunpowder, 
 or fortifications. 
 
 The whole life of the upper classes is a constant incon- 
 sistency. The more delicate a man’s conscience is, the 
 more painful this contradiction is to him. 
 
 A man of sensitive conscience cannot but suffer if he lives 
 such a life. The only means by which he can escape from 
 thissuffering is by blunting his conscience, but even if some 
 men succeed in dulling their conscience they cannot dull 
 their fears. 
 
120 
 
 “ THE KINGDOM OF GOD 
 
 The men of the higher dominating classes whose con- 
 science is naturally not sensitive or has become blunted, if 
 they don’t suffer through conscience, suffer from fear and 
 hatred. They are bound to suffer. They know all the 
 hatred of them existing, and inevitably existing in the work- 
 ing classes. They are aware that the working classes 
 know that they are deceived and exploited, and that they 
 are beginning to organize themselves to shake off oppres- 
 sion and revenge themselves on their oppressors. The 
 higher classes see the unions, the strikes, the May Day 
 Celebrations, and feel the calamity that is threatening them, 
 and their terror passes into an instinct of self-defense and 
 hatred. They know that if for one instant they are worsted 
 in the struggle with their oppressed slaves, they will perish, 
 because the slaves are exasperated and their exasperation 
 is growing more intense with every day of oppression. The 
 oppressors, even if they wished to do so, could not make an 
 end to oppression. They know that they themselves will 
 perish directly they even relax the harshness of their 
 oppression. And they do not relax it, in spite of all their 
 pretended care for the welfare of the working classes, for 
 the eight-hour day, for regulation of the labor of minors 
 and of women, for savings banks and pensions. All that is 
 humbug, or else simply anxiety to keep the slave fit to do 
 his work. But the slave is still a slave, and the master who 
 cannot live without a slave is less disposed to set him free 
 than ever. 
 
 The attitude of the ruling classes to the laborers is that 
 of a man who has felled his adversary to the earth and 
 holds him down, not so much because he wants to hold him 
 down, as because he knows that if he let him go, even 
 for a second, he would himself be stabbed, for his adver- 
 sary is infuriated and has a knife in his hand. And there- 
 fore, whether their conscience is tender or the reverse, our 
 rich men cannot enjoy the wealth t*hey have filched from 
 
75 WITHIN YOU." 
 
 I2I 
 
 the poor as the ancients did who believed in their right to 
 it. Their whole life and all their enjoyments are embittered 
 either by the stings of conscience or by terror. 
 
 So much for the economic contradiction. The political 
 contradiction is even more striking. 
 
 All men are brought up to the habit of obeying the laws 
 of the state before everything. The whole existence of 
 modern times is defined by laws. / A man marries and 
 is divorced, educates his children, and even (in many 
 countries) professes his religious faith in accordance with 
 the law. What about the law then which defines our whole 
 existence? Do men believe in it? Do they regard it as 
 good ? Not at all. In the majority of cases people of the 
 present time do not believe in the justice of the law, they 
 despise it, but still they obey it. It was very well for the 
 men of the ancient world to observe their laws. They 
 firmly believed that their law (it was generally of a religious 
 character) was the only just law, which everyone ought to 
 obey. But is it so with us ? we know and cannot help 
 knowing that the law of our country is not the one eternal 
 law ; that it is only one of the many laws of different 
 countries, which are equally imperfectjjoften obviously 
 wrong and unjust, and are criticised from every point of 
 view in the newspapers. The Jew might well obey his 
 laws, since he had not the slightest doubt that God had 
 written them with his finger ; the Roman too might well 
 obey the laws which he thought had been dictated by the 
 nymph Egeria. Men might well observe the laws if they 
 believed the Tzars who made them were God’s anointed, 
 or even if they thought they were the work of assemblies of 
 lawgivers who had the power and the desire to make them 
 as good as possible. But we all know how our laws are 
 made. We have all been behind the scenes, we know that 
 they are the product of covetousness, trickery, and party 
 struggles ; that there is not and cannot be any real justice 
 
122 
 
 THE KINGDOM OF COD 
 
 in them. And so modern men cannot believe that obedi- 
 ence to civic or political laws can satisfy the demands of 
 the reason or of human nature. Men have long ago recog- 
 nized that it is irrational to obey a law the justice of which 
 is very doubtful, and so they cannot but suffer in obeying 
 a law which they do not accept as judicious and binding. 
 
 A man cannot but suffer when his whole life is defined 
 beforehand for him by laws, which he must obey under 
 threat of punishment, though he does not believe in their 
 wisdom or justice, and often clearly perceives their injustice, 
 cruelty, and artificiality. 
 
 We recognize the uselessness of customs and import 
 duties, and are obliged to pay them. We recognize the 
 uselessness of the expenditure on the mainte-nance of the 
 Court and other members of Government, and we regard 
 the teaching of the Church as injurious, but we are obliged 
 to bear our share of the expenses of these institutions. 
 We regard the punishments inflicted by law as cruel and 
 shameless, but we must assist in supporting them. We 
 regard as unjust and pernicious the distribution of landed 
 property, but we are obliged to submit to it. We see no 
 necessity for wars and armies, but we must bear terribly 
 Jieavy burdens in support of troops and war expenses. 
 
 But this contradiction is nothing in comparison with the 
 contradiction which confronts us when we turn to interna- 
 tional questions, and which demands a solution tinder pain 
 of the loss of the sanity and even the existence of the 
 human race. That is the contradiction between the Chris- 
 tian conscience and war. 
 
 We are all Christian nations living the same spiritual 
 life, so that every noble and pregnant thought, springing up 
 at one end of the world, is at once communicated to the 
 whole of Christian humanity and evokes everywhere the 
 same emotion of pride and rejoicing without distinction of 
 nationalities. We who love thinkers, philanthropists, poets. 
 
75 WITHIN YOU. 
 
 123 
 
 and scientific men of foreign origin, and are as proud of 
 the exploits of Father Damien as if he were one of our- 
 selves, we, who have a simple love for men of foreign 
 nationalities, Frenchmen, Germans, Americans, and Eng- 
 lishmen, who respect their qualities, are glad to meet 
 them and make them so warmly welcome, cannot regard 
 war with them as anything heroic. We cannot even 
 imagine without horror the possibility of a disagreement 
 between these people and ourselves which would call for 
 reciprocal murder. Yet we are all bound to take a hand in 
 this slaughter which is bound to come to pass to morrow — 
 if not to-day. 
 
 It was very well for the Jew, the Greek, and the Roman 
 to defend the independence of his nation by murder. For 
 he piously believed that his people was the only true, fine, 
 and good people dear to God, and all the rest were Philis- 
 tines, barbarians. Men of mediceval times — even up to the 
 end of the last and beginning of this century — might con- 
 tinue to hold this belief. But however much we work upon 
 ourselves we cannot believe it. And this contradiction for 
 men of the present day has become so full of horror that 
 without its solution life is no longer possible. 
 
 “We live in a time which is full of inconsistencies,” 
 writes Count Komarovsky, the professor of international 
 law, in his learned treatise. “The press of all countries is 
 continually expressing the universal desire for peace, and 
 the general sense of its necessity for all nations. 
 
 “ Representatives of governments, private persons, and 
 official organs say the same thing; it is repeated in parlia- 
 mentary debates, diplomatic correspondence, and even in 
 state treaties. At the same time governments are increas- 
 ing the strength of their armies every year, levying fresh 
 taxes, raising loans, and leaving as a bequest to future 
 generations the duty of repairing the blunders of the 
 senseless policy of the present. What a striking contrast 
 
124 
 
 “ THE KINGDOM OF GOD 
 
 between words and deeds ! Of course governments will 
 plead in justification of these measures that all their ex- 
 penditure and armament are exclusively for purposes of 
 defense. But it remains a mystery to every disinterested 
 man whence they can expect attacks if all the great powers 
 are single-hearted in their policy, in pursuing nothing 
 but self-defense. In reality it looks as if each of the great 
 powers were every instant anticipating an attack on the 
 part of the others. And this results in a general feeling of 
 insecurity and superhuman efforts on the part of each 
 government to increase their forces beyond those of the 
 other powers. Such a competition of itself increases the 
 danger of war. Nations cannot endure the constant in- 
 crease of armies for long, and sooner or later they will 
 prefer war to all the disadvantages of their present posi- 
 tion and the constant menace of war. Then the most 
 trifling pretext will be sufficient to throw the whole of 
 Europe into the fire of universal war. And it is a mis- 
 taken idea that such a crisis might deliver us from the 
 political and economical troubles that are crushing us. 
 The experience of the wars of latter years teaches us that 
 every war has only intensified national hatreds, made mili- 
 tary burdens more crushing and insupportable, and ren- 
 dered the political and economical position of Europe more 
 grievous and insoluble.” 
 
 “Modern Europe keeps under arms an active army of 
 nine millions of men,” writes Enrico Ferri, “besides fifteen 
 millions of reserve, with an outlay of four hundred millions 
 of francs per annum. By continual increase of the armed 
 force, the sources of social and individual prosperity are 
 paralyzed, and the state of the modern world may be com- 
 pared to that of a man who condemns himself to wasting 
 from lack of nutrition in order to provide himself with 
 arms, losing thereby the strength to use the arms he pro- 
 vides, under the weight of which he will at last succumb.” 
 
IS WITHIN YOU: 
 
 125 
 
 Charles Booth, in his paper read in London before the 
 Association for the Reform and Codification of the Law 
 of Nations, June 26, 1887, says the same thing. After 
 referring to the same number, nine millions of the active 
 army and fifteen millions of reserve, and the enormous 
 expenditure of governments on the support and arming of 
 these forces, he says ; “ These figures represent only a 
 small part of the real cost, because besides the recognized 
 expenditure of the war budget of the various nations, we 
 ought also to take into account the enormous loss to society 
 involved in withdrawing from it such an immense number 
 of its most vigorous men, who are taken from industrial 
 pursuits and every kind of labor, as well as the enormous 
 interest on the sums expended on military preparations 
 without any return. The inevitable result of this ex- 
 penditure on war and preparations for war is a contin- 
 ually growing national debt. The greater number of 
 loans raised by the governments of Europe were with 
 a view to war. Their total sum amounts to four hundred 
 millions sterling, and these debts are increasing every 
 year.” 
 
 The same Professor Komarovsky says in another place : 
 “ We live in troubled times. Everywhere we hear com- 
 plaints of the depression of trade and manufactures, and 
 the wretchedness of the economic position generally, the 
 miserable conditions of existence of the working classes, 
 and the universal impoverishment of the masses. But in 
 spite of this, governments in their efforts to maintain their 
 independence rush to the greatest extremes of senseless- 
 ness. New taxes and duties are being devised everywhere, 
 and the financial oppression of the nations knows no limits. 
 If we glance at the budgets of the states of Europe for the 
 last hundred years, what strikes us most of all is their rapid 
 and continually growing increase. 
 
 “ How can we explain this extraordinary phenomenon. 
 
126 
 
 THE KINGDOM OF COD 
 
 which sooner or later threatens us all with inevitable bank, 
 ruptcy ? 
 
 “ It is caused beyond dispute by the expenditure for the 
 maintenance of armaments which swallows up a third and 
 even a half of all the expenditure of European states. 
 And the most melancholy thing is that one can foresee no 
 limit to this augmentation of the budget and impoverish- 
 ment of the masses. What is socialism but a protest against 
 this abnormal position in which the greater proportion of 
 the population of our world is placed?” 
 
 ” We are ruining ourselves,” says Frederick Passy in a 
 letter read before the last Congress of Universal Peace (in 
 1890) in London, “ we are ruining ourselves in order to be 
 able to take part in the senseless wars of the future or to 
 pay the interest on debts we have incurred by the sense- 
 less and criminal wars of the past. We are dying of 
 hunger so as to secure the means of killing each other.” 
 
 Speaking later on of the way the subject is looked at in 
 France, he says ; “ We believe that, a hundred years after the 
 Declaration of the Rights of Man and of the citizen, the 
 time has come to recognize the rights of nations and to 
 renounce at once and forever all those undertakings based 
 on fraud and force, which, under the name of conquests, 
 are veritable crimes against humanity, and which, whatever 
 the vanity of monarchs and the pride of nations may think 
 of them, only weaken even those who are triumphant over 
 them.” 
 
 “ I am surprised at the way religion is carried on in this 
 country,” said Sir Wilfrid Lawson at the same congress. 
 “You send a boy to Sunday school, and you tell him: 
 ‘ Dear boy, you must love your enemies. If another boy 
 strikes you, you mustn’t hit him back, but try to reform 
 him by loving him.’ Well. The boy stays in the Sunday 
 school till he is fourteen or fifteen, and then his friends 
 send him into the army. W hat has he to do in the army ? 
 
IS WITHIN you: 
 
 127 
 
 He certainly won’t love his enemy ; quite the contrary, if he 
 can only get at him, he will run him through with his bay- 
 onet. That is the nature of all religious teaching in this 
 country. I do not think that that is a very good way of 
 carrying out the precepts of religion. I think if it is a 
 good thing for a boy to love his enemy, it is good for a 
 grown-up man.” 
 
 “ There are in Europe twenty-eight millions of men 
 under arms,” says Wilson, “to decide disputes, not by 
 discussion, but by murdering one another. That is the 
 accepted method for deciding disputes among Christian 
 nations. This method is, at the same time, very expensive, 
 for, according to the statistics I have read, the nations of 
 Europe spent in the year 1872 a hundred and fifty millions 
 sterling on preparations for deciding disputes by means of 
 murder. It seems to me, therefore, that in such a state of 
 things one of two alternatives must be admitted : either 
 Cliristianity is a failure, or those who have undertaken to 
 expound it have failed in doing so. Until our warriors are 
 disarmed and our armies disbanded, we have not the right 
 to call ourselves a Christian nation.” 
 
 In a conference on the subject of the duty of Christian 
 ministers to preach against war, G. D. Bartlett said among 
 other things : “If I understand the Scriptures, I say that 
 men are only playing with Christianity so long as they 
 ignore the question of war. I have lived a longish life 
 and have heard our ministers preach on universal peace 
 hardly half a dozen times. Twenty years ago, in a drawing 
 room, I dared in the presence of forty persons to moot the 
 proposition that war was incompatible with Christianity ; I 
 was regarded as an arrant fanatic. The idea that we could 
 get on without war was regarded as unmitigated weakness 
 and folly.” 
 
 The Catholic priest Defourney has expressed himself in 
 the same spirit. “ One of the first precepts of the eternal 
 
128 
 
 ‘ THE KINGDOM OF GOD 
 
 law inscribed in the consciences of all men,” says the Abb6 
 Defourney, ” is the prohibition of taking the life or shed- 
 ding the blood of a fellow-creature without sufficient 
 cause, without being forced into the necessity of it. This 
 is one of the commandments which is most deeply stamped 
 in the heart of man. But so soon as it is a question of 
 war, that is, of shedding blood in torrents, men of the 
 present day do not trouble themselves about a sufficient 
 cause. Those who take part in wars do not even think of 
 asking themselves whether there is any justification for 
 these innumerable murders, whether they are justifiable or 
 unjustifiable, lawful or unlawful, innocent or criminal ; 
 whether they are breaking that fundamental commandment 
 that forbids killing without lawful cause. But their con- 
 science is mute. War has ceased to be something depend- 
 ent on moral considerations. In warfare men have in all 
 the toil and dangers they endure no other pleasure than 
 that of being conquerors, no sorrow other than that of 
 being conquered. Don’t tell me that they are serving 
 their country. A great genius answered that long ago in 
 the words that have become a proverb: ‘ Without justice, 
 what is an empire but a great band of brigands?’ And is 
 not every band of brigands a little empire ? They too 
 have their laws ; and they too make war to gain booty, and 
 even for honor. 
 
 “ The aim of the proposed institution [the institution of 
 an international board of arbitration] is that the nations 
 of Europe may cease to be nations of robbers, and their 
 armies, bands of brigands. And one must add, not only 
 brigands, but slaves. For our armies are simply gangs of 
 slaves at the disposal of one or two commanders or min- 
 isters, who exercise a despotic control over them without 
 any real responsibility, as we very well know. 
 
 “ The peculiarity of a slave is that he is a mere tool in 
 the hands of his master, a thing, not a m.an. That is just 
 
75 WITHIN YOU. 
 
 129 
 
 what soldiers, officers, and generals are, going to murder 
 and be murdered at the will of a ruler or rulers. Military 
 slavery is an actual fact, and it is the worst form of slaver)’-, 
 especially now when by means of compulsory service it lays 
 its fetters on the necks of all the strong and capable men 
 of a nation, to make them instruments of murder, butchers 
 of human flesh, for that is all they are taken and trained 
 to do. 
 
 “ The rulers, two or three in number, meet together in 
 cabinets, secretly deliberate without registers, without pub- 
 licity, and consequently without responsibility, and send 
 men to be murdered.” 
 
 “ Protests against armaments, burdensome to the people, 
 have not originated in our times,” says Signor E. G. Moneta. 
 “ Hear what Montesquieu wrote in his day. ‘ France [and 
 one might say, Europe] will be ruined by soldiers. A new 
 plague is spreading throughout Europe. It attacks sov- 
 ereigns and forces them to maintain an incredible number 
 of armed men. This plague is infectious and spreads, 
 because directly one government increases its armament, all 
 the others do likewise. So that nothing is gained by it but 
 general ruin. 
 
 “ ‘ Every government maintains as great an army as it 
 possibly could maintain if its people were threatened with 
 extermination, and people call peace this state of tension 
 of all against all. And therefore Europe is so ruined that 
 if private persons were in the position of the governments 
 of our continent, the richest of them would not have 
 enough to live on. We are poor though we have the wealth 
 and trade of the whole world.’ 
 
 “That was written almost 150 years ago. The picture 
 seems drawn from the world of to-day. One thing only 
 has changed — the form of government. In Montesquieu’s 
 time it was said that the cause of the maintenance of 
 great armaments was the despotic power of kings, who 
 
130 
 
 “ THE KINGDOM OF GOD 
 
 made war in the hope of augmenting by conquest their 
 personal revenues and gaining glory. People used to say 
 then: ‘Ah, if only people could elect those who would 
 have the right to refuse governments the soldiers and the 
 money — then there would be an end to military politics.’ 
 Now there are representative governments in almost the 
 whole of Europe, and in spite of that, war expenditures 
 and the preparations for war have increased to alarming 
 proportions. 
 
 “ It is evident that the insanity of sovereigns has gained 
 possession of the ruling classes. War is not made now be- 
 cause one king has been wanting in civility to the mistress 
 of another king, as it was in Louis XIV. ’s time. But the 
 natural and honorable sentiments of national honor and 
 patriotism are so exaggerated, and the public opinion of 
 one nation so excited against another, that it is enough for 
 a statement to be made (even though it may be a false 
 report) that the ambassador of one state was not received 
 by the principal personage of another state to cause the 
 outbreak of the most awful and destructive war there has 
 ever been seen. Europe keeps more soldiers under arms 
 to-day than in the time of the great Napoleonic wars. All 
 citizens with few exceptions are forced to spend some years 
 in barracks. Fortresses, arsenals, and ships are built, new 
 weapons are constantly being invented, to be replaced in a 
 short time by fresh ones, for, sad to say, science, which 
 ought always to be aiming at the good of humanity, assists 
 in the work of destruction, and is constantly inventing new 
 means for killing the greatest number of men in the shortest 
 time. And to maintain so great a multitude of soldiers and 
 to make such vast preparations for murder, hundreds of 
 millions are spent annually, sums which would be sufficient 
 for the education of the people and for immense works of 
 public utility, and which would make it possible to find a 
 peaceful solution of the social question. 
 
IS WITHIN YOU. 
 
 131 
 
 “ Europe, then, is, in this respect, in spite of all the con- 
 quests of science, in the same position as in the darkest 
 and most barbarous days of the Middle Ages. All deplore 
 this state of things — neither peace nor war — and all would 
 be glad to escape from it. The heads of governments all 
 declare that thej'^ all wish for peace, and vie with one 
 anotlier in the most solemn protestations of peaceful inten- 
 tions. But the same day or the ne.\t they will lay a scheme 
 for the increase of the armament before their legislative 
 assembly, saying that these are the preventive measures 
 they take for the very purpose of securing peace. 
 
 “ But this is not the kind of peace we want. And the 
 nations are not deceived by it. True peace is based on 
 mutual confidence, while these huge armaments show open 
 and utter lack of confidence, if not concealed hostility, 
 between states. What should we say of a man who, want- 
 ing to show his friendly feelings for his neighbor, should 
 invite him to discuss their differences with a loaded revolver 
 in his hand ? 
 
 “ It is just this flagrant contradiction between the peace- 
 ful professions and the warlike policy of governments 
 which all good citizens desire to put an end to, at any 
 cost.” 
 
 People are astonished that every year there are sixty 
 thousand cases of suicide in Europe, and those only the 
 recognized and recorded cases — and excluding Russia and 
 Turkey ; but one ought rather to be surprised that there 
 are so few. Every man of the present day, if w^e go deep 
 enough into the contradiction between his conscience and 
 his life, is in a state of despair. 
 
 Not to speak of all the other contradictions between 
 modern life and the conscience, the permanently armed 
 condition of Europe together with its profession of Chris- 
 tianity is alone enough to drive any man to despair, to doubt 
 of the sanity of mankind, and to terminate an existence in 
 
132 
 
 ” THE KINGDOM OF GOD 
 
 this senseless and brutal world. This contradiction, which 
 is a quintessence of all the other contradictions, is so ter- 
 rible that to live and to take part in it is only possible if 
 one does not think of it — if one is able to forget it. 
 
 What ! all of us, Christians, not only profess to love one 
 another, but do actually live one common life ; we whose 
 social existence beats with one common pulse — we aid one 
 another, learn from one another, draw ever closer to one 
 another to our mutual happiness, and find in this closeness 
 the whole meaning of life ! — and to-morrow some crazy 
 ruler will say some stupidity, and another will answer in 
 the same spirit, and then I must go expose myself to being 
 murdered, and murder men — who have done me no harm — 
 and more than that, whom I love. And this is not a remote 
 contingency, but the veiy thing we are all preparing for, 
 which is not only probable, but an inevitable certainty. 
 
 To recognize this clearly is enough to drive a man out 
 of his senses or to make him shoot himself. And this is 
 just what does happen, and especially often among military 
 men. A man need only come to himself for an instant to 
 be impelled inevitably to such an end. 
 
 And this is the only explanation of the dreadful inten- 
 sity with which men of modern times strive to stupefy 
 themselves, with spirits, tobacco, opium, cards, reading 
 newspapers, traveling, and all kinds of spectacles and 
 amusements. These pursuits are followed up as an impor- 
 tant, serious business. And indeed they are a serious 
 business. If there were no external means of dulling their 
 sensibilities, half of mankind would shoot themselves with- 
 out delay, for to live in opposition to one’s reason is the 
 most intolerable condition. And that is the condition of 
 all men of the present day. All men of the modern world 
 exist in a state of continual and flagrant antagonism 
 between their conscience and their way of life. This 
 antagonism is apparent in economic as well as polit- 
 
IS WITHm YOU. 
 
 133 
 
 ical life. But most striking of all is the contradiction 
 between the Christian law of the brotherhood of men 
 existing in the conscience and the necessity under which 
 all men are placed by compulsory military service of being 
 prepared for hatred and murder — of being at the same 
 time a Christian and a gladiator. 
 
 CHAPTER VI. 
 
 ATTITUDE OF MEN OF THE PRESENT DAY TO WAR. 
 
 People do not Try to Remove the Contradiction between Life and Con- 
 science by a Change of Life, but their Cultivated Leaders Exert Every 
 Effort to Obscure the Demands of Conscience, and Justify their Life ; 
 in this Way they Degrade Society below Paganism to a State of Prime- 
 val Barbarism — Undefined Attitude of Modern Leaders of Thought to 
 War, to Universal Militarism, and to Compulsory Service in Army — 
 One Section Regards War as an Accidental Political Phenomenon, to 
 be Avoided by External Measures only — Peace Congress — The Article 
 in the Revue des Revues — Proposition of Maxime du Camp — 
 Value of Boards of Arbitration and Suppression of Armies — Attitude 
 of Governments to Men of this Opinion and What they Do — Another 
 Section Regards War as Cruel, but Inevitable — Maupassant — Rod — A 
 Third Section Regard War as Necessary, and not without its Advantages 
 — Doucet — Claretie — Zola — V ogUe. 
 
 The antagonism between life and the conscience may 
 be removed in two ways; by a change of life or by a change 
 of conscience. And there would seem there can be no 
 doubt as to these alternatives. 
 
 A man may cease to do what he regards as wrong, but he 
 cannot cease to consider wrong what is wrong. Just in the 
 same way all humanity may cease to do what it regards as 
 wrong, but far from being able to change, it cannot even 
 retard for a time the continual growth of a clearer recogni- 
 tion of what is wrong and therefore ought not to be. And 
 
134 
 
 “ THE KINGDOM OF GOD 
 
 therefore it would seem inevitable for Christian men to 
 abandon the pagan forms of society which they condemn, 
 and to reconstruct their social existence on the Christian 
 principles they profess. 
 
 So it would be were it not for the law of inertia, as immu- 
 table a force in men and nations as in inanimate bodies. 
 In men it takes the form of the psychological principle, so 
 truly expressed in the words of the Gospel, “They have 
 loved darkness better than light because their deeds were 
 evil.” This principle shows itself in men not trying to 
 recognize the truth, but to persuade themselves that the life 
 they are leading, which is what they like and are used to, 
 is a life perfectly consistent with truth. 
 
 Slavery was opposed to all the moral principles advocated 
 by Plato and Aristotle, yet neither of them saw that, 
 because to renounce slavery would have meant the break 
 up of the life they were living. We see the same thing in 
 our modern world. 
 
 The division of men into two castes, as well as the use of 
 force in government and war, are opposed to every moral 
 principle professed by our modern society. Yet the culti- 
 vated and advanced men of the day seem not to see it. 
 
 The majority, if not all, of the cultivated men of our day 
 try unconsciously to maintain the old social conception of 
 life, which justifies their position, and to hide from them- 
 selves and others its insufficiency, and above all the necessity 
 of adopting the Christian conception of life, which will mean 
 the break up of the whole existing social order. They 
 struggle to keep up the organization based on the social 
 conception of life, but do not believe in it themselves, 
 because it is extinct and it is impossible to believe in it. 
 
 All modern literature — philosophical, political, and artis- 
 tic — is striking in this respect. What wealth of idea, of 
 form, of color, what erudition, what art, but what a lack of 
 serious matter, what dread of any exactitude of thought or 
 
/S WITHIN YOU." 
 
 135 
 
 expression ! Subtleties, allegories, humorous fancies, the 
 widest generalizations, but nothing simple and clear, noth- 
 ing going straight to the point, that is, to the problem of life. 
 
 But that is not all; besides these graceful frivolities, our 
 literature is full of simple nastiness and brutality, of argu- 
 ments which would lead men back in the most refined way 
 to primeval barbarism, to the principles not only of the 
 pagan, but even of the animal life, which we have left be- 
 hind us five thousand years ago. 
 
 And it could not be otherwise. In their dread of the 
 Christian conception of life which will destroy the social 
 order, which some cling to only from habit, others also from 
 interest, men cannot but be thrown back upon the pagan 
 conception of life and the principles based on it. Nowa- 
 days we see advocated not only patriotism and aristocratic 
 principles just as they were advocated two thousand years 
 ago, but even the coarsest epicureanism and animalism, only 
 with this difference, that the men who then professed those 
 views believed in them, while nowadays even the advocates 
 of such views do not believe in them, for they have no mean- 
 ing for the present day. No one can stand still when the 
 earth is shaking under his feet. If we do not go forward 
 we must go back. And strange and terrible to say, the 
 cultivated men of our day, the leaders of thought, are in 
 reality with their subtle reasoning drawing society back, not 
 to paganism even, but to a state of primitive barbarism. 
 
 This tendency on the part of the leading thinkers of the 
 day is nowhere more apparent than in their attitude to the 
 phenomenon in which all the insufficiency of the social con- 
 ception of life is presented in the most concentrated form — 
 in their attitude, that is, to war, to the general arming of 
 nations, and to universal compulsory service. 
 
 The undefined, if not disingenuous, attitude of modern 
 thinkers to this phenomenon is striking. It takes three 
 forms in cultivated society. One section look at it as an 
 
“ THE KINGDOM OF GOD 
 
 136 
 
 incidental phenomenon, arising out of the special political 
 situation of Europe, and consider that this state of things 
 can be reformed without a revolution in the whole internal 
 social order of nations, by external measures of international 
 diplomacy. Another section regard it as something cruel 
 and hideous, but at the same time fated and inevitable, like 
 disease and death. A third party with cool indifference 
 consider war as an inevitable phenomenon, beneficial in its 
 effects and therefore desirable. 
 
 Men look at the subject from different points of view, but 
 all alike talk of war as though it w’ere something absolutely 
 independent of the will of those who take part in it. And 
 consequently they do not even admit the natural question 
 which presents itself to every simple man: “How about 
 me — ought I to take any part in it?’’ In their view no 
 question of this kind even exists, and every man, however 
 he may regard war from a personal standpoint, must slavishly 
 submit to the requirements of the authorities on the subject. 
 
 The attitude of the first section of thinkers, those who see 
 a way out of war in international diplomatic measures, is well 
 expressed in the report of the last Peace Congress in Lon- 
 don, and the articles and letters upon war that appeared in 
 No. 8 of the Revue des Revues, 1891. The congress after 
 gathering together from various quarters the verbal and 
 written opinion of learned men opened the proceedings by 
 a religious service, and after listening to addresses for five 
 whole days, concluded them by a public dinner and 
 speeches. They adopted the following resolutions: 
 
 “1. The congress affirms its belief that the brotherhood 
 of man involves as a necessary consequence a brotherhood 
 of nations. 
 
 “2. The congress recognizes the important influence that 
 Christianity exercises on the moral and political progress of 
 mankind, and earnestly urges upon ministers of the Gospel 
 and other religious teachers the duty of setting forth the 
 
75 WITHIN YOU. 
 
 137 
 
 principles of peace and good will toward men. And it 
 recommends that the third Sunday in December be set apart for 
 that piirpose. 
 
 *‘3. The congress expresses the opinion that all teachers 
 of history should call the attention of the young to the grave 
 evils inflicted on mankind in all ages by war, and to the fact 
 that such war has been waged for most inadequate causes. 
 
 “4. The congress protests against the use of military 
 drill in schools by way of physical exercise, and suggests 
 the formation of brigades for saving life rather than of a 
 quasi-military character; and urges the desirability of 
 impressing on the Board of Examiners who formulate the 
 questions for examination the propriety of guiding the 
 minds of children in the principles of peace. 
 
 “5. The congress holds that the doctrine of the Rights 
 of Man requires that the aboriginal and weaker races, their 
 territories and liberties, shall be guarded from injustice and 
 fraud, and that these races shall be shielded against the 
 vices so prevalent among the so-called advanced races of 
 men. It further expresses its conviction that there should 
 be concert of action among the nations for the accomplish- 
 ment of these ends. The congress expresses its hearty 
 appreciation of the resolutions of the Anti-slavery Confer- 
 ence held recently at Brussels for the amelioration of the 
 condition of the peoples of Africa. 
 
 “6. The congress believes that the warlike prejudices 
 and traditions which are still fostered in the various nation- 
 alities, and the misrepresentations by leaders of public 
 opinion in legislative assemblies or through the press, are 
 often indirect causes of war, and that these evils should be 
 counteracted by the publication of accurate information 
 tending to the removal of misunderstanding between nations, 
 and recommends the importance of considering the question 
 of commencing an international newspaper with such a 
 purpose. 
 
138 “ THE KINGDOM OF GOD 
 
 “7. The congress proposes to the Inter-parliamentary 
 Conference that the utmost support should be given to every 
 project for unification of weights and measures, coinage, 
 tariff, postage, and telegraphic arrangements, etc., which 
 would assist in constituting a commercial, industrial, and 
 scientific union of the peoples. 
 
 “8. The congress, in view of the vast social and moral 
 influence of woman, urges upon every woman to sustain the 
 things that make for peace, as otherwise she incurs grave 
 responsibility for the continuance of the systems of mili- 
 tarism, 
 
 “9 The congress expresses the hope that the Financial 
 Reform Association and other similar societies in Europe 
 and America should unite in considering means for estab- 
 lishing equitable commercial relations between states, by 
 the reduction of import duties. The congress feels that it 
 can affirm that the whole of Europe desires peace, and 
 awaits with impatience the suppression of armaments, which, 
 under the plea of defense, become in their turn a danger by 
 keeping alive mutual distrust, and are, at the same time, 
 the cause of that general economic disturbance which 
 stands in the way of settling in a satisfactory manner the 
 problems of labor and poverty, which ought to take prece- 
 dence of all others. 
 
 “10. The congress, recognizing that a general disarma- 
 ment would be the best guarantee of peace and would lead 
 to the solution of the questions which now most divide 
 states, expresses the wish that a congress of representatives 
 of all the states of Europe may be assembled as soon as 
 possible to consider the means of effecting a gradual general 
 disarmament. 
 
 “ii. The congress, in consideration of the fact that the 
 timidity of a single power might delay the convocation of 
 the above-mentioned congress, is of opinion that the govern- 
 ment which should first dismiss any considerable number of 
 
75 WITHIN YOU." 
 
 139 
 
 soldiers would confer a signal benefit on Europe and man- 
 kind, because it would, by public opinion, oblige other 
 governments to follow its example, and by the moral force 
 of this accomplished fact would have increased rather than 
 diminished the conditions of its national defense. 
 
 “12. The congress, considering the question of disarma- 
 ment, as of peace in general, depends on public opinion, 
 recommends the peace societies, as well as all friends of 
 peace,' to be active in its propaganda, especially at the time 
 of parliamentary elections, in order that the electors should 
 give their votes to candidates who are pledged to support 
 Peace, Disarmament, and Arbitration. 
 
 “13. The congress congratulates the friends of peace on 
 the resolution adopted by the International American Con- 
 ference, held at Washington in April last, by which it was 
 recommended that arbitration should be obligatory in all 
 controversies, whatever their origin, except only those which 
 may imperil the independence of one of the nations involved. 
 
 “14. The congress recommends this resolution to the 
 attention of European statesmen, and expresses the ardent 
 desire that similar treaties may speedily be entered into be- 
 tween the other nations of the world. 
 
 “15. The congress expresses its satisfaction at the adop- 
 tion by the Spanish Senate on June 16 last of a project of 
 law authorizing the government to negotiate general or 
 special treaties of arbitration for the settlement of all dis- 
 putes except those relating to the independence or internal 
 government of the states affected; also at the adoption of 
 resolutions to a like effect by the Norwegian Storthing and 
 by the Italian Chamber. 
 
 “16. The congress resolves that a committee be ap- 
 pointed to address communications to the principal political, 
 religious, commercial, and labor and peace organizations, 
 requesting them to send petitons to the governmental 
 authorities praying that measures be taken for the formation 
 
14 ° *• THE KINGDOM OF GOD 
 
 of suitable tribunals for the adjudicature of international 
 questions so as to avoid the resort to war. 
 
 “17. Seeing (i) that the object pursued by all peace 
 societies is the establishment of judicial order between 
 nations, and (2) that neutralization by international treaties 
 constitutes a step toward this judicial state and lessens the 
 number of districts in which war can be carried on, the 
 congress recommends a larger extension of the rule of 
 neutralization, and expresses the wish, (i) that all treaties 
 which at present assure to certain states the benefit of 
 neutrality remain in force, or if necessary be amended in a 
 manner to render the neutrality more effective, either by 
 extending neutralization to the whole of the state or by 
 ordering the demolition of fortresses, which constitute 
 rather a peril than a guarantee for neutrality; (2) that new 
 treaties in harmony with the wishes of the populations con- 
 cerned be concluded for establishing the neutralization of 
 other states. 
 
 “18. The sub-committee proposes, (i) that the annual 
 Peace Congress should be held either immediately before 
 the meeting of the annual Sub-parliamentary Conference, or 
 immediately after it in the same town ; (2) that the question 
 of an international peace emblem be postponed sine die ; 
 (3) that the following resolutions be adopted: 
 
 “<7. To express satisfaction at the official overtures of the 
 Presbyterian Church in the United States addressed to the 
 highest representatives of each church organization in 
 Christendom to unite in a general conference to promote the 
 substitution of international arbitration for war. 
 
 "b. To express in the name of the congress its profound 
 reverence for the memory of Aurelio Saffi, the great Italian 
 jurist, a member of the committee of the International 
 League of Peace and Liberty. 
 
 “(4) That the memorial adopted by this congress and 
 signed by the president to the heads of the civilized states 
 
IS WITHIN YOU. 
 
 t4t 
 
 should, as far as practicable, be presented to each power by 
 influential deputations. 
 
 “(5) That the following resolutions be adopted; 
 
 "a. A resolution of thanks to the presidents of the various 
 sittings of the congress. 
 
 "b. A resolution of thanks to the chairman, the secre- 
 taries, and the members of the bureau of the congress. 
 
 "c. A resolution of thanks to the conveners and members 
 of the sectional committees. 
 
 "d. A resolution of thanks to Rev. Canon Scott Holland, 
 Rev. Dr. Reuen Thomas, and Rev. J. Morgan Gibbon for 
 their pulpit addresses before the congress, and also to the 
 authorities of St. Paul’s Cathedral, the City Temple, and 
 Stamford Hill Congregational Church for the use of those 
 buildings for public services. 
 
 "e. A letter of thanks to her Majesty for permission to 
 visit Windror Castle. 
 
 “/. And also a resolution of thanks to the Lord Mayor 
 and Lady Mayoress, to Mr. Passmore Edwards, and other 
 friends who have extended their hospitality to the members 
 of the congress. 
 
 “19. The congress places on record a heartfelt expres- 
 sion of gratitude to Almighty God for the remarkable har- 
 mony and concord which have characterized the meetings of 
 the assembly, in which so many men and women of varied 
 nations, creeds, tongues, and races have gathered in closest 
 co-operation, and for the conclusion of the labors of the 
 congress; and expresses its firm and unshaken belief in the 
 ultimate triumph of the cause of peace and of the principles 
 advocated at these meetings.” 
 
 The fundamental idea of the congress is the necessity (i) 
 of diffusing among all people by all means the conviction of 
 the disadvantages of war and the great blessing of peace, 
 and (2) of rousing governments to the sense of the superi- 
 ority of international arbitration over war and of the conse- 
 
142 
 
 “ THE KINGDOM OF GOD 
 
 quent advisability and necessity of disarmament. To attain 
 the first aim the congress has recourse to teachers of his- 
 tory, to women, and to the clergy, with the advice to the 
 latter to preach on the evil of war and the blessing of peace 
 every third Sunday in December. To attain the second 
 object the congress appeals to governments with the sug- 
 gestion that they should disband their armies and replace 
 war by arbitration. 
 
 To preach to men of the evil of war and the blessing of 
 peace! But the blessing of peace is so well known to men 
 that, ever since there have been men at all, their best wish 
 has been expressed in the greeting, “Peace be with you.’’ 
 So Avhy preach about it? 
 
 Not only Christians, but pagans, thousands of years ago, 
 all recognized the evil of war and the blessing of peace. So 
 that the recommendation to ministers of the Gospel to 
 preach on the evil of war and the blessing of peace every 
 third Sunday in December is quite superfluous. 
 
 The Christian cannot but preach on that subject every 
 day of his life. If Christians and preachers of Christianity 
 do not do so, there must be reasons for it. And until these 
 have been removed no recommendations will be effective. 
 Still less effective will be the recommendations to govern- 
 ments to disband their armies and replace them by inter- 
 national boards of arbitration. Governments, too, know 
 very well the difficulty and the burdensomeness of raising 
 and maintaining forces, and if in spite of that knowledge 
 they do, at the cost of terrible strain and effort, raise and 
 maintain forces, it is evident that they cannot do otherwise, 
 and the recommendation of the congress can never change 
 it. But the learned gentlemen are uiiAvilling to see that, 
 and keep hoping to find a political combination, through 
 which governments shall be induced to limit their powers 
 themselves. 
 
 “Can we get rid of Avar’’? asks a learned Avriter in the 
 
IS WITHIN YOU." 
 
 143 
 
 Revue des Revues. ‘ ‘All are agreed that if it were to break 
 out in Europe, its consequences would be like those of 
 the great inroads of barbarians. The existence of whole 
 nationalities would be at stake, and therefore the war 
 would be desperate, bloody, atrocious. 
 
 “This consideration, together with the terrible engines of 
 destruction invented by modern science, retards the moment 
 of declaring war, and maintains the present temporary situa- 
 tion, which might continue for an indefinite period, except 
 for the fearful cost of maintaining armaments which are 
 exhausting the European states and threatening to reduce 
 nations to a state of misery hardly less than that of war 
 itself. 
 
 “Struck by this reflection, men of various countries have 
 tried to find means for preventing, or at least for softening, 
 the results of the terrible slaughter with which we are 
 threatened. 
 
 “Such are the questions brought forward by the Peace 
 Congress shortly to be held in Rome, and the publication 
 of a pamphlet, ‘Sur le Ddsarmement.’ 
 
 “It is unhappily beyond doubt that with the present 
 organization of the majority of European states, isolated 
 from one another and guided by distinct interests, the abso- 
 lute suppression of war is an illusion with which it would 
 be dangerous to cheat ourselves. Wiser rules and regula- 
 tions imposed on these duels between nations might, how- 
 ever, at least limit its horrors. 
 
 ‘ ‘It is equally chimerical to reckon on projects of disarma- 
 ment, the execution of which is rendered almost impossible 
 by considerations of a popular character present to the mind 
 of all our readers. [This probably means that France can- 
 not disband its arm)^ before taking its revenge.] Public 
 opinion is not prepared to accept them, and moreover, the 
 international relations between different peoples are not 
 such as to make their acceptance possible. Disarmament 
 
144 
 
 “ THE KINGDOM OF GOD 
 
 imposed on one nation by another in circumstances threaten- 
 ing its security would be equivalent to a declaration of war. 
 
 “However, one may admit that an exchange of ideas be- 
 tween the nations interested could aid, to a certain degree, 
 in bringing about the good understanding indispensable to 
 any negotiations, and would render possible a considerable 
 reduction of the military expenditure which is crushing the 
 nations of Europe and greatly hindering the solution of thp 
 social question, which each individually must solve on pain 
 of having internal war as the price for escaping it externally. 
 
 “We might at least demand the reduction of the enor- 
 mous expenses of war organized as it is at present with a 
 view to the power of invasion within twenty-four hours and 
 a decisive battle within a week of the declaration of war. 
 
 “We ought to manage so that states could not make the 
 attack suddenly and invade each other’s territories within 
 twenty-four hours.” 
 
 This practical notion has been put forth by Maxime du 
 Camp, and his article concludes with it. 
 
 The propositions of M. du Camp are as follows: 
 
 1. A diplomatic congress to be held every year. 
 
 2. No war to be declared till two months after the inci- 
 dent which provoked it. (The difficulty here would be to 
 decide precisely what incident did provoke the war, since 
 whenever war is declared there are very many such inci- 
 dents, and one w'ould have to decide from wffiich to reckon 
 the two months’ interval.) 
 
 3. No war to be declared before it has been submitted to 
 a plebiscitum of the nations preparing to take part in it. 
 
 4. No hostilities to be commenced till a month after the 
 official declaration of war. 
 
 “No war to be declared. No hostilities to be com- 
 menced,” etc. But who is to arrange that no war is to be 
 declared? Who is to compel people to do this and that? 
 Who is to force states to delay their operations for a certain 
 
75 WITHIN YOU." 
 
 145 
 
 fixed time? All the other states. But all these others are 
 also states which want holding in check and keeping within 
 limits, and forcing, too. Who is to force them, and how? 
 Public opinion. But if there is a public opinion which can 
 force governments to delay their operations for a fixed 
 period, the same public opinion can force governments not 
 to declare war at all. 
 
 But, it will be replied, there may be such a balance of 
 power, such a ponderation de forces, as would lead states to 
 hold back of their own accord. Well, that has been tried 
 and is being tried even now. The Holy Alliance was noth- 
 ing but that, the League of Peace was another attempt at 
 the same thing, and so on. 
 
 But, it will be answered, suppose all were agreed. If all 
 were agreed there would be no more war certainly, and no 
 need for arbitration either. 
 
 “A court of arbitration! Arbitration shall replace war. 
 Questions shall be decided by a court of arbitration. The 
 Alabama question was decided by a court of arbitration, 
 and the question of the Caroline Islands was submitted to 
 the decision of the Pope. Switzerland, Belgium, Denmark, 
 and Holland have all declared that they prefer arbitration 
 to war.” 
 
 I dare say Monaco has expressed the same preference. 
 The only unfortunate thing is that Germany, Russia, Aus- 
 tria, and France have not so far shown the same inclination. 
 It is amazing how men can deceive themselves when they 
 find it necessary! Governments consent to decide their 
 disagreements by arbitration and to disband their armies! 
 The differences between Russia and Poland, between Eng- 
 land and Ireland, between Austria and Bohemia, between 
 Turkey and the Slavonic states, between France and Ger- 
 many, to be soothed away by amiable conciliation! 
 
 One might as well suggest to merchants and bankers that 
 they should sell nothing for a greater price than they gave 
 
146 
 
 “ THE KINGDOM OF GOD 
 
 for it, should undertake the distribution of wealth for no 
 profit, and should abolish money, as it would thus be ren- 
 dered unnecessary. 
 
 But since commercial and banking operations consist in 
 nothing but selling for more than the cost price, this would 
 be equivalent to an invitation to suppress themselves. It 
 is the same in regard to governments. To suggest to 
 governments that they should not have recourse to violence, 
 but should decide their misunderstandings in accordance 
 with equity, is inviting them to abolish themselves as rulers, 
 and that no government can ever consent to do. 
 
 The learned men form societies (there are more than a 
 hundred such societies), assemble in congresses (such as 
 those recently held in London and Paris, and shortly to be 
 held in Rome), deliver addresses, eat public dinners and 
 make speeches, publish journals, and prove by every means 
 possible that the nations forced to support millions of troops 
 are strained to the furthest limits of their endurance, that 
 the maintenance of these huge armed forces is in opposition 
 to all the aims, the interests, and the wishes of the people, 
 and that it is possible, moreover, by writing numerous 
 papers, and uttering a great many words, to bring all men 
 into agreement and to arrange so that they shall have no 
 antagonistic interests, and then there will be no more war. 
 
 When I was a little boy they told me if I wanted to catch 
 a bird I must put salt on its tail. I ran after the birds with 
 the salt in my hand, but I soon convinced myself that if I 
 could put salt on a bird’s tail, I could catch it, and realized 
 that I had been hoaxed. 
 
 People ought to realize the same fact when they read 
 books and articles on arbitration and disarmament. . 
 
 If one could put salt on a bird’s tail, it would be because 
 it could not fly and there would be no difficulty in catching 
 it. If the bird had wings and did not want to be caught, it 
 would not let one put salt on its tail, because the specialty 
 
75 WITHIN YOU." 
 
 147 
 
 of a bird is to fly. In precisely the same way the specialty 
 of government is not to obey, but to enforce obedience. 
 And a government is only a government so long as it can 
 make itself obeyed, and therefore it always strives for that 
 and will never willingly abandon its power. But since it is 
 on the army that the power of government rests, it will never 
 give up the army, and the use of the army in war. 
 
 The error arises from the learned jurists deceiving them- 
 selves and others, by asserting that government is not what 
 it really is, one set of men banded together to oppress 
 another set of men, but, as shown by science, is the repre- 
 sentation of the citizens in their collective capacity. They 
 have so long been persuading other people of this that at 
 last they have persuaded themselves of it; and thus they 
 often seriously suppose that government can be bound by 
 considerations of justice. But history shows that from 
 Caesar to Napoleon, and from Napoleon to Bismarck, 
 government is in its essence always a force acting in viola- 
 tion of justice, and that it cannot be otherwise. Justice can 
 have no binding force on a ruler or rulers who keep men, 
 deluded and drilled in readiness for acts of violence — sol- 
 diers, and by means of them control others. And so govern- 
 ments can never be brought to consent to diminish the 
 number of these drilled slaves, who constitute their whole 
 power and importance. 
 
 Such is the attitude of certain learned men to the contra- 
 diction under which our society is being crushed, and such 
 are their methods of solving it. Tell these people that the 
 whole matter rests on the personal attitude of each man to 
 the moral and religious question put nowadays to everyone, 
 the question, that is, whether it is lawful or unlawful for 
 him to take his share of military service, and these learned 
 gentlemen will shrug their shoulders and not condescend to 
 listen or to answer you. The solution of the question in 
 their idea is to be found in reading addresses, writing books, 
 
148 
 
 “ THE KINGDOM OF COD 
 
 electing presidents, vice-presidents, and secretaries, and 
 meeting and speaking first in one town and then in another. 
 From all this speechifying and writing it will come to pass, 
 according to their notions, that governments will cease to 
 levy the soldiers, on whom their whole strength depends, 
 will listen to their discourses, and will disband their forces, 
 leaving themselves without any defense, not only against 
 their neighbors, but also against their own subjects. As 
 though a band of brigands, who have some unarmed travel- 
 ers bound and ready to be plundered, should be so touched 
 by their complaints of the pain caused by the cords they are 
 fastened with as to let them go again. 
 
 Still there are people who believe in this, busy themselves 
 over peace congresses, read addresses, and write books. 
 And governments, we may be quite sure, express their sym- 
 pathy and make a show of encouraging them. In the same 
 way they pretend to support temperance societies, while 
 they are living principally on the drunkenness of the people; 
 and pretend to encourage education, when their whole 
 strength is based on ignorance; and to support constitu- 
 tional freedom, when their strength rests on the absence of 
 freedom; and to be anxious for the improvement of the 
 condition of the working classes, when their very existence 
 depends on their oppression; and to support Christianity, 
 when Christianity destroys all government. 
 
 To be able to do this they have long ago elaborated 
 methods encouraging temperance, which cannot suppress 
 drunkenness; methods of supporting education, which not 
 only fail to prevent ignorance, but even increase it; 
 methods of aiming at freedom and constitutionalism, which 
 are no hindrance to despotism ; methods of protecting the 
 working classes, which will not free them from slavery; and 
 a Christianity, too, they have elaborated, which does not 
 destroy, but supports governments. 
 
 Now there is something more for the government to 
 
IS WITHIN YOU." 
 
 149 
 
 encourage — peace. The sovereigns, who nowadays take 
 counsel with their ministers, decide by their will alone 
 whether the butchery of millions is to be begun this year or 
 next. They know very well that all these discourses upon 
 peace will not hinder them from sending millions of men to 
 butchery when it seems good to them. They listen even 
 with satisfaction to these discourses, encourage them, and 
 take part in them. 
 
 All this, far from being detrimental, is even of service to 
 governments, by turning people’s attention from the most 
 important and pressing question: Ought or ought not each 
 man called upon for military service to submit to serve in 
 the army? 
 
 “Peace will soon be arranged, thanks to alliances and 
 congresses, to books and pamphlets; meantime go and put 
 on your uniform, and prepare to cause suffering and to 
 endure it for our benefit,’’ is the government’s line of argu- 
 ment. And the learned gentlemen who get up congresses 
 and write articles are in perfect agreement with it. 
 
 This is the attitude of one set of thinkers. And since it 
 is that most beneficial to governments, it is also the most 
 encouraged by all intelligent governments. 
 
 Another attitude to war has something tragical in it. 
 There are men who maintain that the love for peace and the 
 inevitability of war form a hideous contradiction, and that 
 such is the fate of man. These are mostly gifted and sensi- 
 tive men, who see and realize all the horror and imbecility 
 and cruelty of war, but through some strange perversion of 
 mind neither see nor seek to find any way out of this posi- 
 tion, and seem to take pleasure in teasing the wound by 
 dwelling on the desperate position of humanity. A notable 
 example of such an attitude to war is to be found in the 
 celebrated French writer Guy de Maupassant. Looking 
 from his yacht at the drill and firing practice of the French 
 soldiers the following reflections occur to him: 
 
“ THE KINGDOM OF GOD 
 
 ISO 
 
 “When I think only of this word war, a kind of terror 
 seizes upon me, as though I were listening to some tale of 
 sorcery, of the Inquisition, some long past, remote abomi- 
 nation, monstrous, unnatural. 
 
 “When cannibalism is spoken of, we smile with pride, 
 proclaiming our superiority to these savages. Which are 
 the savages, the real savages? Those who fight to eat the 
 conquered, or those who fight to kill, for nothing but to 
 kill? 
 
 “The young recruits, moving about in lines yonder, are 
 destined to death like the flocks of sheep driven by the 
 butcher along the road. They will fall in some plain with 
 a saber cut in the head, or a bullet through the breast. And 
 these are young men who might work, be productive and 
 useful. Their fathers are old and poor. Their mothers, 
 who have loved them for twenty years, worshiped them as 
 none but mothers can, will learn in six months’ time, or a 
 year perhaps, that their son, their boy, the big boy reared 
 with so much labor, so much expense, so much love, has 
 been thrown in a hole like some dead dog, after being dis- 
 emboweled by a bullet, and trampled, crushed, to a mass of 
 pulp by the charges of cavalry. Why have they killed her 
 boy, her handsome boy, her one hope, her pride, her life? 
 She does not know. Ah, why? 
 
 “War! fighting! slaughter! massacres of men! And 
 we have now, in our century, with our civilization, with the 
 spread of science, and the degree of philosophy which the 
 genius of man is supposed to have attained, schools for 
 training to kill, to kill very far off, to perfection, great num- 
 bers at once, to kill poor devils of innocent men with fam- 
 ilies and without any kind of trial. 
 
 “And what is most bewildering is that the people do not rise 
 against their govertwients. For what difference is there be- 
 tween moiiarchies and republics ? The most bewildering thing 
 is that the whole of society is not in revolt at the word war," 
 
IS WITHIN YOU." 
 
 151 
 
 "Ah ! we shall always live under the burden of the ancient 
 and odious customs, the criminal prejudices, the ferocious 
 ideas of our barbarous ancestors, for we are beasts, and 
 beasts we shall remain, dominated by instinct and changed 
 by nothing. Would not any other man than Victor Hugo 
 have been exiled for that mighty cry of deliverance and 
 truth? ‘To-day force is called violence, and is being 
 brought to judgment ; war has been put on its trial. At the 
 plea of the human race, civilization arraigns warfare, and 
 draws up the great list of crimes laid at the charge of con- 
 querors and generals. The nations are coming to under- 
 stand that the magnitude of a crime cannot be its extenua- 
 tion; that if killing is a crime, killing many can be no 
 extenuating circumstance; that if robbery is disgraceful, 
 invasion cannot be glorious. Ah! let us proclaim these 
 absolute truths; let us dishonor war!’ 
 
 "Vain wrath,’’ continues Maupassant, "a poet’s indigna- 
 tion. War is held in more veneration than ever. 
 
 "A skilled proficient in that line, a slaughterer of genius. 
 Von Moltke, in reply to the peace delegates, once uttered 
 these strange words: 
 
 " ‘War is holy, war is ordained of God. It is one of the 
 most sacred laws of the world. It maintains among men all 
 the great and noble sentiments — honor, devotion, virtue, 
 and courage, and saves them in short from falling into the 
 most hideous materialism.’ 
 
 "So, then, bringing millions of men together into 
 herds, marching by day and by night without rest, 
 thinking of nothing, studying nothing, learning nothing, 
 reading nothing, being useful to no one, wallowing in filth, 
 sleeping in mud, living like brutes in a continual state of 
 stupefaction, sacking towns, burning villages, ruining whole 
 populations, then meeting another mass of human flesh, fall- 
 ing upon them, making pools of blood, and plains of flesh 
 mixed with trodden mire and red with heaps of corpses. 
 
152 " THE KINGDOM OF GOD 
 
 having your arms or legs carried off, your brains blown out 
 for no advantage to anyone, and dying in some corner of a 
 field while your old parents, your wife and children are 
 perishing of hunger — that is what is meant by not falling 
 into the most hideous materialism! 
 
 “Warriors are the scourge of the world. We struggle 
 against nature and ignorance and obstacles of all kinds to 
 make our wretched life less hard. Learned men — bene- 
 factors of all — spend their lives in working, in seeking what 
 can aid, what be of use, what can alleviate the lot of their 
 fellows. They devote themselves unsparingly to their task 
 of usefulness, making one discovery after another, enlarging 
 the sphere of human intelligence, extending the bounds of 
 science, adding each day some new store to the sum of 
 knowledge, gaining each day prosperity, ease, strength for 
 their country. 
 
 “War breaks out. In six months the generals have 
 destroyed the work of twenty years of effort, of patience, 
 and of genius. 
 
 “That is what is meant by not falling into the most 
 hideous materialism. 
 
 “We have seen it, war. We have seen men turned to 
 brutes, frenzied, killing for fun, for terror, for bravado, for 
 ostentation. Then when right is no more, law is dead, 
 every notion of justice has disappeared. We have seen men 
 shoot innocent creatures found on the road, and suspected 
 because they were afraid. We have seen them kill dogs 
 chained at their masters’ doors to try their new revolvers, 
 we have seen them fire on cows lying in a field for no rea- 
 son whatever, simply for the sake of shooting, for a joke. 
 
 “That is what is meant by not falling into the most 
 hideous materialism. 
 
 “Going into a country, cutting the man’s throat who 
 defends his house because he wears a blouse and has not a 
 military cap on his head, burning the dwellings of wretched 
 
IS WITHIN YOU." 
 
 153 
 
 beings who have nothing to eat, breaking furniture and steal- 
 ing goods, drinking the wine found in the cellars, violating 
 the women in the streets, burning thousands of francs’ 
 worth of powder, and leaving misery and cholera in one’s 
 track — 
 
 “That is what is meant by not falling into the most 
 hideous materialism. 
 
 “What have they done, those warriors, that proves the 
 least intelligence? Nothing. What have they invented? 
 Cannons and muskets. That is all. 
 
 “What remains to us from Greece? Books and statues. 
 Is Greece great from her conquests or her creations? 
 
 “Was it the invasions of the Persians which saved Greece 
 from falling into the most hideous materialism? 
 
 “Were the invasions of the barbarians what saved and 
 regenerated Rome? 
 
 “Was it Napoleon I. who carried forward the great intel- 
 lectual movement started by the philosophers of the end of 
 last century? 
 
 “Yes, indeed, since government assumes the right of anni- 
 hilating peoples thus, there is nothing surprising in the fact 
 that the peoples assume the right of annihilating govern- 
 ments. 
 
 “They defend themselves. They are right. No one has 
 an absolute right to govern others. It ought only to be 
 done for the benefit of those who are governed. And it is 
 as much the duty of anyone who governs to avoid war as it 
 is the duty of a captain of a ship to avoid shipwreck. 
 
 “When a captain has let his ship come to ruin, he is 
 judged and condemned, if he is found guilty of negligence 
 or even incapacity. 
 
 “Why should not the government be put on its trial 
 after every declaration of war? If the people understood 
 that, if they themselves passed judgment on murderous govern- 
 ments, if they refused to let themselves be killed for nothing, if 
 
154 
 
 “ 'I'HE KINGDOM OF GOD 
 
 they would only turn their arms against those who have given 
 them to them for massacre, on that day war would be no more. 
 But that day will never come.” * 
 
 The author sees all the horror of war. He sees that it is 
 caused by governments forcing men by deception to go out 
 to slaughter and be slain without any advantage to them- 
 selves. And he sees, too, that the men who make up the 
 armies could turn their arms against th^ governments and 
 bring them to judgment. But he thinks that that will 
 never come to pass, and that there is, therefore, no escape 
 from the present position. “I think war is terrible, but that 
 it is inevitable; that compulsory military service is as inevi- 
 table as death, and that since government will always desire 
 it, war will always exist.” 
 
 So writes this talented and sincere writer, who is endowed 
 with that power of penetrating to the innermost core of the 
 subjects which is the essence of the poetic faculty. He 
 brings before us all the cruelty of the inconsistency between 
 men’s moral sense and their actions, but without trying to 
 remove it; seems to admit that this inconsistency must exist 
 and that it is the poetic tragedy of life. 
 
 Another no less gifted writer, Edouard Rod, paints in still 
 more vivid colors the cruelty and madness of the present 
 state of things. He too only aims at presenting its tragic 
 features, without suggesting or forseeing any issue from the 
 position. 
 
 ‘‘What is the good of doing anything? What is the good 
 of undertaking any enterprise? And how are we to love 
 men in these troubled times when every fresh day is a 
 menace of danger? . . . All we have begun, the plans we are 
 developing, our schemes of work, the little good we may 
 have been able to do, will it not all be swept away by the 
 tempest that is in preparation? . . . Everywhere the earth is 
 
 ■^Surl’Eau,” pp. 71-80. 
 
IS IVITHIN YOU." 155 
 
 shaking under our feet and storm-clouds are gathering on 
 our horizon which will have no pity on us. 
 
 “Ah! if all we had to dread were the revolution which 
 is held up as a specter to terrify us ! Since I cannot imagine 
 a society more detestable than ours, I feel more skeptical 
 than alarmed in regard to that which will replace it. If I 
 should have to suffer from the change, I should be consoled 
 by thinking that the executioners of that day were the vic- 
 tims of the previous time, and the hope of something better 
 would help us to endure the worst. But it is not that remote 
 peril which frightens me. I see another danger, nearer and 
 far more cruel; more cruel because there is no excuse for 
 it, because it is absurd, because it can lead to no good. 
 Every day one balances the chances of war on the morrow, 
 every day they become more merciless. 
 
 “The imagination revolts before the catastrophe which is 
 coming at the end of our century as the goal of the progress 
 of our era, and yet we must get used to facing it. For 
 twenty years past every resource of science has been ex- 
 hausted in the invention of engines of destruction, and soon 
 a few charges of cannon will suffice to annihilate a whole 
 army. No longer a few thousands of poor devils, who were 
 paid a price for their blood, are kept under arms, but whole 
 nations are under arms to cut each other’s throats. They 
 are robbed of their time now (by compulsory service) that 
 they may be robbed of their lives later. To prepare them 
 for the work of massacre, their hatred is kindled by per- 
 suading them that they are hated. And peaceable men let 
 themselves be played on thus and go and fall on one another 
 with the ferocity of wild beasts; furious troops of peaceful 
 citizens taking up arms at an empty word of command, for 
 some ridiculous question of frontiers or colonial trade 
 interests — Heaven only knows what. . . They will go like 
 sheep to the slaughter, knowing all the while where they are 
 going, knowing that they are leaving their wives, knowing 
 
“ THE KINGDOM OF GOD 
 
 156 
 
 that their children will want for food, full of misgivings, yet 
 intoxicated by the fine-sounding lies that are dinned into 
 their ears. They will march without revolt, passive, resigned — 
 though the numbers and the strength are theirs, and they might, 
 if they htew how to co-operate together, establish the reign of 
 good sense and fraternity, instead of the barbarous trickery 
 of diplomacy. They will march to battle so deluded, so 
 duped, that they will believe slaughter to be a duty, and will 
 ask the benediction of God on their lust for blood. They 
 will march to battle trampling underfoot the harvests they 
 have sown, burning the towns they have built — with songs 
 of triumph, festive music, and cries of jubilation. And 
 their sons will raise statues to those who have done most in 
 their slaughter. 
 
 “The destiny of a whole generation depends on the hour 
 in which some ill-fated politician may give the signal that 
 will be followed. We know that the best of us will be cut 
 down and our work will be destroyed in embryo. We know 
 it and tremble with rage, but we caji do nothing. We are held 
 fast in the toils of officialdom and red tape, and too rude a 
 shock would be needed to set us free. We are enslaved by 
 the laws we set up for our protection, which have become 
 our oppression. We are but the tools of that autocratic 
 abstraction the state, which enslaves each mdividual in the 
 name of the will of all, who tuould all, taken individually, desire 
 exactly the opposite of what they will be made to do. 
 
 “And if it were only a generation that must be sacrificed! 
 But there are graver interests at stake. 
 
 “The paid politicians, the ambitious statesmen, who 
 exploit the evil passions of the populace, and the imbeciles 
 who are deluded by fine-sounding phrases, have so embit- 
 tered national feuds that the existence of a Avhole race will 
 be at stake in the war of the morrow. One of the elements 
 that constitute the modern world is threatened, the con- 
 quered people will be wiped out of existence, and which- 
 
/S WITHIN YOU. 
 
 157 
 
 ever it may be, we shall see a moral force annihilated, as if 
 there were too many forces to work for good — we shall have 
 a new Europe formed on foundations so unjust, so brutal, 
 so sanguinary, stained with so monstrous a crime, that it 
 cannot but be worse than the Europe of to-day — more 
 iniquitous, more barbarous, more violent. 
 
 “Thus one feels crushed under the weight of an immense 
 discouragement. We are struggling in a cul de sac with 
 muskets aimed at us from the housetops. Our labor is like 
 that of sailors executing their last task as the ship begins to 
 sink. Our pleasures are those of the condemned victim, 
 who is offered his choice of dainties a quarter of an hour 
 before his execution. Thought is paralyzed by anguish, 
 and the most it is capable of is to calculate — interpreting the 
 vague phrases of ministers, spelling out the sense of the 
 speeches of sovereigns, and ruminating on the words attrib- 
 uted to diplomatists reported on the uncertain authority of 
 the newspapers — whether it is to be to-morrow or the day 
 after, this year or the next, that we are to be murdered. 
 So that one might seek in vain in history an epoch more 
 insecure, more crushed under the weight of suffering.’’* 
 
 Here it is pointed out that the force is in the hands of 
 those who work their own destruction, in the hands of the 
 individual men who make up the masses; it is pointed out 
 that the source of the evil is the government. It would 
 seem evident that the contradiction between life and con- 
 science had reached the limit beyond which it cannot go, 
 and after reaching this limit some solution of it must be 
 found. 
 
 But the author does not think so. He sees in this the 
 tragedy of human life, and after depicting all the horror of 
 the position he concludes that human life must be spent in 
 the midst of this horror. 
 
 “Le Sens de la Vie,” pp. 208-13. 
 
158 
 
 “ THE KINGDOM OF GOD 
 
 So much for the attitude to war of those who regard it as 
 something tragic and fated by destiny. 
 
 The third category consists of men who have lost all con- 
 science and, consequently, all common sense and feeling of 
 humanity. 
 
 To this category belongs Moltke, whose opinion has been 
 quoted above by Maupassant, and the majority of military 
 men, who have been educated in this cruel superstition, live 
 by it, and consequently are often in all simplicity convinced 
 that war is not only an inevitable, but even a necessary and 
 beneficial thing. This is also the view of some civilians, so- 
 called educated and cultivated people. 
 
 Here is what the celebrated academician Camille Doucet 
 writes in reply to the editor of the Revue des Revues, where 
 several letters on war were published together: 
 
 “Dear Sir: When you ask the least warlike of acade- 
 micians whether he is a partisan of war, his answer is known 
 beforehand. 
 
 “Alas! sir, you yourself speak of the pacific ideal inspir- 
 ing your generous compatriots as a dream. 
 
 “During my life I have heard a great many good people 
 protest against this frightful custom of international butchery, 
 which all admit and deplore ; but how is it to be remedied? 
 
 “Often, too, there have been attempts to suppress duel- 
 ing; one would fancy that seemed an easy task: but not at 
 all! All that has been done hitherto with that noble object 
 has never been and never will be of use. 
 
 “All the congresses of both hemispheres may vote against 
 war, and against dueling too, but above all arbitrations, 
 conventions, and legislations there will always be the per- 
 sonal honor of individual men, which has always demanded 
 dueling, and the interests of nations, which will always 
 demand war. 
 
 “I wish none the less from the depths of my heart that 
 
IS WITHIN YOU: 
 
 159 
 
 the Congress of Universal Peace may succeed at last in its 
 very honorable and difficult enterprise. 
 
 “I am, dear sir, etc., 
 
 “Camille Doucet.” 
 
 The upshot of this is that personal honor requires men to 
 fight, and the interests of nations require them to ruin and 
 exterminate each other. As for the efforts to abolish war, 
 they call for nothing but a smile. 
 
 The opinion of another well-known academician, Jules 
 Claretie, is of the same kind. 
 
 “Dear Sir [he writes]: For a man of sense there can 
 be but one opinion on the subject of peace and war. 
 
 “Humanity is created to live, to live free, to perfect and 
 ameliorate its fate by peaceful labor. The general harmony 
 preached by the Universal Peace Congress is but a dream 
 perhaps, but at least it is the fairest of all dreams. Man is 
 always looking toward the Promised Land, and there the 
 harvests are to ripen with no fear of their being torn up by 
 
 shells or crushed by cannon wheels. . . But! Ah! but 
 
 since philosophers and philanthropists are not the controll- 
 ing powers, it is well for our soldiers to guard our frontier 
 and homes, and their arms, skillfully used, are perhaps the 
 surest guarantee of the peace we all love. 
 
 “Peace is a gift only granted to the strong and the reso- 
 lute. 
 
 “I am, dear sir, etc., 
 
 “Jules Claretie.” 
 
 The upshot of this letter is that there is no harm in talk- 
 ing about what no one intends or feels obliged to do. But 
 when it comes to practice, we must fight. 
 
 And here now is the view lately expressed by the most 
 popular novelist in Europe, Emile Zola: 
 
i6o 
 
 “ THE KINGDOM OF GOD 
 
 “I regard war as a fatal necessity, which appears inevita- 
 ble for us from its close connection with human nature and 
 the whole constitution of the world. I should wish that war 
 could be put off for the longest possible time. Nevertheless, 
 the moment will come when we shall be forced to go to war. 
 
 I am considering it at this moment from the standpoint of 
 universal humanity, and making no reference to our mis- 
 understanding with Germany — a most trivial incident in the 
 history of mankind. I say that war is necessary and bene- 
 ficial, since it seems one of the conditions of existence for 
 humanity. War confronts us everywhere, not only war be- 
 tween different races and peoples, but war too, in private 
 and family life. It seems one of the principal elements of 
 progress, and every step in advance that humanity has taken 
 hitherto has been attended by bloodshed. 
 
 “Men have talked, and still talk, of disarmament, while 
 disarmament is something impossible, to which, even if it 
 were possible, we ought not to consent. I am convinced 
 that a general disarmament throughout the world would 
 involve something like a moral decadence, which would 
 show itself in general feebleness, and would hinder the pro- 
 gressive advancement of humanity. A warlike nation has 
 always been strong and flourishing. The art of war has led 
 to the development of all the other arts. History bears wit- 
 ness to it. So in Athens and in Rome, commerce, manu- 
 factures, and literature never attained so high a point of 
 development as when those cities were masters of the whole 
 world by force of arms. To take an example from times 
 nearer our own, we may recall the age of Louis XIV. The 
 wars of the Grand Monarque were not only no hindrance 
 to the progress of the arts and sciences, but even, on the 
 contrary, seem to have promoted and favored their develop- 
 ment.’’ 
 
 So war is a beneficial thing! 
 
 But the best expression of this attitude is the view of the 
 
TS WITHm YOU." 
 
 i6i 
 
 most gifted of the writers of this school, the academician de 
 Vogiie. This is what he writes in an article on the Military 
 Section of the Exhibition of 1889: 
 
 “On the Esplanade des Invalides, among the exotic and 
 colonial encampments, a building in a more severe style 
 overawes the picturesque bazaar; all these fragments of the 
 globe have come to gather round the Palace of War, and in 
 turn our guests mount guard submissively before the mother 
 building, but for whom they would not be here. Fine sub- 
 ject for the antithesis of rhetoric, of humanitarians who 
 could not fail to whimper over this juxtaposition, and to say 
 that ‘ceci tuera cela,' * that the union of the nations through 
 science and labor will overcome the instinct of war. Let us 
 leave them to cherish the chimera of a golden age, which 
 would soon become, if it could be realized, an age of mud. 
 All history teaches us that the one is created for the other, 
 that blood is needed to hasten and cement the union of the 
 nations. Natural science has ratified in our day the mys- 
 terious law revealed to Joseph de Maistre by the intuition 
 of his genius and by meditation on fundamental truths ; he 
 saw the world redeeming itself from hereditary degenera- 
 tions by sacrifice; science shows it advancing to perfection 
 through struggle and violent selection ; there is the state- 
 ment of the same law in both, expressed in different 
 formulas. The statement is disagreeable, no doubt; but the 
 laws of the world are not made for our pleasure, they are 
 made for our progress. Let us enter this inevitable, neces- 
 sary palace of war; we shall be able to observe there how 
 the most tenacious of our instincts, without losing any of its 
 vigor, is transformed and adapted to the varying exigencies 
 of historical epochs.’’ 
 
 M. de Vogiid finds the necessity for war, according to his 
 views, well expressed by the two great writers, Joseph de 
 
 * Phrase quoted from Victor-Hugo, “ Notre- Dame de Paris.” 
 
i 62 
 
 “ THE KINGDOM OF GOD 
 
 Maistre and Darwin, whose statements he likes so much 
 that he quotes them again. 
 
 “Dear Sir [he writes to the editor of the Revue des 
 Revues\ : You ask me my view as to the possible success of 
 the Universal Congress of Peace. I hold with Darwin that 
 violent struggle is a law of nature which overrules all other 
 laws; I hold with Joseph de Maistre that it is a divine law; 
 two different ways of describing the same thing. If by 
 some impossible chance a fraction of human society — all the 
 civilized West, let us suppose — were to succeed in suspend- 
 ing the action of this law, some races of stronger instincts 
 would undertake the task of putting it into action against 
 us: those races would vindicate nature’s reasoning against 
 human reason; they would be successful, because the cer- 
 tainty of peace — I do not say peace, I say the certainty of 
 peace — would, in half a century, engender a corruption and 
 a decadence more destructive for mankind than the worst of 
 wars. I believe that we must do with war — the criminal law 
 of humanity — as with all our criminal laws, that is, soften 
 them, put them in force as rarely as possible; use every 
 effort to make their application unnecessary. But all the 
 experience of history teaches us that they cannot be alto- 
 gether suppressed so long as two men are left on earth, with 
 bread, money, and a woman between them. 
 
 “I should be very happy if the Congress would prove me 
 in error. But I doubt if it can prove history, nature, and 
 God in error also. 
 
 “I am, dear sir, etc. 
 
 “E. M. DE VOGUl” 
 
 This amounts to saying that history, human nature, and 
 God show us that so long as there are two men, and bread, 
 money and a woman — there will be war. That is to say 
 that no progress will lead men to rise above the savage con- 
 
IS WITHIN YOU. 
 
 163 
 
 ception of life, which regards no participation of bread, 
 money (money is good in this context) and woman possible 
 without fighting. 
 
 They are strange people, these men who assemble in Con- 
 gresses, and make speeches to show us how to catch birds 
 by putting salt on their tails, though they must know it is 
 impossible to do it. And amazing are they too, who, like 
 Maupassant, Rod, and many others, see clearly all the hor- 
 ror of war, all the inconsistency of men not doing what is 
 needful, right, and beneficial for them to do ; who lament 
 over the tragedy of life, and do not see that the whole 
 tragedy is at an end directly men, ceasing to take account 
 of any unnecessary considerations, refuse to do what is hate- 
 ful and disastrous to them. They are amazing people truly, 
 but those who, like De Vogiie and others, who, professing 
 the doctrine of evolution, regard war as not only inevitable, 
 but beneficial, and therefore desirable — they are terrible, 
 hideous, in their moral perversion. The others, at least, 
 say that they hate evil, and love good, but these openly 
 declare that good and evil do not exist. 
 
 All discussion of the possibility of re-establishing peace 
 instead of everlasting war — is the pernicious sentimentality 
 of phrasemongers. There is a law of evolution by which it 
 follows that I must live and act in an evil way; what is to 
 be done? I am an educated man, I know the law of evolu- 
 tion, and therefore I will act in an evil way. " Entroiis au 
 palais de la guerre." There is the law of evolution, and 
 therefore there is neither good nor evil, and one must live 
 for the sake of one’s personal existence, leaving the rest to 
 the action of the law of evolution. This is the last word of 
 refined culture, and with it, of that overshadowing of con- 
 science which has come upon the educated classes of our 
 times. The desire of the educated classes to support the 
 ideas they prefer, and the order of existence based on them, 
 has attained its furthest limits. They lie, and delude them- 
 
164 
 
 “ THE KINGDOM OF GOD 
 
 selves, and one another, with the subtlest forms of decep- 
 tion, simply to obscure, to deaden conscience. 
 
 Instead of transforming their life into harmony with their 
 conscience, they try by every means to stifle its voice. But 
 it is in darkness that the light begins to shine, and so the 
 light is rising upon our epoch. 
 
 CHAPTER VII. 
 
 SIGNIFICANCE OF COMPULSORY SERVICE. 
 
 Universal Compulsory Service is not a Political Accident, but the 
 Furthest Limit of the Contradiction Inherent in the Social Conception 
 of Life — Origin of Authority in Society — Basis of Authority is Physi- 
 cal Violence — To be Able to Perform its Acts of Violence Authority 
 Needs a Special Organization — The Army — Authority, that is. Vio- 
 lence, is the Principle which is Destroying the Social Conception of 
 Life — Attitude of Authority to the Masses, that is, Attitude of Gov- 
 ernment to Working Oppressed Classes — Governments Try to Foster 
 in Working Classes the Idea that State Force is Necessary to Defend 
 Them from External Enemies — But the Army is Principally Needed to 
 Preserve Government from its own Subjects — The Working Classes — 
 Speech of M. de Capri vi — All Privileges of Ruling Classes Based on 
 Violence — The Increase of Armies up to Point of Universal Service — 
 Universal Compulsory Service Destroys all the Advantages of Social 
 Life, which Government is Intended to Preserve — Compulsory Service 
 is the Furthest Limit of Submission, since in Name of the State it 
 Requires Sacrifice of all that can be Precious to a Man — Is Govern- 
 ment Necessary? — The Sacrifices Demanded by Government in Com- 
 pulsory Service have No Longer any Reasonable Basis — And there is 
 More Advantage to be Gained by not Submitting to the Demands 
 of the State than by Submitting to Them. 
 
 Educated people of the upper classes are trying to 
 stifle the ever-growing sense of the necessity of transform- 
 ing the existing social order. But life, which goes on 
 growing more complex, and developing in the same direc- 
 tion, and increases the inconsistencies and the sufferings 
 
IS IVITHTN YOU." 
 
 165 
 
 of men, brings them to the limit beyond which they can- 
 not go. This furthest limit of inconsistency is universal 
 compulsory military service. 
 
 It is usually supposed that universal military service and 
 the increased armaments connected with it, as well as the 
 resulting increase of taxes and national debts, are a passing 
 phenomenon, produced by the particular political situation 
 of Europe, and that it may be removed by certain political 
 combinations without any modification of the inner order 
 of life. 
 
 -Xhis^is .absolutely incorrect. Universal military service 
 is only the internal inconsistency inherent in the social 
 conception of life, carried to its furthest limits, and becom- 
 ing evident when a certain stage of material development 
 is reached. 
 
 The social conception of life, we have seen, consists iiT 
 the transfer of the aim of life from the individual to groups 
 and their maintenance — to the tribe, famil}'’, race, or state. 
 
 In the social conception of life it is supposed that since 
 the aim of life is found in groups of individuals, individuals 
 will voluntarily sacrifice their own interests for the interests 
 of the group. And so it has been, and still is, in fact, in 
 certain groups, the distinction being that they are the most 
 primitive forms of association in the family or tribe or race, 
 or even in the patriarchal state. Through tradition handed 
 down by education and supported by religious sentiment, 
 individuals without compulsion merged their interests in 
 the interest of the group and sacrificed their own good for 
 the general welfare. 
 
 But the more complex and the larger societies become, 
 and especially the more often conquest becomes the cause 
 of the amalgamation of people into a state, the more often 
 individuals strive to .attain their own aims at the public 
 expense, and the more often it becomes necessary to 
 restrain these insubordinate individuals by recourse to 
 
i66 
 
 “ THE KINGDOM OF GOD 
 
 authority, that is, to violence. The champions of the 
 social conception of life usually try to connect the idea of 
 authority, that is, of violence, with the idea of moral influ- 
 ence, but this connection is quite impossible. 
 
 The effect of moral influence on a man is to change his 
 desires and to bend them in the direction of the duty 
 required of him. The man who is controlled by moral 
 influence acts in accordance with his own desires. Author- 
 ity, in the sense in which the word is ordinarily understood, 
 is a means of forcing a man to act in opposition to his 
 desires. The man who submits to authority does not do 
 as he chooses but as he is obliged by authority. Nothing 
 can oblige a man to do what he does not choose except 
 physical force, or the threat of it, that is — deprivation of 
 freedom, blows, imprisonment, or threats — easily carried 
 out — of such punishments. This is what authority consists 
 of and always has consisted of. 
 
 In spite of the unceasing efforts of those who happen to 
 be in authority to conceal this and attribute some other sig- 
 nificance to it, authority has always meant for man the 
 cord, the chain with which he is bound and fettered, or the 
 knout with which he is to be flogged, or the ax with which 
 he is to have hands, ears, nose, or head cut off, or at the 
 very least, the threat of these terrors. So it was under 
 Nero and Ghenghis Khan, and so it is to-day, even under 
 the most liberal government in the Republics of the United 
 States or of France. If men submit to authority, it is only 
 because they are liable to these punishments in case of 
 non-submission. All state obligations, payment of taxes, 
 fulfillment of state duties, and submission to punishments, 
 exile, fines, etc., to which people appear to submit volun- 
 tarily, are always based on bodily violence or the threat 
 of it. 
 
 The basis of authority is bodily violence. The possi- 
 bility of applying bodily violence to people is provided 
 
/S WITHIN YOU. 
 
 167 
 
 above all by an organization of armed men, trained to act 
 in unison in submission to one will. These bands of armed 
 men, submissive to a single will, are what constitute the 
 army. The army has always been and still is the basis of 
 power. Power is always in the hands of those who control 
 the army, and all men in power — from the Roman Caesars 
 to the Russian and German Emperors — take more interest 
 in their army than in anything, and court popularity in the 
 army, knowing that if that is on their side their power is 
 secure. 
 
 The formation and aggrandizement of the army, indis- 
 pensable to the maintenance of authority, is what has intro- 
 duced into the social conception of life the principle that is 
 destroying it. 
 
 The object of authority and the justification for its exist- 
 ence lie in the restraint of those who aim at attaining their 
 personal interests to the detriment of the interests of 
 society. 
 
 But however power has been gained, those who possess . 
 it are in no way different from other men, and therefore no i 
 more disposed than others to subordinate their own inter- * 
 ests to those of the society. On the contrary, having the 
 power to do so at their disposal, they are more disposed 
 than others to subordinate the public interests to their own. 
 Whatever means men have devised for preventing those in 
 authority from over-riding public interests for tlieir own 
 benefit, or for intrusting power only to the most faultless 
 people, they have not so far succeeded in either of those 
 aims. 
 
 All the methods of appointing authorities that have been 
 tried, divine right, and election, and heredity, and ballot- 
 ing, and assemblies and parliaments and senate — have all 
 proved ineffectual. Everyone knows that not one of these 
 methods attains the aim either of intrusting power only to 
 the incorruptible, or of preventing power from being 
 
i68 
 
 THE KINGDOM OF GOD 
 
 abused. Everyone knows on the contrary that men in 
 authority — be they emperors, ministers, governors* or 
 police officers — are always, simply from the possession of 
 power, more liable to be demoralized, that is, to subordinate 
 public interests to their personal aims than those who have 
 not the power to do so. Indeed, it could not be other- 
 wise. 
 
 The state conception of life could be justified only so 
 long as all men voluntarily sacrificed their personal interests 
 to the public welfare. But so soon as there were indi- 
 viduals who would not voluntarily sacrifice their own 
 interests, and authority, that is, violence, was needed to 
 restrain them, then the disintegrating principle of the 
 coercion of one set of people by another set entered into 
 the social conception of the organization based on it. 
 
 For the authority of one set of men over another to attain 
 its object of restraining those who override public interests 
 for their personal ends, power ought only to be put into the 
 hands of the impeccable, as it is supposed to be among the 
 Chinese, and as it was supposed to be in the Middle Ages, 
 and is even now supposed to be by those who believe in the 
 consecration by anointing. Only under those conditions 
 could the social organization be justified. 
 
 But since this is not the case, and on the contrary men 
 in power are always far from being saints, through the very 
 fact of their possession of power, the social organization 
 based on power has no justification. 
 
 Even if there was once a time when, owing to the low 
 standard of morals, and the disposition of men to violence, 
 the existence of an authority to restrain such violence was 
 an advantage, because the violence of government was less 
 than the violence of individuals, one cannot but see that 
 this advantage could not be lasting. As the disposition of 
 individuals to violence diminished, and as the habits of the 
 people became more civilized, and as power grew more 
 
IS WITHIN YOU." 169 
 
 demoralized through lack of restraint, this advantage dis-! 
 appeared. 
 
 The whole history of the last two thousand years is noth- 
 ing but the history of this gradual change of relation 
 between the moral development of the masses on the one , 
 hand and the demoralization of governments on the other., 
 
 This, put simply^ is how it has corne to pass. 
 
 Men lived in families, tribes, and races, at feud with one 
 another, plundering, outraging, and killing one another. 
 These violent hostilities were carried on on a large and on a 
 small scale : man against man, family against family, tribe 
 against tribe, race against race, and people against people. 
 The larger and stronger groups conquered and absorbed 
 the weaker, and the larger and stronger they became, the 
 more internal feuds disappeared and the more the con- 
 tinuity of the group seemed assured. 
 
 The members of a family or tribe, united into one com- 
 munity, are less hostile among themselves, and families and 
 tribes do not die like one man, but have a continuity of 
 existence. Between the members of one state, subject to 
 a single authority, the strife between individuals seems still 
 less and the life of the state seems even more secure. 
 
 Their association into larger and larger groups was jiqt ' 
 the result of the conscious pecqgiiitiaa_oX_the benefits of 
 such associations, as it is said to be in the story of the 
 Varyagi. It was produced, on one hand, by the natural 
 growth of population, and, on the other, by struggle and 
 conquest. 
 
 After conquest the power of the emperor puts an end to 
 internal dissensions, and so the state conception of life 
 justifies itself. But this justification is never more than 
 temporary. Internal dissensions disappear only in propor- 
 tion to the degree of oppression exerted by the authority 
 over the dissentient individuals. The violence of internal 
 feud crushed by authority reappears in authority itself. 
 
iTo 
 
 “ THE KINGDOM OF GOD 
 
 which falls into the hands of men who, like the rest, are 
 frequently or always ready to sacrifice the public welfare 
 to their personal interest, with the difference that their 
 subjects cannot resist them, and thus they are exposed to 
 all the demoralizing influence of authority. And thus the 
 evil of violence, when it passes into the hands of authority, 
 is always growing and growing, and in time becomes greater 
 than the evil it is supposed to suppress, while, at the same 
 time, the tendency to violence in the members of the society 
 becomes weaker and weaker, so that the violence of 
 authority is less and less needed. 
 
 Government authorit)’’, even if it does suppress private 
 violence, always introduces into the life of men fresh forms 
 of violence, which tend to become greater and greater in 
 proportion to the duration and strength of the govern, 
 ment. 
 
 So that though the violence of power is less noticeable 
 in government than when it is employed by members of 
 society against one another, because it finds expression in 
 submission, and not in strife, it nevertheless exists, and 
 often to a greater degree than in former days. 
 
 And it could not be otherwise, since, apart from the 
 demoralizing influence of power, the policy or even the 
 unconscious tendency of those in power will always be to 
 reduce their subjects to the extreme of weakness, for the 
 weaker the oppressed, the less effort need be made to keep 
 him in subjection. 
 
 And therefore the oppression of the oppressed always 
 goes on growing up to the furthest limit, beyond which it 
 cannot go without killing the goose with the golden eggs. 
 And if the goose lays no more eggs, like the American 
 Indians, negroes, and Fijians, then it is killed in spite of 
 the sincere protests of philanthropists. 
 
 The most convincing example of this is to be found in 
 the condition of the working classes of our epoch, who are 
 
75 iviTmAT you: 
 
 171 
 
 in reality no better than the slaves of ancient times sub- 
 dued by conquest. 
 
 In spite of the pretended efforts of the higher classes to 
 ameliorate the position of the workers, all the working 
 classes of the present day are kept down by the inflexible 
 iron law by which they only get just what is barely neces- 
 sary, so that they are forced to work without ceasing while 
 still retaining strength enough to labor for their employers, 
 who are I’eally those who have conquered and enslaved 
 them. -- — 
 
 So it has always been. In ratio to the duration and I J 
 increasing strength of authority its advantages for its sub- | 
 jects disappear and its disadvantages increase. - 
 
 And this has been so, independently of the forms of 
 government under which nations have lived. The only 
 difference is that under a despotic form of government the 
 authority is concentrated in a small number of oppressors 
 and violence takes a cruder form ; under constitutional 
 monarchies and republics as in France and America author- 
 ity is divided among a great number of oppressors and the 
 forms assumed by violence is less crude, but its effect of 
 making the disadvantages of authority greater than its 
 advantages, and of enfeebling the oppressed to the furthest 
 extreme to which they can be reduced with advantage to 
 the oppressors, remains always the same. 
 
 Such has been and still is the condition of all the 
 oppressed, but hitherto they have not recognized the fact. 
 
 In the majority of instances they have believed in all sim- 
 plicity that governments exist for their benefit ; that they 
 would be lost without a government ; that the very idea of 
 living without a government is a blasphemy which one 
 hardly dare put into words ; that this is the — for some 
 reason terrible — doctrine of anarchism, with which a mental 
 picture of all kinds of horrors is associated. 
 
 People have believed, as though it were something fully 
 
1"]2 
 
 ‘ THE KINGDOM OF GOD 
 
 proved, and so needing no proof, that since all nations have 
 hitherto developed in the form of states, that form of 
 organization is an indispensable condition of the develop- 
 ment of humanity. 
 
 And in that way it has lasted for hundreds and thou- 
 sands of years, and governments — those who happened to 
 be in power — have tried it, and are now trying more zeal- 
 ously than ever to keep their subjects in this error. 
 
 So it was under the Roman emperors and so it is now. 
 In spite of the fact that the sense of the uselessness and 
 even injurious effects of state violence is more and more 
 penetrating into men’s consciousness, things might have 
 gone on in the same way forever if governments were not 
 under the necessity of constantly increasing their armies in 
 order to maintain their power. 
 
 It is generally supposed that governments strengthen 
 their forces only to defend the state from other states, in 
 oblivion of the fact that armies are necessary, before all 
 things, for the defense of governments from their own 
 oppressed and enslaved subjects. 
 
 That has always been necessary, and has become more 
 and more necessary with the increased diffusion of educa- 
 tion among the masses, with the improved communication 
 between people of the same and of different nationalities. 
 It has become particularly indispensable now in the face of 
 communism, socialism, anarchism, and the labor movement 
 generally. Governments feel that it is so, and strengthen 
 the force of their disciplined armies.* 
 
 In the German Reichstag not long ago, in reply to a 
 
 * The fact that in America the abuses of authority exist in spite of the 
 small number of their troops not only fails to disprove this position, but 
 positively confirms it. In America there are fewer soldiers than in 
 other states. That is why there is nowhere else so little oppression of 
 the working classes, and no country where the end of the abuses of 
 government and of government itself seems so near. Of late as the com- 
 
IS WITHIN YOU." 
 
 173 
 
 question why funds were needed for raising the salaries of 
 the under-officers, the German Chancellor openly declared 
 that trustworthy under-officers were necessary to contend 
 against socialism. Caprivi only said aloud what every 
 statesman knows and assiduously conceals from the people. 
 The reason to which he gave e.xpression is essentially the 
 same as that which made the French kings and the popes 
 engage Swiss and Scotch guards, and makes the Rus- 
 sian authorities of to-day so carefully distribute the re- 
 cruits, so that the regiments from the frontiers are stationed 
 in central districts, and the regiments from the center are 
 stationed on the frontiers. The meaning of Caprivi’s 
 speech, put into plain language, is that funds are needed, 
 not to resist foreign foes, but to buy U7ider-officers to be 
 ready to act against the enslaved toiling masses. 
 
 Caprivi incautiously gave utterance to what everyone 
 knows perfectly well, or at least feels vaguely if he does not 
 recognize it, that is, that the existing order of life is as it 
 is, not, as would be natural and right, because the people 
 wish it to be so, but because it is so maintained by state 
 violence, by the army with its bought under-officers and 
 generals. 
 
 If the laborer has no land, if he cannot use the natural 
 right of every man to derive subsistence for himself and 
 his family out of the land, that is not because the people 
 wish it to be so, but because a certain set of men, the land- 
 owners, have appropriated the right of giving or refusing 
 admittance to the land to the laborers. And this abnormal 
 order of things is maintained by the army. If the immense 
 
 binations of laborers gain in strength, one hears more and more fre- 
 quently the cry raised for the increase of the army, though the United 
 States are not threatened with any attack from without. The upper 
 classes know that an army of fifty thousand will soon be insufficient, and 
 no longer relying on Pinkerton’s men, they feel that the security of 
 their position depends on the increased strength of the army. 
 
*74 
 
 THE KINGDOM OF GOD 
 
 wealth produced by the labor of the working classes is not 
 regarded as the property of all, but as the property of a 
 few exceptional persons ; if labor is taxed by authority and 
 the taxes spent by a few on what they think fit ; if strikes 
 on the part of laborers are repressed, while on the part of 
 capitalists they are encouraged ; if certain persons appro- 
 priate the right of choosing the form of the education, 
 religious and secular, of children, and certain persons 
 monopolize the right of making the laws all must obey, and 
 so dispose of the lives and properties of other people — all 
 this is not done because the people wish it and because it 
 is what is natural and right, but because the government 
 and ruling classes wish this to be so for their own benefit, 
 and insist on its being so even by physical violence. 
 
 Everyone, if he does not recognize this now, will know 
 that it is so at the first attempt at insubordination or at a 
 revolution of the existing order. 
 
 Armies, then, are needed by governments and by the 
 ruling classes above all to support the present order, 
 which, far from being the result of the people’s needs, is 
 often in direct antagonism to them, and is only beneficial to 
 the government and ruling classes. 
 
 To keep their subjects in oppression and to be able to 
 enjoy the fruits of their labor the government must have 
 armed forces. 
 
 But there is not only one government. There are other 
 governments, exploiting their subjects by violence in the 
 same way, and always ready to pounce down on any other 
 government and carry off the fruits of the toil of its 
 enslaved subjects. And so every government needs an 
 army also to protect its booty from its neighbor brigands. 
 Every government is thus involuntarily reduced to the 
 necessity of emulating one another in the increase of their 
 armies. This increase is contagious, as Montesquieu 
 pointed out 150 years ago. 
 
IS WITHIN- YOU." 
 
 I7S 
 
 Every increase in the army of one state, with the aim of 
 self-defense against its subjects, becomes a source of 
 danger for neighboring states and calls for a similar in- 
 crease in their armies. 
 
 The armed forces have reached their present number 
 of millions not only through the menace of danger from 
 neighboring states, but principally through the necessity 
 of subduing every effort at revolt on the part of the sub- 
 jects. 
 
 JBoLb causes, mutually dependent, contribute to the same 
 result at once ; troops are required against internal forces 
 and also to keep up a position with other states. One is 
 the result ,of the other. The despotism of a government 
 always increases with the strength of the army and its 
 e.xternal successes, and the aggressiveness of a govern- 
 ment increases with its internal despotism. 
 
 The rivalry of the European states in constantly increas- 
 ing their forces has reduced them to the necessity of having 
 recourse to universal military service, since by that means 
 the greatest possible number of soldiers is obtained at the 
 least possible expense. Germany first hit on this device. 
 And directly one state adopted it the others were obliged 
 to do the same. And by this means all citizens are under 
 arms to support the iniquities practiced upon them ; all 
 citizens have become their own oppressors. 
 
 Universal military service __was an inevitabje Jogical 
 mecessityqto which we were bound to come. B ut it is al sx?. 
 the last expressio n o f the inconsistency__.i.nUereiit_.in, the. 
 social conception of Ijfe, when violence istieed.e.d to main- 
 tain it. This inconsistency has become obvious in univer- 
 sal military service. In fact, the whole significance of the 
 social conception of life consists in man’s recognition of 
 the barbarity of strife between individuals, and the transi- 
 toriness of personal life itself, and the transference of the 
 aim of life to groups of persons. But with universal 
 
176 
 
 THE KINGDOM OF GOD 
 
 military service it comes to pass that men, after making 
 every sacrifice to get rid of the cruelty of strife and the 
 insecurity of existence, are called upon to face all the perils 
 they had meant to avoid. And in addition to this the 
 state, for whose sake individuals renounced their personal 
 advantages, is exposed again to the same risks of inse- 
 curity and lack of permanence as the individual himself 
 Was in previous times. 
 
 Governments were to give men freedom from the 
 cruelty of personal strife and security in the permanence of 
 the state order of existence. But instead of doing that 
 they expose the individuals to the same necessity of strife, 
 substituting strife with individuals of other states for strife 
 with neighbors. And the danger of destruction for the 
 individual, and the state too, they leave just as it was. 
 
 Universal military service may be compared to the efforts 
 of a man to prop up his falling house who so surrounds it 
 and fills it with props and buttresses and planks and 
 scaffolding that he manages to keep the house standing 
 only by making it impossible to live in it. 
 
 In the same way universal military service destroys all 
 the benefits of the social order of life which it is employed 
 to maintain. ' 
 
 The advantages of social organization are security of 
 property and Tabor and associated action for the improve- 
 ment of existence — universal military service destroys all 
 this. 
 
 The taxes raised from the people for war preparations 
 absorb the greater part of the produce of labor which the 
 army ought to defend. 
 
 The withdrawing of all men from the ordinary course of 
 life destroys the possibility of labor itself. The danger 
 of war, ever ready to break out, renders all reforms of 
 social life vain and fruitless. 
 
 In former days if a man were told that if he did not 
 
IS WITHIN YOU. 
 
 177 
 
 acknowledge the authority of the state, he would be ex- 
 posed to attack from enemies domestic and foreign, that he 
 would have to resist them alone, and would be liable to be 
 killed, and that therefore it would be to his advantage to 
 put up with some hardships to secure himself from these 
 calamities, he might well believe it, seeing that the sacrifices 
 he made to the state were only partial and gave him the 
 hope of a tranquil existence in a permanent state. But 
 now, when the sacrifices have been increased tenfold and 
 the promised advantages are disappearing, it would be a 
 natural reflection that submission to authority is absolutely 
 useless. 
 
 But the fatal significance of universal military service, as 
 the manifestation of the contradiction inherent in the social 
 conception of life, is not only apparent in that. The greatest 
 manifestation of this contradiction consists in the fact that 
 every citizen in being made a soldier becomes a prop of the 
 government organization, and shares the responsibility of 
 everything the government does, even though he may not 
 admit its legitimacy. 
 
 Governments assert that armies are needed above all for 
 external defense, but that is not true. They are needed 
 principally against their subjects, and every man, under 
 universal military service, becomes an accomplice in all the 
 acts of violence of the government against the citizens 
 without any choice of his own. 
 
 To convince oneself of this one need only remember 
 what things are done in every state, in the name of order 
 and the public welfare, of which the execution always falls 
 to the army. All civil outbreaks for dynastic or other party 
 reasons, all the executions that follow on such disturbances, 
 all repression of insurrections, and military intervention to 
 break up meetings and to suppress strikes, all forced extor- 
 tion of taxes, all the iniquitous distributions of land, all the 
 restrictions on labor — are either carried out directly by the 
 
178 
 
 “ THE KINGDOM OF GOD 
 
 military or by the police with the army at their back. Any- 
 one who serves his time in the army shares the responsi- 
 bility of all these things, about which he is, in some cases, 
 dubious, while very often they are directly opposed to his 
 conscience. People are unwilling to be turned out of the 
 land they have cultivated for generations, or they are un- 
 willing to disperse when the government authority orders 
 them, or they are unwilling to pay the taxes required of 
 them, or to recognize laws as binding on them when they 
 have had no hand in making them, or to be deprived of their 
 nationality — and I, in the fulfillment of my military duty, 
 must go and shoot them for it. How can I help asking 
 myself when I take part in such punishments, whether they 
 are just, and whether I ought to assist in carrying them 
 out ? 
 
 Universal service is the extreme limit of violence neces- 
 sary for the support of the whole state organization, and it 
 is the extreme limit to which submission on the part of the 
 subjects can go. It is the keystone of the whole edifice, 
 and its fall will bring it all down. 
 
 The time has come when the ever-growing abuse of 
 power by governments and their struggles with one another 
 has led to their demanding such material and even moral 
 sacrifices from their subjects that everyone is forced to 
 reflect and ask himself, “ Can I make these sacrifices ? And 
 for the sake of what am I making them? I am expected 
 for the sake of the state to make these sacrifices, to re- 
 nounce everything that can be precious to man — iieace, 
 family, security, and human dignity.” What is this state, for 
 whose sake such terrible sacrifices have to be made ? And 
 why is it so indispensably necessary ? “The state,” they 
 tell us, “ is indispensably needed, in the first place, because 
 without it we should not be protected against the attacks 
 of evil-disposed persons ; and secondly, except for the state 
 we should be savages and should have neither religion, cul- 
 
/S WITHIN YOU." 
 
 179 
 
 ture, education, nor commerce, nor means of communication, 
 nor other social institutions ; and thirdl}', without the state 
 to defend us we should be liable to be conquered and en- 
 slaved by neighboring peoples.” 
 
 “ Except for the state,” they say, “ we should be exposed 
 to the attacks of evil-disposed persons in our own country.” 
 
 But who are these evil-disposed persons in our midst from 
 whose attacks we are preserved by the state and its army ? 
 Even if, three or four centuries ago, when men prided 
 themselves on their warlike prowess, when killing men was 
 considered an heroic achievement, there were such persons; 
 we know very well that there are no such persons now, that 
 we do not nowadays carry or use firearms, but everyone 
 professes humane principles and feels sympathy for his 
 fellows, and wants nothing more than we all do — that is, to 
 be left in peace to enjoy his existence undisturbed. So that 
 nowadays there are no special malefactors from whom the 
 state could defend us. If by these evil-disposed persons is 
 meant the men who are punished as criminals, we know 
 very well that they are not a different kind of being like 
 wild beasts among sheep, but are men just like ourselves, 
 and no more naturally inclined to crimes than those against 
 whom they commit them. We know now that threats and 
 punishments cannot diminish their number; that that can 
 only be done by change of environment and moral influence. 
 So that tlie justification of state violence on the ground of 
 the protection it gives us from evil-disposed persons, even 
 if it had some foundation three or four centuries ago, has 
 none whatever now. At present one would rather say on 
 the contrary that the action of the state with its cruel 
 methods of punishment, behind the general moral standard 
 of the age, such as prisons, galleys, gibbets, and guillotines, 
 tends rather to brutalize the people than to civilize them, 
 and consequently rather to increase than diminish the 
 number of malefactors. 
 
l 8 o “ the kingdom of GOD 
 
 “ Except for the state,” they tell us, “ we should not have 
 any religion, education, culture, means of communication, 
 and so on. Without the state men would not have been 
 able to form the social institutions needed for doing any- 
 thing.” This argument too was well founded only some 
 centuries ago. 
 
 If there was a time when people were so disunited, when 
 they had so little means of communication and interchange 
 of ideas, that they could not co-operate and agree together 
 in any common action in commerce, economics, or education 
 without the state as a center, this want of common action 
 exists no longer. The great extension of means of com- 
 munication and interchange of ideas has made men com- 
 pletely able to dispense with state aid in forming societies, 
 associations, corporations, and congresses for scientific, 
 economic, and political objects. Indeed government is 
 more often an obstacle than an assistance in attaining these 
 aims. 
 
 From the end of last century there has hardly been a 
 single progressive movement of humanity which has not 
 been retarded by the government. So it has been with 
 abolition of corporal punishment, of trial by torture, and 
 j of slavery, as well as with the establishment of the liberty 
 I of the press and the right of public meeting. In our day 
 governments not only fail to encourage, but directly hinder 
 every movement by which people try to work out new forms 
 of life for themselves. Every attempt at the solution of 
 the problems of labor, land, politics, and religion meets with 
 direct opposition on the part of government. 
 
 “Without governments nations would be enslaved by 
 their neighbors.” It is scarcely necessary to refute this 
 last argument. It carries its refutation on the face of it. 
 The government, they tell us, with its army, is necessary to 
 defend us from neighboring states who might enslave us. 
 But we know this is what all governments say of one 
 
IS WITHIN YOU. 
 
 i8i 
 
 another, and yet we know that all the European nations 
 profess the same principles of liberty and fraternity, and 
 therefore stand in no need of protection against one 
 another. And if defense against barbarous nations is 
 meant, one-thousandth part of the troops now under arms 
 would be amply sufficient for that purpose. We see that it 
 is really the very opposite of what we have been told. 
 The power of the state, far from being a security against 
 the attacks of our neighbors, exposes us, on the contrary, 
 to much greater danger of such attacks. So that every 
 man who is led, through his compulsory service in the 
 army, to reflect on the value of the state for whose sake he 
 is expected to be ready to sacrifice his peace, security, and 
 life, cannot fail to perceive that there is no kind of justifi- 
 cation in modern times for such a sacrifice. 
 
 And it is not only from the theoretical standpoint that 
 every man must see that the sacrifices demanded by the 
 state have no justification. Even looking at it practically, 
 weighing, that is to say, all the burdens laid on him by the 
 state, no man can fail to see that for him personally to 
 comply with state demands and serve in the army, would, 
 in the majority of cases, be more disadvantageous than to 
 refuse to do so. 
 
 If the majority of men choose to submit rather than to 
 refuse, it is not the result of sober balancing of advantages 
 and disadvantages, but because they are induced by a 
 kind of hypnotizing process practiced upon them. In 
 submitting they simply yield to the suggestions given 
 them as orders, without thought or effort of will. To resist 
 would need independent thought and effort of which every 
 man is not capable. Even apart from the moral signifi- 
 cance of compliance or non-compliance, considering 
 material advantage only, non-compliance will be more 
 advantageous in general. 
 
 Whoever I may be, whether I belong to the well-to-do 
 
“ THE KINGDOM OF GOD 
 
 182 
 
 class of the oppressors, or the working- class of the 
 oppressed, in either case the disadvantages of non-com- 
 pliance are less and its advantages greater than those of 
 compliance. If I belong to the minority of oppressors the 
 disadvantage.‘5 of non-compliance will consist in my being 
 brought to judgment for refusing to perform my duties to 
 the state, and if I am lucky, being acquitted or, as is done 
 in the case of the Mennonites in Russia, being set to work 
 out my military service at some civil occupation for the 
 state ; while if I am unlucky, I may be condemned to exile 
 or imprisonment for two or three years (I judge by the 
 cases that have occurred in Russia), possibly to even longer 
 imprisonment, or possibly to death, though the probability 
 of that latter is very remote. 
 
 So much for the disadvantages of non-compliance. The 
 disadvantages of compliance will be as follows: if I am 
 lucky I sh'all not be sent to murder my fellow-creatures, 
 and shall not be exposed to great danger of being maimed 
 and killed, but shall only be enrolled into military slavery. 
 I shall be dressed up like a clown, I shall be at the beck 
 and call of every man of a higher grade than my own from 
 corporal to field-marshal, shall be put through any bodily 
 contortions at their pleasure, and after being kept from 
 one to five years I shall have for ten years afterward to 
 be in readiness to undertake all of it again at any minute. 
 If I am unlucky I may, in addition, be sent to war, where I 
 shall be forced to kill men of foreign nations who have 
 done me no harm, where I may be maimed or killed, or 
 sent to certain destruction as in the case of the garrison of 
 Sevastopol, and other cases in every war, or what would 
 be most terrible of all, I may be sent against my own com- 
 patriots and have to kill my own brothers for some dynastic 
 or other state interests which have absolutely nothing to 
 do with me. So much for the comparative disadvant- 
 
75 WITHIN YOU." 183 
 
 The comparative advantages of compliance and non- 
 compliance are as follows : 
 
 For the man who submits, the advantages will be that, 
 after exposing himself to all the humiliation and perform- 
 ing all the barbarities required of him, he may, if he escapes 
 being killed, get a decoration of red or gold tinsel to stick 
 on his clown’s dress ; he may, if he is very lucky, be put in 
 command of hundreds of thousands of others as brutalized 
 as himself ; be called a field-marshal, and get a lot of 
 money. 
 
 The advantages of the man who refuses to obey will con- 
 sist in preserving his dignity as a man, gaining the approba- 
 tion of good men, and above all knowing that he is doing 
 the work of God, and so undoubtedly doing good to his 
 fellow-men. 
 
 So much for the advantages and disadvantages of both 
 lines of conduct for a man of the wealthy classes, an op- 
 pressor- For a man of the poor working class the advan- 
 tages and disadvantages will be the same, but with a great 
 increase of disadvantages. The disadvantages for the poor 
 man who submits will be aggravated by the fact that he 
 will by taking part in it, and, as it were, assenting to it 
 strengthen the state of subjection in which he is held him- 
 self. 
 
 But no considerations as to how far the state is useful or 
 beneficial to the men who help to support it by serving in 
 the army, nor of the advantages or disadvantages for the 
 individual of compliance or non-compliance with state 
 demands, will decide the question of the continued exist- 
 ence or the abolition of government. This question wilM 
 be finally decided beyond appeal by the religious con- | 
 sciousness or conscience of every man who is forced, I t/ 
 whether he will or no, through universal conscription, to| 
 face the question whether the state is to continue to exist} 
 or not. — ^ 
 
184 
 
 " THE KINGDOM OF GOD 
 
 CHAPTER VIII. 
 
 DOCTRINE OF NON-RESISTANCE TO EVIL BY FORCE MUST 
 INEVITABLY BE ACCEPTED BY MEN OF THE PRESENT 
 DAY. 
 
 Christianity is Not a System of Rules, but a New Conception of Life, and 
 therefore it was Not Obligatory and was Not Accepted in its True Sig- 
 nificance by All, but only by a Few — Christianity is. Moreover, 
 Prophetic of the Destruction of the Pagan I.ife, and therefore of 
 Necessity of the Acceptance of the Christian Doctrines — Non-resist- 
 ance of Evil by P'orce is One Aspect of the Christian Doctrine, which 
 must Inevitably in Our Times be Accepted by Men — Two Methods of 
 Deciding Every Quarrel — First Method is to Find a Universal Defini- 
 tion of Evil, which All Must Accept, and to Resist this Evil by Force 
 — Second Method is the Christian One of Complete Non-resistance by 
 Force — Though the P'ailure of the First Method was Recognized since 
 the Early Days of Christianity, it was Still Proposed, and only as 
 Mankind has Progressed it has Become More and More Evident that 
 there Cannot be any Universal Definition of Evil — This is Recog- 
 nized by All at the Present Day, and if Force is Still Used to Resist 
 Evil, it is Not Because it is Now Regarded as Right, but Because 
 People Don’t Know How to Avoid It — The Difficulty of Avoiding It 
 is the Result of the Subtle and Complex Character of the Government 
 Use of Force — Force is Used in Four Ways: Intimidation, Bribery, 
 Hypnotism, and Coercion by Force of Arms — State Violence Can 
 Never be Suppressed by the Forcible Overthrow of the Government — 
 Men are Led by the Sufferings of the Pagan Mode of Life to the Neces- 
 sity of Accepting Christ’s Teaching with its Doctrine of Non-resist- 
 ance by Force — The Consciousness of its Truth which is Diffused 
 Throughout Our Society, Will also Bring About its Acceptance — This 
 Consciousness is in Complete Contradiction with Our Life — This is 
 Specially Obvious in Compulsory Military Service, but Through Habit 
 and the Application of the Four Methods of Violence by the State, 
 Men do not See this Inconsistency of Christianity with Life of a 
 Soldier — They do Not even See It, though the Authorities Themselves 
 Show all the Immorality of a Soldier’s Duties with Perfect Clearness — 
 The Call to Military Service is the Supreme Test for Every Man, 
 when the Choice is Offered Him, between Adopting the Christian 
 Doctrine of Non-resistance, or Slavishly Submitting to the Existing 
 
IS WITHIN YOU." 
 
 185 
 
 State Organization — Men Usually Renounce All They Hold Sacred, 
 and Submit to the Demands of Government, Seeming to See No 
 Other Course Open to Them — For Men of the Pagan Conception of 
 Life there is No Other Course Open, and Never Will Be, in Spite of 
 the Growing Horrors of War — Society, Made Up of Such Men, Must 
 Perish, and No Social Reorganization Can Save It — Pagan Life Has 
 Reached Its Extreme Limit, and Will Annihilate Itself. 
 
 It is often said that if Christianity is a truth, it ought to 
 have been accepted by everyone directly it appeared, and 
 ought to have transformed men’s lives for the better. But 
 this is like saying that if the seed were ripe it ought at 
 once to bring forth stalk, flower, and fruit. 
 
 The Christian religion is not a legal system which, being 
 imposed by violence, may transform men’s lives. Chris- 
 tianity is a new and higher conception of life. A new con- 
 ception of life cannot be imposed on men ; it can only be 
 freely assimilated. And it can only be freely assimilated 
 in two ways : one spiritual and internal, the other experi- 
 mental and external. 
 
 Some people — a minority — by a kind of prophetic instinct 
 divine the truth of the doctrine, surrender themselves to it 
 and adopt it. Others — the majority — only through a long 
 course of mistakes, experiments, and suffering are brought 
 to recognize the truth of the doctrine and the necessity of 
 adopting it. 
 
 And by this experimental external method the majority 
 of Christian men have now been brought to this necessity 
 of assimilating the doctrine. One sometimes wonders whaT^ 
 necessitated the corruption of Christianity which is now 
 the greatest obstacle to its acceptance in its true signi fi- | 
 cance. 
 
 If Christianity had been presented to men in its true, 
 uncorrupted form, it would not have been accepted by the 
 majority, who would have been as untouched by it as the 
 nations of Asia are now. The peoples who accepted it in 
 
1 86 •• the kingdom OF COD 
 
 its corrupt form were subjected to its slow but certain 
 influence, and by a long course of errors and experiments 
 and their resultant sufferings have now been brought to 
 the necessity of assimulating it in its true significance. 
 
 The corruption of Christianity and its acceptance in its 
 corrupt form by the majority of men was as necessary as it 
 is that the seed should remain hidden for a certain time in 
 the earth in order to germinate. 
 
 Christianity is at once a doctrine of truth and a proph- 
 ecy. Eighteen centuries ago Christianity revealed to men 
 the truth in which they ought to live, and at the same time 
 foretold what human life would become if men would not 
 live by it but continued to live by their previous principles, 
 and what it would become if they accepted the Christian 
 doctrine and carried it out in their lives. 
 
 Laying down in the Sermon on the Mount the principles 
 by which to guide men’s lives, Christ said ; “ Whosoever 
 heareth these sayings of mine, and doeth them, I will liken 
 him unto a wise man, who built his house upon a rock; and 
 the rain descended, and the floods came, and the winds 
 blew, and beat upon that house ; and it fell not, for it was 
 founded upon a rock. A nd everyone that heareth these say- 
 ings, and doeth them not, shall be likened unto a foolish 
 man, who built his house upon the sand ; and the rain 
 descended, and the floods came, and the winds blew, and 
 beat upon that house ; and it fell : and great was the fall 
 of it ” (Matt. vii. 24-27). 
 
 And now after eighteen centuries the prophecy has been 
 fulfilled. Not having followed Christ’s teaching generally 
 and its application to social life in non-resistance to evil, 
 men have been brought in spite of themselves to the inevi- 
 table destruction foretold by Christ for those who do not 
 fulfill his teaching. 
 
 People often think the question of non-resistance to evil 
 by force is a theoretical one, which can be neglected. Yet 
 
IS WITHIN YOU." 
 
 187 
 
 this question is presented by life itself to all men, and calls 
 for some answer from every thinking man. Ever since 
 Christianity has been outwardly professed, this question is 
 for men in their social life like the question which presents 
 itself to a traveler when the road on which he has been 
 journeying divides into two branches. He must go on 
 and he cannot say : I will not think about it, but will go on 
 just as I did before. There was one road, now there are 
 two, and he must make his choice. 
 
 In the same way since Christ’s teaching has been known 
 by men they cannot say : I will live as before and will not 
 decide the question of resistance or non-resistance to evil 
 by force. At every new struggle that arises one must 
 inevitably decide ; am I, or am I not, to resist by force 
 what I regard as evil. 
 
 The question of resistance or non-resistance to evil arose 
 when the first conflict between men took place, since every 
 conflict is nothing else than resistance by force to what 
 each of the combatants regards as evil. But before Christ, 
 men did not see that resistance by force to what each 
 regards as evil, simply because one thinks evil what the 
 other thinks good, is only one of the methods of settling 
 the dispute, and that there is another method, that of not 
 resisting evil by force at all. 
 
 Before Christ’s teaching, it seemed to men that the one 
 only means of settling a dispute was by resistance to evil 
 by force. And they acted accordingly, each of the com- 
 batants trying to convince himself and others that what 
 each respectively regards as evil, is actually, absolutely 
 evil. 
 
 And to do this from the earliest time men have devised 
 definitions of evil and tried to make them binding on every- 
 one. And such definitions of evil sometimes took the form 
 of laws, supposed to have been received by supernatural 
 means, sometimes of the commands of rulers or assemblies 
 
i88 
 
 “ THE KINGDOM OF GOD 
 
 to whom infallibility was attributed. Men resorted to vio- 
 lence against others, and convinced themselves and others 
 that they were directing their violence against evil recog- 
 nized as such by all. 
 
 This means was employed from the earliest times, espe- 
 cially by those who had gained possession of authority, and 
 for a long while its irrationality was not detected. 
 
 But the longer men lived in the world and the more com- 
 plex their relations became, the more evident it was that to 
 resist by force what each regarded as evil was irrational, 
 that conflict was in no way lessened thereby, and that no 
 human definitions can succeed in making what some regard 
 as evil be accepted as such by others. 
 
 Already at the time Christianity arose, it was evident to 
 a great number of people in the Roman Empire where it 
 arose, that what was regarded as evil by Nero and Caligula 
 could not be regarded as evil by others. Even at that time 
 men had begun to understand that human laws, though 
 given out for divine laws, were compiled by men, and can- 
 not be infallible, whatever the external majesty with which 
 they are invested, and that erring men are not rendered 
 infallible by assembling together and calling themselves a 
 senate or any other name. Even at that time this was felt 
 and understood by many. And it was then that Christ 
 preached his doctrine, which consisted not only of the pro- 
 hibition of resistance to evil by force, but gave a new con- 
 ception of life and a means of putting an end to conflict 
 between all men, not by making it the duty of one section 
 only of mankind to submit without conflict to what is pre- 
 scribed to them by certain authorities, but by making it the 
 duty of all — and consequently of those in authority — not to 
 resort to force against anyone in any circumstances. 
 
 d'his doctrine was accepted at the time by only a very 
 small number of disciples. The majority of men, especially 
 all who were in power, even after the nominal acceptance of 
 
IS mr/iiM you: 
 
 189 
 
 Christianity, continued to maintain for themselves the prin- i 
 ciple of resistance by force to what they regarded as evil. / 
 So it was under the Roman and Byzantine emperors, and so | 
 it continued to be later. 
 
 The insufficiency of the principle of the authoritative defi- 
 nition of evil and resistance to it by force, evident as it 
 was in the early ages of Christianity, becomes still more 
 obvious through the division of the Roman Empire into 
 many states of equal authority, through their hostilities and 
 the internal conflicts that broke out within them. 
 
 But men were not ready to accept the solution given by 
 Christ, and the old definitions of evil, wliich ought to be 
 resisted, continued to be laid down by means of making 
 laws binding on all and enforced by forcible means. The 
 authority who decided what ought to be regarded as evil 
 and resisted by force was at one time the Pope, at another 
 an emperor or king, an elective assembly or a whole nation. 
 But both within and without the state there were always 
 men to be found who did not accept as binding on them- 
 selves the laws given out as the decrees of a god, or made 
 by men invested with a sacred character, or the institutions 
 supposed to represent the will of the nation ; and there 
 were men who thought good what the existing authorities 
 regarded as bad, and who struggled against the authorities 
 with the same violence as was employed against them. 
 
 The men invested with religious authority regarded as, 
 evil what the men and institutions invested with temporal 
 authority regarded as good and vice versa, and the struggle' 
 grew more and more intense. And the longer men used ■ 
 violence as the means of settling their disputes, the more ' 
 obvious it became that it was an unsuitable means, since 
 there could be no external authority able to define evil 
 recognized by all. — - 
 
 Things went on like this for eighteen centuries, and at 
 last reached the present position in which it is absolutely 
 
190 
 
 “ THE KINGDOM OF GOD 
 
 obvious that there is, and can be, no external definition of 
 ■ evil binding upon all. Men have come to the point of 
 ceasing to believe in the possibility or even desirability of 
 I finding and establishing such a general definition. It has 
 come to men in power ceasing to attempt to prove that 
 what they regard as evil is evil, and simply declaring that 
 they regard as evil what they don’t like, while their subjects 
 no longer obey them because they accept the definition of 
 evil laid down by them, but simply obey because they can- 
 Inot help themselves./ It was not because it was a good 
 'uiing, necessary and beneficial to men, and the contrary 
 course would have been an evil, but simply because it was 
 the will of those in power that Nice was incorporated into 
 France, and Lorraine into Germany, and Bohemia into 
 Austria, and that Poland was divided, and Ireland and 
 India ruled by the English government, and that the 
 Chinese are attacked and the Africans slaughtered, and the 
 Chinese prevented from immigrating by the Americans, and 
 the Jews persecuted by the Russians, and that landowners 
 appropriate lands they do not cultivate and capitalists 
 enjoy the fruits of the labor of others. It has come to the 
 present state of things ; one set of men commit acts of 
 violence no longer on the pretext of resistance to evil, but 
 simply for their profit or their caprice, and another set sub- 
 mit to violence, not because they suppose, as was su])posed 
 in former times, that this violence was practised upon them 
 for the sake of securing them from evil, but simply because 
 they cannot avoid it. 
 
 If the Roman, or the man of mediseval times, or the 
 average Russian of fifty years ago, as I remember him, was 
 convinced without a shade of doubt that the violence of 
 authority was indispensable to preserve him from evil ; that 
 taxes, dues, serfage, prisons, scourging, knouts, executions, 
 the army and war were what ought to be — we know now 
 that one can seldom find a man who believes that all these 
 
rs WITHIN- YON." 
 
 rgi 
 
 means of violence preserve anyone from any evil whatever, 
 and indeed does not clearly perceive that most of these 
 acts of violence to which he is exposed, and in which he 
 has some share, are in themselves a great and useless evil. 
 
 There is no one to-day who does not see the uselessness 
 and injustice of collecting taxes from the toiling masses 
 to enrich idle officials ; or the senselessness of inflicting 
 punishments on weak or depraved persons in the shape of 
 transportation from one place to another, or of imprison- 
 ment in a fortress where, living in security and indolence, 
 they only become weaker and more depraved ; or the worse 
 than uselessness and injustice, the positive insanity and 
 barbarity of preparations for war and of wars, causing 
 devastation and ruin, and having no kind of justification. 
 Yet these forms of violence continue and are supported by 
 the very people who see their uselessness, injustice, and 
 cruelty, and suffer from them. If fifty years ago the idle 
 rich man and the illiterate laborer were both alike con- 
 vinced that their state of everlasting holiday for one and 
 everlasting toil for the other was ordained by God himself, 
 we know very well that nowadays, thanks to the growth of 
 population and the diffusion of books and education, it 
 would be hard to find in Europe or even in Russia, either 
 among rich or poor, a man to whom in one shape or another 
 a doubt as to the justice of this state of things had never 
 presented itself. The rich know that they are guilty in the 
 very fact of being rich, and try to expiate their guilt by 
 sacrifices to art and science, as of old they expiated their 
 sins by sacrifices to the Church. And even the larger half 
 of the working people openly declare that the existing 
 order is iniquitous and bound to be destroyed or reformed. 
 One set of religious people of whom there are millions in 
 Russia, the so-called sectaries, consider the existing social 
 order as unjust and to be destroyed on the ground of the 
 Gospel teaching taken in its true sense. Others regard it 
 
192 
 
 “ THE KINGDOM OF GOD 
 
 as unjust on the ground of the socialistic, communistic, or 
 anarchistic theories, which are springing up in the lower 
 strata of the working people. Violence no longer rests on 
 the belief in its utility, but only on the fact of its having 
 existed so long, and being organized by the ruling classes 
 who profit by it, so that those who are under their authority 
 cannot extricate themselves from it. The governments of 
 our day — all of them, the most despotic and the liberal 
 alike — have become what Herzen so well called “ Ghenghis 
 Khan with the telegraph ; ” that is to say, organizations of 
 violence based on no principle but the grossest tyranny, 
 and at the same time taking advantage of all the means 
 invented by science for the peaceful collective social 
 activity of free and equal men, used by them to enslave 
 and oppress their fellows. 
 
 r Governments and the ruling classes no longer take their 
 stand on right or even on the semblance of justice, but on 
 a skillful organization carried to such a point of perfection 
 by the aid of science that everyone is caught in the circle 
 of violence and has no chance of escaping from it. This 
 circle is made up now of four methods of working upon 
 men, joined together like the links of a chain ring. 
 
 The first and oldest method is intimidation. This con- 
 sists in representing the existing state organization — what- 
 ever it may be, free republic or the most savage des- 
 potism — as something sacred and immutable, and therefore 
 following any efforts to alter it with the cruellest punish- 
 ments. This method is in use now — as it has been from 
 olden times — wherever there is a government : in Russia 
 against the so-called Nihilists, in America against Anarch- 
 ists, in France against Imperialists, Legitimists, Com- 
 munards, and Anarchists. 
 
 Railways, telegraphs, telephones, photographs, and the 
 great perfection of the means of getting rid of men for 
 years, without killing them, by solitary confinement, where. 
 
IS WITHIN YOU." 
 
 T93 
 
 hidden from the world, they perish and are forgotten, and 
 the many other modern inventions employed by govern- 
 ment, give such power that when once authority has come 
 into certain hands, the police, open and secret, the admin- 
 istration and prosecutors, jailers and executioners of all 
 kinds, do their work so zealously that there is no chance of 
 overturning the government, however cruel and senseless it 
 may be. 
 
 Jhe se con d metho d is corruption. It consists in plun- 
 dering the industrious 'w6'rking“'people of their wealth by 
 means of taxes and distributing it in satisfying the greed of 
 officials, who are bound in return to support and keep up 
 the oppression of the people. These bought officials, from 
 the highest ministers to the poorest copying clerks, make 
 up an unbroken network of men bound together by the 
 same interest — that of living at the expense of the people. 
 They become the richer the more submissively they carry 
 out the will of the government ; and at all times and places, 
 sticking at nothing, in all departments support by word and 
 deed the violence of government, on which their own pros- 
 perity also rests. 
 
 The third- method is what I can only describe as hypno- 
 tizing the people. This consists in checking the moral 
 development of men, and by various suggestions keeping 
 them back in the ideal of life, outgrown by mankind at 
 large, on which the power of government rests. This 
 hypnotizing process is organized at the present in the most 
 complex manner, and starting from their earliest childhood, 
 continues to act on men till the day of their death. It 
 begins in their earliest years in the compulsory schools, 
 created for this purpose, in which the children have in- 
 stilled into them the ideas of life of their ancestors, which 
 are in direct antagonism with the conscience of the modern 
 world. In countries where there is a state religion, they 
 teach the children the senseless blasphemies of the Church 
 
194 
 
 “ THE KINGDOM OF COD 
 
 catechisms, together with the duty of obedience to their 
 superiors. In republican states they teach them the savage 
 superstition of patriotism and the same pretended obedi- 
 ence to the governing authorities. 
 
 The process is kept up during later years by the en- 
 couragement of religious and patriotic superstitions. 
 
 The religious superstition is encouraged by establish- 
 ing, with money taken from the people, temples, proces- 
 sions, memorials, and festivals, which, aided by painting, 
 architecture, music, and incense, intoxicate the people, and 
 above all by the support of the clergy, whose duty consists 
 in brutalizing the people and keeping them in a permanent 
 state of stupefaction by their teaching, the solemnity of 
 their services, their sermons, and their interference in pri- 
 vate life— at births, deaths, and marriages. The patriotic 
 superstition is encouraged by the creation, with money 
 taken from the people, of national fetes, spectacles, monu- 
 ments, and festivals to dispose men to attach importance to 
 their own nation, and to the aggrandizement of the state and 
 its rulers, and to feel antagonism and even haired for other 
 nations. With these objects under despotic governments 
 there is direct prohibition against printing and disseminat- 
 ing books to enlighten the people, and everyone who might 
 rouse the people from their lethargy is exiled or imprisoned. 
 Moreover, under every government without exception 
 everything is kept back that might emancipate and every- 
 thing encouraged that tends to corrupt the people, such as 
 literary works tending to keep them in the barbarism of 
 religious and patriotic superstition, all kinds of sensual 
 amusements, spectacles, circuses, theaters, and even the 
 physical means of inducing stupefaction, as tobacco and 
 alcohol, which form the principal source of revenue of 
 states. Even prostitution is encouraged, and not only 
 recognized, but even organized by the government in the 
 majority of states. So much for the third method. 
 
IS WITHIN- YOU." 
 
 195 
 
 The fourth method consists in selecting from all the men 
 who have been -stupefied and enslaved by the three former 
 methods a certain number, exposing them to special and 
 intensified means of stupefaction and brutalization, and so 
 making them into a passive instrument for carrying out all 
 the cruelties and brutalities needed by the government. 
 This result is attained by taking them at the youthful age 
 when men have not had time to form clear and definite 
 principles of morals, and removing them from all natui'al 
 and human conditions of life, home, family and kindred, 
 and useful labor. They are shut up together in barracks, 
 dressed in special c’othes, and worked upon by cries, drums, 
 music, and shining objects to go through certain daily 
 actions invented for this purpose, and by this means are 
 brought into an hypnotic condition in which they cease to 
 be men and become mere senseless machines, submissive 
 to the hypnotizer. These physically vigorous young men 
 (in these days of universal conscription, all young men), 
 hypnotized, armed with murderous weapons, always 
 obedient to the governing authorities and ready for any 
 act of violence at their command, constitute the fourth and 
 principal method of enslaving men. 
 
 By this method the circle of violence is completed. 
 
 Intimidation, corruption, and hypnotizing bring people 
 into a condition in which they are willing to be soldiers ; 
 the soldiers give the power of punishing and plundering 
 them (and purchasing officials with the spoils), and hyp- 
 notizing them and converting them in time into these 
 same soldiers again. ^ 
 
 Tlie circle is complete, ai^there is no chance of break- 
 ing through it by force. 
 
 Some persons maintain that freedom from violence, or 
 at least a great diminution of it, may be gained by the 
 oppressed forcibly overturning the oppressive government 
 and replacing it by a new one under which such violence 
 
196 
 
 “ THE KINGDOM OF GOD 
 
 and oppression will be unnecessary, but they deceive them- 
 selves and others, and their efforts do not better the posi- 
 tion of the oppressed, but only make it worse. Their con- 
 duct only tends to increase the despotism of government. 
 Their efforts only afford a plausible pretext for government 
 to strengthen their power. 
 
 Even if we admit that under a combination of circum- 
 stances specially unfavorable for the government, as in 
 France in 1870, any government might be forcibl}" over- 
 turned and the power transferred to other hands, the new 
 authority would rarely be less oppressive than the old one ; 
 on the contrary, always having to defend itself against its 
 dispossessed and exasperated enemies, it would be more 
 despotic and cruel, as has always been the rule in all 
 revolutions. 
 
 While socialists and communists regard the individual, 
 istic, capitalistic organization of society as an evil, and the 
 anarchists regard as an evil all government whatever, there 
 are royalists, conservatives, and capitalists who consider 
 any socialistic or communistic organization or anarchy as 
 an evil, and all these parties have no means other than 
 violence to bring men to agreement. Whichever of these 
 parties were successful in bringing their schemes to pass, 
 must resort to support its authority to all the existing 
 methods of violence, and even invent new ones. 
 
 The oppressed would be another set of people, and 
 coercion would take some new form ; but the violence and 
 oppression would be unchanged or even more cruel, since 
 hatred would be intensified by the struggle, and new forms 
 of oppression would have been devised. So it has always 
 been after all revolutions and all attempts at revolution, all 
 conspiracies, and all violent changes of government. 
 Every conflict only strengthens the means of oppression in 
 the hands of those who happen at a given moment to be in 
 power. 
 
IS WITHIN YOU." 
 
 197 
 
 The position of our Christian society, and especially the 
 ideals most current in it, prove this in a strikingly convinc- 
 ing way. 
 
 There remains now only one sphere of human life not 
 encroached upon by government authority — that is the 
 domestic, economic sphere, the sphere of private life and 
 labor. And even this is now — thanks to the efforts of com- 
 munists and socialists — being gradually encroached upon 
 by government, so that labor and recreation, dwellings, 
 dress, and food will gradually, if the hopes of the reformers 
 are successful, be prescribed and regulated by government. 
 
 The slow progress of eighteen centuries has brought the 
 Christian nations again to the necessity of deciding the 
 question they have evaded — the question of the acceptance 
 or non-acceptance of Christ’s teaching, and the question 
 following upon it in social life of resistance or non-resist- 
 ance to evil by force. But there is this difference, that 
 whereas formerly men could accept or refu.se to accept the 
 solution given by Christ, now that solution cannot be 
 avoided, since it alone can save men from the slavery in 
 which they are caught like a net. 
 
 But it is not only the misery of the position which makes 
 this inevitable. 
 
 While the pagan organization has been proved more and 
 more false, the truth of the Christian religion has been 
 growing more and more evident. 
 
 Not in vain have the best men of Christian humanity, 
 who apprehended the truth by spiritual intuition, for 
 eighteen centuries testified to it in spite of every menace, 
 every privation, and every suffering. By their martyrdom 
 they passed on the truth to the masses, and impressed it on 
 their hearts. 
 
 Christianity has penetrated into the consciousness of 
 humanity, not only negatively by the demonstration of the 
 impossibility of continuing in the pagan life, but also 
 
198 
 
 “ THE KINGDOM OF GOD 
 
 through its simplification, its increased clearness and free- 
 dom from the superstitions intermingled with it, and its 
 diffusion through all classes of the population. 
 
 Eighteen centuries of Christianity have not passed with- 
 out an effect even on those who accepted it only externally. 
 These eighteen centuries have brought men so far that even 
 while they continue to live the pagan life which is no longer 
 consistent with the development of humanity, they not only 
 see clearly all the wretchedness of their position, but in 
 the depths of their souls they believe (they can only live 
 through this belief) that the only salvation from this posi- 
 tion is to be found in fulfilling the Christian doctrine in its 
 true significance. As to the time and manner of salvation, 
 opinions are divided according to the intellectual develop- 
 ment and the prejudices of each society. But every man 
 of the modern world recognizes that our salvation lies in 
 fulfilling the law of Christ. Some believers in the super- 
 natural character of Christianity hold that salvation will 
 come when all men are brought to believe in Christ, whose 
 second coming is at hand. Other believers in supernatural 
 Christianity hold that salvation will come through the 
 Church, which will draw all men into its fold, train them in 
 the Christian virtues, and transform their life. A third 
 section, who do not admit the divinity of Christ, hold that 
 the salvation of mankind will be brought about by slow 
 and gradual progress, through which the pagan principles 
 of our existence will be replaced by the principles of libert)^ 
 equality, and fraternity — that is, by Christian principles. 
 A fourth section, who believe in the social revolution, hold 
 that salvation will come when through a violent revolution 
 men are forced into community of property, abolition of 
 government, and collective instead of individual industry — 
 that is to say, the realization of one side of the Christian 
 doctrine. In one way or another all men of our day in 
 their inner consciousness condemn the existing effete 
 
/S WITHIN YOU." 
 
 199 
 
 pagan order, and admit, often unconsciously and while 
 regarding themselves as hostile to Christianity, that our 
 salvation is only to be found in the application of the Chris- 
 tian doctrine, or parts of it, in its true significance to our 
 daily life. 
 
 Christianity cannot, as its Founder said, be realized by 
 the majority of men all at once ; it must grow like a huge 
 tree from a tiny seed. And so it has grown, and now has 
 reached its full development, not yet in actual life, but in 
 the conscience of men of to-day. 
 
 Now not only the minority, who have always compre- 
 hended Christianity by spiritual intuition, but all the vast 
 majority who seem so far from it in their social existence 
 recognize its true significance. 
 
 Look at individual men in their private life, listen to their 
 standards of conduct in their judgment of one another; 
 hear not only their public utterances, but the counsels 
 given by parents and guardians to the young in their 
 charge ; and you will see that, far as their social life based 
 on violence may be from realizing Christian truth, in their 
 private life what is considered good by all without excep- 
 tion is nothing but the Christian virtues ; what is con- 
 sidered as bad is nothing but the antichristian vices. 
 Those who consecrate their lives self-sacrificingly to the 
 service of humanity are regarded as the best men. The 
 selfish, who make use of the misfortunes of others for their 
 own advantage, are regarded as the worst of men. 
 
 Though some non-Christian ideals, such as strength, 
 courage, and wealth, are still worshiped by a few who have 
 not been penetrated by the Christian spirit, these ideals 
 are out of date and are abandoned, if not by all, at least 
 by all those regarded as the best people. There are no 
 ideals, other than the Christian ideals, which are accepted 
 by all and regarded as binding on all. 
 
 The position of our Christian humanity, if you look at it 
 
200 
 
 “ THE KINGDOM OF GOD 
 
 from the outside with all its cruelty and degradation of 
 men, is terrible indeed. But if one looks at it within, in its 
 inner consciousness, the spectacle it presents is absolutely 
 different. 
 
 All the evil of our life seems to exist only because it has 
 been so for so long ; those who do the evil have not had 
 time yet to learn how to act otherwise, though they do not 
 want to act as they do. 
 
 All the evil seems to exist through some cause inde- 
 pendent of the conscience of men. 
 
 Strange and contradictory as it seems, all men of the 
 present day hate the very social order they are themselves 
 supporting. 
 
 I think it is Max Muller who describes the amazement of 
 an Indian convert to Christianity, who after absorbing the 
 essence of the Christian doctrine came to Europe and saw 
 the actual life of Christians. He could not recover from 
 his astonishment at the complete contrast between the 
 reality and what he had expected to find among Christian 
 nations. If we feel no astonishment at the contrast between 
 our convictions and our conduct, that is because the influ- 
 ences, tending to obscure the contrast, produce an effect 
 upon us too. We need only look at our life from the point 
 of view of that Indian, who understood Christianity in its 
 true significance, without any compromises or concessions, 
 we need but look at the savage brutalities of which our life 
 is full, to be appalled at the contradictions in the midst of 
 which we live often without observing them. 
 
 We need only recall the preparations for war, the mitrail- 
 leuses, the silver-gilt bullets, the torpedoes, and — the Red 
 Cross ; the solitary prison cells, the experiments of execu- 
 tion by electricity — and the care of the hygienic welfare of 
 prisoners ; the philanthropy of the rich, and their life, 
 which produces the poor they are benefiting. 
 
 And these inconsistencies are not, as it might seem, 
 
75 WITHIN YOU .7 20 i 
 
 because men pretend to be Christians while they are really 
 pagans, but because of so.aietliing lacking in men, or some 
 kind of force hindering them from being what they already 
 feel themselves to be in their consciousness, and what they 
 genuinely wish to be. Men of the present day do not 
 merely pretend to hate oppression, inequality, class dis- 
 tinction, and every kind of cruelty to animals as well as 
 human beings. They genuinely detest all this, but they do 
 not know how to put a stop to it, or perhaps cannot decide 
 to give up what preserves it all, and seems to them 
 necessary. 
 
 Indeed, ask every man separately whether he thinks it 
 laudable and worthy of a man of this age to hold a position 
 from which he receives a salary disproportionate to his 
 work ; to take from the people — often in poverty — taxes to 
 be spent on constructing cannon, torpedoes, and other 
 instruments of butchery, so as to make war on people with 
 whom we wish to be at peace, and who feel the same wish 
 in regard to us ; or to receive a salary for devoting one’s 
 whole life to constructing these instruments of butchery, or 
 to preparing oneself and others for the work of murder. 
 And ask him whether it is laudable and worthy of a man, 
 and suitable for a Christian, to employ himself, for a salary, 
 in seizing wretched, misguided, often illiterate and drunken, 
 creatures because they appropriate the property of others — 
 on a much smaller scale than we do — or because they kill 
 men in a different fashion from that in which we undertake 
 to do it — and shutting them in prison for it, ill treating 
 them and killing them ; and whether it is laudable and 
 worthy of a man and a Christian to preach for a salary to 
 the people not Christianit}^ but superstitions which one 
 knows to be stupid and pernicious; and whether it is 
 laudable and worthy of a man to rob his neighbor for his 
 gratification of what he wants to satisfy his simplest needs, 
 as the great landowners do ; or to force him to exhaust- 
 
202 
 
 THE KINGDOM OF COD 
 
 ing labor beyond his strength to augment one’s wealth, as 
 do factory owners and manufacturers ; or to profit by the 
 poverty of men to increase one’s gains, as merchants do. 
 And everyone taken separately, especially if one’s remarks 
 are directed at someone else, not himself, will answer. No! 
 And yet the very man who sees all the baseness of those 
 actions, of his own free will, uncoerced by anyone, often 
 even for no pecuniary profit, but only from childish vanity, 
 for a china cross, a scrap of ribbon, a bit of fringe he is 
 allowed to wear, will enter military service, become a 
 magistrate or justice of the peace, commissioner, arch- 
 bishop, or beadle, though in fulfilling these offices he must 
 commit acts the baseness and shamefulness of which he 
 cannot fail to recognize. 
 
 I know that many of these men will confidently try to 
 prove that they have reasons for regarding their position 
 as legitimate and quite indispensable. They will say in 
 their defense that authority is given by God, that the 
 functions of the state are indispensable for the welfare of 
 humanity, that property is not opposed to Christianity, 
 that the rich young man was only corhmanded to sell all 
 he had and give to the poor if he wished to be perfect, 
 that the existing distribution of property and our commer- 
 cial system must always remain as they are, and are to the 
 advantage of all, and so on. But, however much they try 
 to deceive themselves and others, they all know that what 
 they are doing is opposed to all the beliefs which they pro- 
 fess, and in the depths of their souls, when they are left 
 alone with their conscience, they are ashamed and miser- 
 able at the recollection of it, especially if the baseness of 
 their action has been pointed out to them. A man of the 
 present day, whether he believes in the divinity of Christ 
 or not, cannot fail to see that to assist in the capacity of 
 tzar, minister, governor, or commissioner in taking from a 
 poor family its last cow for taxes to be spent on cannons. 
 
75 WITHIN YOU. 
 
 203 
 
 or on the pay and pensions of idle officials, who live in 
 luxury and are worse than useless ; or in putting into 
 prison some man we have ourselves corrupted, and throw- 
 ing his family on the streets ; or in plundering and 
 butchering in war ; or in inculcating savage and idolatrous 
 superstitions in the place of the law of Christ ; or in 
 impounding the cow found on one’s land, though it belongs 
 to a man who has no land ; or to cheat the workman in a 
 factory, by imposing fines for accidentally spoiled articles ; 
 or making a poor man pay double the value for anything 
 simply because he is in the direst poverty ; — not a man of 
 the present day can fail to know that all these actions are 
 base and disgraceful, and that they need not do them. 
 They all know it. They know that what they are doing is 
 wrong, and would not do it for anything in the world if 
 they had the power of resisting the forces which shut their 
 eyes to the criminality of their actions and impel them to 
 commit them. 
 
 In nothing is the pitch of inconsistency modern life has 
 attained to so evident as in universal conscription, which is 
 the last resource and the final expression of violence. 
 
 Indeed, it is only because this state of universal arma- 
 ment has been brought about gradually and imperceptibly, 
 and because governments have exerted, in maintaining it, 
 every resource of intimidation, corruption, brutalization, and 
 violence, that we do not see its flagrant inconsistency with 
 the Christian ideas and sentiments by which the modern 
 world is permeated. 
 
 We are so accustomed to the inconsistency that we do 
 not see all the hideous folly and immorality of men volun- 
 tarily choosing the profession of butchery as though it were 
 an honorable career, of poor wretches submitting to con- 
 scription, or in countries where compulsory service has not 
 been introduced, of people voluntarily abandoning a life of 
 industry to recruit soldiers and train them as murderers. 
 
204 
 
 “ THE KINGDOM OF GOD 
 
 We know that all of these men are either Christians, or pro- 
 fess humane and liberal principles, and they know that they 
 thusbecome partly responsible — through universal conscrip- 
 tion, personally responsible — for the most insane, aimless, 
 and brutal murders. And yet they all do it. 
 
 More than that, in Germany, where compulsory service 
 first orginated, Caprivi has given expression to what had 
 been hitherto so assiduously concealed — that is, that the 
 men that the soldiers will have to kill are not foreigners 
 alone, but their own countrymen, the very working people 
 from whom they themselves are taken. And this admission 
 has not opened people’s eyes, has not horrified them ! They 
 still go like sheep to the slaughter, and submit to every- 
 thing required of them. 
 
 Aud that is not all : the Emperor of Germany has lately 
 shown still more clearly the duties of the army, by thank- 
 ing and rewarding a soldier for killing a defenseless citizen 
 who made his approach incautiously. By rewarding an 
 action always regarded as base and cowardly even by men 
 on the lowest level of morality, William has shown that 
 a soldier’s chief duty — the one most appreciated by the 
 authorities — is that of executioner ; and not a professional 
 executioner who kills only condemned criminals, but one 
 ready to butcher any innocent man at the word of com- 
 mand. 
 
 And even that is not all. In 1892, the same William, 
 the eijf ant terrible of state authority, who says plainly what 
 other people only think, in addressing some soldiers gave 
 public utterance to the following speech, which was 
 reported next day in thousands of newspapers : “ Con- 
 
 scripts ! ” he said, “ you have sworn fidelity to me before 
 the altar and the minister of God ! You are still too 
 young to understand all the importance of what has been 
 said here ; let your care before all things be to obey the 
 orders and instructions given you. You have sworn 
 
JS YOU. 
 
 205 
 
 fidelity to me, lads of my guard ; that means that yon are 
 now my soldiers, you have given yourselves to me body and 
 soul. For you there is now but one enemy, 7ny enemy. 
 In these days of socialistic sedition it may come to pass that 
 I connnand you to fire on your own kindred, your brothers, 
 even your own fathers and 77iothers — which God forbid ! — 
 even then you are bound to obey my orders without 
 hesitation.” 
 
 This man expresses what all sensible rulers think, but 
 studiously conceal. He says openly that the soldiers are 
 in his service, at his disposal, and must be ready for his 
 advantage to murder even their brothers and fathers. 
 
 In the most brutal words he frankly exposes all the 
 horrors and criminality for which men prepare themselves 
 in entering the army, and the depths of ignominy to which 
 they fall in promising obedience. Like a bold hypnotizer, 
 he tests the degree of insensibility of the hypnotized sub- 
 ject. He touches his skin with a red-hot iron ; the skin 
 smokes and scorches, but the sleeper does not awake. 
 
 This miserable man, imbecile and drunk with power, 
 outrages in this utterance everything that can be sacred 
 for a man of the modern world. And yet all the Chris- 
 tians, liberals, and cultivated people, far from resenting 
 this outrage, did not even observe it. 
 
 The last, the most extreme test is put before men in its 
 coarsest form. And they do not seem even to notice that 
 it is a test, that there is any choice about it. They seem 
 to think there is no course open but slavish submission. 
 One would have thought these insane words, which out- 
 rage everything a man of the present day holds sacred, 
 must rouse indignation. But there has been nothing of 
 the kind. 
 
 All the young men through the whole of Europe are ex- 
 posed year after year to this test, and with very few excep- 
 tions they renounce all that a man can hold sacred, all 
 
2o6 
 
 “ THE KINGDOM OF GOD 
 
 express their readiness to kill their brothers, even their 
 fathers, at the bidding of the first crazy creature dressed 
 up in a livery with red and gold trimming, and only wait 
 to be told where and when they are to kill. And they ac- 
 tually are ready. 
 
 Every savage has something he holds sacred, something 
 for which he is ready to suffer, something he will not con- 
 sent to do. But what is it that is sacred to the civilized 
 man of to-day? They say to him: “You must become 
 my slave, and this slavery may force you to kill even your 
 own father ; “ and he, often very well educated, trained in 
 all the sciences at the university, quietly puts his head 
 under the yoke. They dress him up in a clown’s costume, 
 and order him to cut capers, turn and twist and bow, and 
 kill — he does it all submissively. And when they let him 
 go, he seems to shake himself and go back to his former 
 life, and he continues to discourse upon the dignity of man, 
 liberty, equality, and fraternity as before. 
 
 “Yes, but what is one to do ? ’’ people often ask in gen- 
 uine perplexity. “ If everyone would stand out it would 
 be something, but by myself, I shall only suffer without 
 doing any good to anyone.” 
 
 And that is true. A man with the social conception of 
 life cannot resist. The aim of his life is his personal wel- 
 fare. It is better for his personal welfare for him to submit, 
 and he submits. 
 
 Whatever they do to him, however they torture or hu- 
 miliate him, he will submit, for, alone, he can do nothing ; 
 he has no principle for the sake of which he could resist 
 violence alone. And those who control them never allow 
 them to unite together. It is often said that the invention 
 of terrible weapons of destruction will put an end to war. 
 That is an error. As the means of extermination are im- 
 proved, the means of reducing men who hold the state 
 conception of life to submission can be improved to cor- 
 
/S WITHIN YOU. 
 
 207 
 
 respond. They may slaughter them by thousands, by 
 millions, they may tear them to pieces, still they will march 
 to war like senseless cattle. Some will want beating to 
 make them move, others will be proud to go if they are 
 allowed to wear a scrap of ribbon or gold lace. 
 
 And of this mass of men so brutalized as to be ready to 
 promise to kill their own parents, the social reformers — | 
 conservatives, liberals, socialists, and anarchists — propose i 
 to form a rational and moral society. What sort of moral ; 
 and rational society can be formed out of such elements? | 
 With warped and rotten planks you cannot build a house, \ 
 however you put them together. And to form a rational ■ 
 moral society of such men is just as impossible a task. 
 They can be formed into nothing but a herd of cattle, 
 driven by the shouts and whips of the herdsmen. As in- 
 deed they are. 
 
 So, then, we have on one side men calling themselves 
 Christians, and professing the principles of liberty, equality, 
 and fraternity, and along with that ready, in the name of 
 liberty, to submit to the most slavish degradation ; in the 
 name of equality, to accept the crudest, most senseless 
 division of men by externals merely into higher and lower 
 classes, allies and enemies ; and, in the name of fraternity, 
 ready to murder their brothers.* 
 
 The contradiction between life and conscience and the \ 
 misery resulting from it have reached the extreme limit and I 
 can go no further. The state organization of life based on 1 
 violence, the aim of which was the security of personal,, ' 
 family, and social welfare, has come to the point of renounc- 
 
 * The fact that among certain nations, as the English and the Ameri- 
 can, military service is not compulsory (though already one hears there 
 are some who advocate that it should be made so) does not affect the 
 servility of the citizens to the government in principle. Here we have 
 each to go and kill or be killed, there they have each to give the fruit 
 of their toil to pay for the recruiting and training of soldiers. 
 
2o8 
 
 THE KINGDOM OF GOD 
 
 ing the very objects for which it was founded — it has 
 reduced men to absolute renunciation and loss of the 
 welfare it was to secure. 
 
 The first half of the prophecy has been fulfilled in the 
 generation of men who have not accepted Christ’s teaching, 
 Their descendants have been brought now to the absolute 
 necessity of putting the truth of the second half to the test 
 of experience. 
 
 CHAPTER IX. 
 
 THE ACCEPTANCE OF THE CHRISTIAN CONCEPTION OF LIFE 
 WILL EMANCIPATE MEN FROM THE MISERIES OF OUR 
 PAGAN LIFE. 
 
 The External Life of Christian Peoples Remains Pagan Though they are 
 Penetrated by Christian Consciousness — The Way Out of this Contra- 
 diction is by the Acceptance of the Christian Theory of Life — Only 
 Through Christianity is Every Man Eree, and Emancipated of All 
 Human Authority — This Emancipation can be Effected by no Change 
 in External Conditions of Life, but Only by a Change in the Concep- 
 tion of Life — The Christian Ideal of Life Requires Renunciation of 
 all Violence, and in Emancipating the Man who Accepts it. Emanci- 
 pates the Whole World from All External Authorities — The Way 
 Out of the Present Apparently Hopeless Position is for Every Man 
 who is Capable of Assimilating the Christian Conception of Life, to 
 Accept it and Live in Accordance with it — But Men Consider this 
 Way too Slow, and Look for Deliverance Through Changes in Material 
 Conditions of Life Aided by Government — That Will Lead to No 
 Improvement, as it is simply Increasing the Evil under which Men 
 are Suffering — A Striking Instance of this is the Submission to Com- 
 pulsory Military Service, which it would be More Advantageous for 
 Every Man to Refuse than to Submit to — The Emancipation of Men 
 Can Only be Brought About by each Individual Emancipating Himself, 
 and the Examples of this Self-emancipation which are already Appear- 
 ing Threaten the Destruction of Governmental Authority — Refusal to 
 Comply with the Unchristian Demands of Government Undermines the 
 Authority of the State and Emancipates Men — And therefore Cases 
 
IS WITHIN YOU." 
 
 209 
 
 of such Non-compliance are Regarded with more Dread by State 
 Authorities than any Conspiracies or Acts of Violence — Examples of 
 Non-compliance in Russia, in Regard to Oath of Allegiance, Pay- 
 ment of Taxes, Passports, Police Duties, and Military Service — 
 Examples of such Non-compliance in other States— Governments do 
 not Know how to Treat Men who Refuse to Comply with their 
 Demands on Christian Grounds — Such People, without Striking a 
 Blow, Undermine the very Basis of Government from Within — To 
 Punish them is Equivalent to Openly Renouncing Christianity, and 
 Assisting in Diffusing the Very Principle by which these Men Justify 
 their Non-compliance — So Governments are in a Helpless Position — 
 Men who IMaintain the Uselessness of Personal Independence, only 
 Retard the Dissolution of the Present State Organization Based on 
 Force. 
 
 The position of the Christian peoples in oiir days has 
 remained just as cruel as it was in the times of paganism. 
 In many respects, especially in the oppression of the masses, 
 it has become even more cruel than it was in the days of 
 paganism. 
 
 But between the condition of men in ancient times and 
 their condition in our days there is just the difference that 
 we see in the world of vegetation between the last days of 
 autumn and the first days of spring. In the autumn the 
 external lifelessness in nature corresponds with its inward 
 condition of death, while in the spring the external lifeless- 
 ness is in sharp contrast with the internal state of reviving 
 and passing into new forms of life. 
 
 In the same way the similarity between the ancient 
 heathen life and the life of to-day is merely external : the 
 inward condition of men in the times of heathenism was 
 absolutely different from their inward condition at the 
 present time. 
 
 Then the outward condition of cruelty and of slavery 
 was in complete harmony with the inner conscience of men, 
 and every step in advance intensified this harmony ; now 
 the outward condition of cruelty and of slavery is com- 
 
210 
 
 THE KINGDOM OF GOD 
 
 pletely contradictory to the Christian consciousness of men, 
 and every step in advance only intensifies this contradic- 
 tion. 
 
 Humanity is passing through seemingly unnecessary, 
 fruitless agonies. It is passing through something like the 
 throes of birth. Everything is ready for the new life, but 
 still the new life does not come. 
 
 There seems no way out of the position. And there 
 would be none, except that a man (and thereby all men) is 
 gifted with the power of forming a different, higher theory 
 of life, which at once frees him from all the bonds by 
 which he seems indissolubly fettered. 
 
 And such a theory is the Christian view of life made 
 known to mankind eighteen hundred years ago. 
 
 A man need only make this theory of life his own, for 
 the fetters which seemed so indissolubly forged upon him 
 to drop off of themselves, and for him to feel himself abso- 
 lutely free, just as a bird would feel itself free in a fenced- 
 in place directly it took to its wings. 
 
 People talk about the liberty of the Christian Church, 
 about giving or not giving freedom to Christians. Under- 
 lying all these ideas and expressions there is some strange 
 misconception. Freedom cannot be bestowed on or taken 
 from a Christian or Christians. Freedom is an inalienable 
 possession of the Christian. 
 
 If we talk of bestowing freedom on Christians or with- 
 holding it from them, we are obviously talking not of real 
 Christians but of people who only call themselves Chris- 
 tians. A Christian cannot fail to be free, because the 
 attainment of the aim he sets before himself cannot be pre- 
 vented or even hindered by anyone or anything. 
 
 Let a man only understand his life as Christianity 
 teaches him to understand it, let him understand, that is, 
 that his life belongs not to him — not to his own individual- 
 ity, nor to his family, nor to the state — but to him who 
 
75 WITHIN YOU. 
 
 2II 
 
 has sent him into the world, and let him once understand 
 that he must therefore fulfill not the law of his own indi- 
 viduality, nor his family, nor of the state, but the infinite 
 law of him from whom he has come ; and he will not only 
 feel himself absolutely free from every human power, but 
 will even cease to regard such power as at all able to 
 hamper anyone. 
 
 Let a man but realize that the aim of his life is the fulfill- 
 ment of God’s law, and that law will replace all other laws 
 for him, and he will give it his sole allegiance, so that by 
 that very allegiance every human law will lose all binding 
 and controlling power in his eyes. 
 
 The Christian is independent of every human authority 
 by the fact that he regards the divine law of love, implanted 
 in the soul of every man, and brought before his conscious- 
 ness by Christ, as the sole guide of his life and other men’s 
 also. 
 
 The Christian may be subjected to external violence, he 
 may be deprived of bodily freedom, he may be in bondage 
 to his passions (he who commits sin is the slave of sin), 
 but he cannot be in bondage in the sense of being forced 
 by any danger or by any threat of external harm to perform 
 an act which is against his conscience. 
 
 He cannot be compelled to do this, because the depriva- 
 tions and sufferings which form such a powerful weapon 
 against men of the state conception of life, have not the 
 least power to compel him. 
 
 Deprivations and sufferings take from them the happi- 
 ness for which they live ; but far from disturbing the 
 happiness of the Christian, which consists in the conscious- 
 ness of fulfilling the will of God, they may even intensify 
 it, when they are inflicted on him for fulfilling his will. ~ 
 
 And therefore the Christian, who is subject only to the 
 inner divine law, not only cannot carry out the enactments 
 of the external law, v/hen they are not in agreement with 
 
2 12 
 
 THE KIHGDOM OF GOD 
 
 the divine law of love which he acknowledges (as is usually 
 the case with state obligations), he cannot even recognize 
 the duty of obedience to anyone or anything whatever, he 
 cannot recognize the duty of what is called allegiance. 
 
 For a Christian the oath of allegiance to any govern- 
 ment whatever — the very act which is regarded as the 
 foundation of the e.xistence of a state — is a direct renuncia- 
 tion of Christianit3c For the man who promises uncon- 
 ditional obedience in the future to laws, made or to be 
 made, by that very promise is in the most positive manner 
 renouncing Christianity, which means obeying in every cir- 
 cumstance of life only the divine law of love he recognizes 
 within him. 
 
 Under the pagan conception of life it was possible to 
 carry out the will of the temporal authorities, without 
 infringing the law of God expressed in circumcisions. 
 Sabbaths, fixed times of prayer, abstention from certain 
 kinds of food, and so on. The one law was not opposed 
 to the other. But that is just the distinction between the 
 Christian religion and heathen religion. Christianity does 
 not require of a man certain definite negative acts, but puts 
 him in a new, different relation to men, from which may 
 result the most diverse acts, which cannot be defined 
 beforehand. And therefore the Christian not only cannot 
 promise to obey the will of any other man, without know- 
 ing what will be required by that will ; he not only cannot 
 obey the changing laws of man, but he cannot even promise 
 to do anything definite at a certain time, or to abstain 
 from doing anything for a certain time. For he cannot 
 know what at any time will be required of him by that 
 Christian law of love, obedience to which constitutes the 
 meaning of life for him. ^’The Christian, in promising 
 unconditional fulfillment of the laws of men in the future, 
 would show plainly by that promise that the inner law of 
 God does not constitute for him the sole law of his life. 
 
IS WITHIN- YOU." 
 
 213 
 
 For a Christian to promise obedience to men, or the laws 
 of men, is just as though a workman bound to one em- 
 ployer should also promise to carry out every order that 
 might be given him by outsiders. One cannot serve two 
 masters. 
 
 The Christian is in dependent of human authority, be - 
 can ^ he ackno wJprTg^ Qod ^ au t^rity alone. His law, 
 revealed by Christ, he recognizes in himself, and TOluntarily 
 obeys it. 
 
 And this independence is gained, not by means of strife, 
 not by the destruction of existing forms of life, but only by 
 a change in the interpretation of life. , This independence 
 results first from the Christian recognizing the law of love, 
 revealed to him by his teacher, as perfectly sufficient for 
 all human relations, and therefore he regards every use of 
 force as unnecessary and unlawful ; and secondly, from the 
 fact that those deprivations and sufferings, or threats of 
 deprivations and sufferings (which reduce the man of the 
 social conception of life to the necessity of obeying) to the 
 Christian from his different conception of life, present them- 
 selves merely as the inevitable conditions of existence. 
 And these conditions, without striving against them by force, 
 he patiently endures, like sickness, hunger, and every other 
 hardship, but they cannot serve him as a guide for his 
 actions. The only guide for the Christian’s actions is to be 
 found in the divine principle living within him, which can- 
 not be checked or governed by anything. 
 
 The Christian acts according to the words of the prophecy 
 applied to his teacher: “ He shall not strive, nor cry; neither 
 shall any man hear his voice in the streets. A bruised reed 
 shall he not break, and smoking flax shall he not quench, till 
 he send forth judgment unto victory.” (Matt. xii. 19, 20.) 
 
 The Christian will not dispute with anyone, nor attack 
 anyone, nor use violence against anyone. On the con- 
 trary, he will bear violence w.ithput opposing it. But by 
 
214 
 
 “ THE KINGDOM OF GOD 
 
 this very attitude to violence, he will not only himself be 
 free, but will free the whole world from all external power. 
 
 “ Ye shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you 
 free.” If there were any doubt of Christianity being the 
 truth, the perfect liberty, that nothing can curtail, which a 
 man experiences directly he makes the Christian theory of 
 life his own, would be an unmistakable proof of its truth. 
 
 Men in their present condition are like a swarm of bees 
 hanging in a cluster to a branch. The position of the bees 
 on the branch is temporary, and must inevitably be changed. 
 They must start off and find themselves a habitation. Each 
 of the bees knows this, and desires to change her own and 
 the others’ position, but no one of them can do it till the 
 rest of them do it. They cannot all start off at once, be- 
 cause one hangs on to another and hinders her from 
 separating from the swarm, and therefore they all continue 
 to hang there. It would seem that the bees could never 
 escape from their position, just as it seems that worldly 
 men, caught in the toils of the state conception of life, can 
 never escape. And there would be no escape for the bees, 
 if each of them were not a living, separate creature, en- 
 dowed with wings of its own. Similarly there would be no 
 escape for men, if each were not a living being endowed 
 with the faculty of entering into the Christian conception 
 of life. 
 
 If every bee who could fly, did not try to fly, the others, 
 too, would never be stirred, and the swarm would never 
 change its position. And if the man who has mastered 
 the Christian conception of life would not, without waiting 
 for other people, begin to live in accordance with this con- 
 ception, mankind would never change its position. But 
 only let one bee spread her wings, start off, and fly away, 
 and after her another, and another, and the clinging, inert 
 cluster would become a freely flying swarm of bees. Just 
 in the same way, only let one man look at life as Chris- 
 
IS WITHIN YOU: 
 
 215 
 
 tianity teaches him to look at it, and after him let another 
 and another do the same, and the enchanted circle of exist- 
 ence in the state conception of life, from which there 
 seemed no escape, will be broken through. 
 
 But men think that to set all men free by this means is 
 too slow a process, that they must find some other means 
 by which they could set all men free at once. It is just as 
 though the bees who want to start and fly away should 
 consider it too long a process to wait for all the swarm to 
 start one by one ; and should think they ought to find 
 some means by which it would not be necessary for every 
 separate bee to spread her wings and fly off, but by which 
 the whole swarm could fly at once where it wanted to. But 
 that is not possible ; till a first, a second, a third, a hun- 
 dredth bee spreads her wings and flies off of her own 
 accord, the swarm will not fly off and will not begin its 
 new life. Till every individual man makes the Christian 
 conception of life his own, and begins to live in accord with 
 it, there can be no solution of the problem of human life, 
 and no establishment of a new form of life. 
 
 One of the most striking phenomena of our times is pre- 
 cisely this advocacy of slavery, which is promulgated among 
 the masses, not by governments, in whom it is inevitable, 
 but by men who, in advocating socialistic theories, regard 
 themselves as the champions of freedom. 
 
 These people advance the opinion that the amelioration 
 of life, the bringing of the facts of life into harmony with 
 the conscience, will come, not as the result of the personal 
 efforts of individual men, but of itself as the result of a 
 certain possible reconstruction of society effected in some 
 way or other. The idea is promulgated that men ought 
 not to walk on their own legs where they want and ought to 
 go, but that a kind of floor under their feet will be moved 
 somehow, so that on it they can reach where they ought to 
 go without moving their own legs. And, therefore, all 
 
2i6 
 
 “ THE KINGDOM OF GOD 
 
 their efforts ought to be directed, not to going so far as 
 their strength allows in the direction they ought to go, but 
 to standing still and constructing such a floor. 
 
 In the sphere of political economy a theory is propounded 
 which amounts to saying that the worse things are the 
 better they are ; that the greater the accumulation of 
 capital, and therefore the oppression of the workman, the 
 nearer the day of emancipation, and, therefore, every per- 
 sonal effort on the part of a man to free himself from the 
 oppression of capital is useless. In the sphere of govern- 
 ment it is maintained that the greater the power of the 
 government, which, according to this theory, ought to inter- 
 vene in every department of private life in which it has not 
 yet intervened, the better it will be, and that therefore we 
 ought to invoke the interference of government in private 
 life. In politics and internr.tional questions it is maintained 
 that the improvement of the means of destruction, the mul- 
 tiplication of armaments, will lead to the necessity of making 
 war by means of congresses, arbitration, and so on. And, 
 marvelous to say, so great is the dullness of men, that they 
 believe in these theories, in spite of the fact that the whole 
 course of life, every step they take, shows how unworthy 
 they are of belief. 
 
 The people are suffering from oppression, and to deliver 
 them from this oppression they are advised to frame general 
 measures for the improvement of their position, which 
 measures are to be intrusted to the authorities, and them- 
 selves to continue to yield obedience to the authorities. And 
 obviously all that results from this is only greater power in 
 the hands of the authorities, and greater oppression result- 
 ing from it. 
 
 Not one of the errors of men carries them so far away 
 from the aim toward which they are struggling as this very 
 one. They do all kinds of different things for the attain- 
 ment of their aim, but not the one simple obvious thing 
 
IS WITHIN- you: 
 
 217 
 
 which is within reach of everyone. They devise the subtlest 
 means for changing the position which is irksome to them, 
 but not that simplest means, that everyone should refrain 
 from doing what leads to that position. 
 
 I have been told a story of a gallant police officer, who 
 came to a village where the peasants were in insurrection 
 and the military had been called out, and he undertook to 
 pacify the insurrection in the spirit of Nicholas I., by his 
 personal influence alone. He ordered some loads of rods 
 to be brought, and collecting all the peasants together into 
 a barn, he went in with them, locking the door after him. 
 To begin with, he so terrified the peasants by his loud 
 threats that, reduced to submission by him, they set to work 
 to flog one another at his command. And so they flogged 
 one another until a simpleton was found who would not 
 allow himself to be flogged, and shouted to his companions 
 not to flog one another. Only then the flogging ceased and 
 the police officer made his escape. Well, this simpleton’s 
 advice would never be followed by men of the state concep- 
 tion of life, who continue to flog one another, and teach 
 people that this very act of self-castigation is the last word 
 of human wisdom. 
 
 Indeed, can one imagine a more striking instance of men 
 flogging themselves than the submissiveness with which 
 men of our times will perform the very duties required of 
 them to keep them in slavery, especially the duty of military 
 service ? We see people enslaving themselves, suffering 
 from this slavery, and believing that it must be so, that it 
 does not matter, and will not hinder the emancipation of 
 men, which is being prepared somewhere, somehow, in spite 
 of the ever-increasing growth of slavery. 
 
 In fact, take any man of the present time whatever (I 
 don’t mean a true Christian, but an average man of the 
 present day), educated or uneducated, believing or unbe- 
 lieving, rich or poor, married or unmarried. Such a man 
 
2i8 
 
 THE KINGDOM OF GOD 
 
 lives working at his work, or enjoying his amusements, 
 spending the fruits of his labors on himself or on those near 
 to him, and, like everyone, hating every kind of restriction 
 and deprivation, dissension and suffering. Such a man is 
 going his way peaceably, when suddenly people come and say 
 to him; First, promise and swear to us that you will slavishly 
 obey us in everything we dictate to you, and will consider 
 absolutely good and authoritative everything we plan, 
 decide, and call law. Secondly, hand over a part of the 
 fruits of your labors for us to dispose of — we will use the 
 money to keep you in slavery, and to hinder you from 
 forcibly opposing our orders. Thirdly, elect others, or be 
 yourself elected, to take a pretended share in the govern- 
 ment, knowing all the while that the government will pro- 
 ceed quite without regard to the foolish speeches you, and 
 those like you, may utter, and knowing that its proceedings 
 will be according to our will, the will of those who have the 
 army in their hands. Fourthly, come at a certain time to 
 the law courts and take your share in those senseless cruel- 
 ties which we perpetrate on sinners, and those whom we 
 have corrupted, in the shape of penal servitude, exile, soli- 
 tary confinement, and death. And fifthly and lastl}^ more 
 than all this, in spite of the fact that you may be on the friend- 
 liest terms with people of other nations, be ready, directly 
 we order you to do so, to regard those whom we indicate to 
 you as your enemies ; and be ready to assist, either in per- 
 son or by proxy, in devastation, plunder, and murder of 
 their men, women, children, and aged alike — possibly your 
 own kinsmen or relations — if that is necessary to us. 
 
 One would expect that every man of the present day 
 who has a grain of sense left, might reply to such require- 
 ments, “ But why should I do all this?” One would think 
 every right-minded man must say in amazement: “Why 
 should I promise to yield obedience to everything that 
 has been decreed first by Salisbury, then by Gladstone ; 
 
/S WITHIN YOU. 
 
 219 
 
 one day by Boulanger, and another by Parliament ; one day 
 by Peter III., the next by Catherine, and the day after by 
 Pougachef ; one day by a mad king of Bavaria, another by 
 William ? Why should I promise to obey them, knowing 
 them to be wicked or foolish people, or else not knowing 
 them at all ? Why am I to hand over the fruits of my 
 labors to them in the shape of taxes, knowing that the 
 money will be spent on the support of officials, prisons, 
 churches, armies, on things that are harmful, and on my 
 own enslavement ? Why should I punish myself ? Why 
 should I go wasting my time and hoodwinking myself, giv- 
 ing to miscreant evildoers a semblance of legality, by 
 taking part in elections, and pretending that I am taking 
 part in the government, when I know very well that the 
 real control of the government is in the hands of those 
 who have got hold of the army? Why should I go to the 
 law courts to take part in the trial and punishment of men 
 because they have sinned, knowing, if I am a Christian, 
 that the law of vengence is replaced by the law of love, 
 and, if I am an educated man, that punishments do not 
 reform, but only deprave those on whom they are inflicted ? 
 And why, most of all, am I to consider as enemies the 
 people of a neighboring nation, with whom I have hitherto 
 lived and with whom I wish to live in love and harmony, 
 and to kill and rob them, or to bring them to misery, simply 
 in order that the keys of the temple at Jerusalem may be in 
 the hands of one archbishop and not another, that one 
 German and not another may be prince in Bulgaria, or that 
 the English rather than the American merchants may cap- 
 ture seals ? 
 
 And why, most of all, should I take part in person or 
 hire others to murder my own brothers and kinsmen ? 
 Why should I flog myself? It is altogether unnecessary 
 for me ; it is hurtful to me, and from every point of view 
 it is immoral, base, and vile. So why should I do this ? 
 
220 
 
 THE KINGDOM OF GOD 
 
 (I 
 
 If you tell me that if I do it not I shall receive some injury 
 from someone, then, in the first place, I cannot anticipate 
 from anyone an injury so great as the injury you bring on 
 me if I obey you ; and secondly, it is perfectly clear to me 
 that if we our own selves do not flog ourselves, no one will 
 flog us. 
 
 As for the government — that means the tzars, ministers, 
 and officials with pens in their hands, who cannot force us 
 into doing anything, as that officer of police compelled the 
 peasants ; the men who will drag us to the law court, to 
 prison, and to execution, are not tzars or officials with 
 pens in their hands, but the very people who are in the 
 same position as we are. And it is just as unprofitable and 
 harmful and unpleasant to them to be flogged as to me, 
 and therefore there is every likelihood that if I open their 
 eyes they not only would not treat me with violence, but 
 would do just as I am doing. 
 
 Thirdly, even if it should come to pass that I had to 
 suffer for it, even then it would be better for me to be 
 exiled or sent to prison for standing up for common sense 
 and right — which, if not to-day, at least within a very short 
 time, must be triumphant — than to suffer for folly and 
 wrong which must come to an end directly. And there- 
 fore, even in that case, it is better to run the risk of their 
 banishing me, shutting me up in prison, or executing me, 
 than of my living all my life in bondage, through my own 
 fault, to wicked men. Better is this than the possibility of 
 being destroyed by victorious enemies, and being stupidly 
 tortured and killed by them, in fighting for a cannon, or a 
 piece of land of no use to anyone, or for a senseless rag 
 called a banner. 
 
 I don’t want to flog myself and I won’t do it. I have no 
 reason to do it. Do it yourselves, if you want it done ; but 
 I won’t do it. 
 
 One would have thought that not religious or moral feel- 
 
75 WITHIN YOU." , 221 
 
 ing alone, but the simplest common sense and foresight 
 should impel every man of the present day to answer and 
 to act in that way. But not so. Men of the state con- 
 ception of life are of the opinion that to act in that way is 
 not necessary, and is even prejudicial to the attainment of 
 their object, the emancipation of men from slavery. They 
 hold that we must continue, like the police officer’s peas- 
 ants, to flog one another, consoling ourselves with the 
 reflection that we are talking away in the assemblies and 
 meetings, founding trades unions, marching through the 
 streets on the ist of May, getting up conspiracies, and 
 stealthily teasing the government that is flogging us, and 
 that through all this it will be brought to pass that, by 
 enslaving ourselves in closer and closer bondage, we shall 
 very soon be free. 
 
 Nothing hinders the emancipation of men from slavery 
 so much as this amazing error. Instead of every man 
 directing his energies to freeing himself, to transforming 
 his conception of life, people seek for an external united 
 method of gaining freedom, and continue to rivet their 
 chains faster and faster. 
 
 It is much as if men were to maintain that to make up a 
 fire there was no need to kindle any of the coals, but that 
 all that was necessary was to arrange the coals in a certain 
 order. Yet the fact that the freedom of all men will be 
 brought about only through the freedom of individual 
 persons, becomes more and more clear as time goes on. 
 The freedom of individual men, in the name of the Chris- 
 tian conception of life, from state domination, which was 
 formerly an exceptional and unnoticed phenomenon, has of 
 late acquired threatening significance for state authorities. 
 
 If in a former age, in the Roman times, it happened that 
 a Christian confessed his religion and refused to take part 
 in sacrifices, and to worship the emperors or the gods ; or 
 in the Middle Ages a Christian refused to worship images, 
 
222 
 
 “ THE KINGDOM OF GOD 
 
 or to acknowledge the authority of the Pope — these cases 
 were in the first place a matter of chance. A man might 
 be placed under the necessity of confessing his faith, or he 
 might live all his life without being placed under this 
 necessity. But now all men, without exception, are sub- 
 jected to this trial of their faith. Every man of the present 
 day is under the necessity of taking part in the cruelties of 
 pagan life, or of refusing all participation in them. And 
 secondly, in those days cases of refusal to worship the gods 
 or the images or the Pope were not incidents that had any 
 material bearing on the state. Whether men worshiped 
 or did not worship the gods or the images or the Pope, 
 the state remained just as powerful. But now cases of 
 refusing to comply with the unchristian demands of the 
 government are striking at the very root of state authority, 
 because the whole authority of the state is based on the 
 compliance with these unchristian demands. 
 
 The sovereign powers of the world have in the course of 
 time been brought into a position in which, for their own 
 preservation, they must require from all men actions which 
 cannot be performed by men who profess true Chris- 
 tianity. 
 
 And therefore in our days every profession of true Chris- 
 tianity, by any individual man, strikes at the most essential 
 power of the state, and inevitably leads the way for the 
 emancipation of all. 
 
 What importance, one might think, can one attach to 
 such an incident as some dozens of crazy fellows, as people 
 will call them, refusing to take the oath of allegiance to the 
 government, refusing to pay taxes, to take part in law pro- 
 ceedings or in military service ? 
 
 These people are punished and exiled to a distance, and 
 life goes on in its old way. One might think there was no 
 importance in such incidents ; but yet, it is just those inci- 
 dents, more than anything else, that will undermine the 
 
IS WITHIN YOU. 
 
 223 
 
 power of the state and prepare the way for the freedom of 
 men. These are the individual bees, who are beginning to 
 separate from the swarm, and are flying near it, waiting till 
 the whole swarm can no longer be prevented from starting 
 off after them. And the governments know this, and fear 
 such incidents more than all the socialists, communists, and 
 anarchists, and their plots and dynamite bombs. 
 
 A new reign is beginning. According to the universal 
 rule and established order it is required that all the subjects 
 should take the oath of allegiance to the new government. 
 There is a general decree to that effect, and all are 
 summoned to the council-houses to take the oath. All at 
 once one man in Perm, another in Tula, a third in Moscow, 
 and a fourth in Kalouga declare that they will not take the 
 oath, and though there is no communication between them, 
 they all explain their refusal on the same grounds — namely, 
 that swearing is forbidden by the law of Christ, and that 
 even if swearing had not been forbidden, they could not, 
 in the spirit of the law of Christ, promise to perform the 
 evil actions required of them in the oath, such as informing 
 against all such as may act against the interests of the 
 government, or defending their government with firearms 
 or attacking its enemies. They are brought before rural 
 police officers, district police captains, priests, and gov- 
 ernors. They are admonished, questioned, threatened, and 
 punished ; but they adhere to their resolution, and do not 
 take the oath. And among the millions of those who did 
 take the oath, those dozens go on living who did not take 
 the oath. And they are questioned : 
 
 “ What, didn’t you take the oath ? ” 
 
 “ No, I didn’t take the oath.” 
 
 “ And what happened — nothing ? ” 
 
 “ Nothing.” 
 
 The subjects of a state are all bound to pay taxes. And 
 everyone pays taxes, till suddenly one man in Kharkov, 
 
224 
 
 “ THE KINGDOM OF GOD 
 
 another in Tver, and a third in Samara refuse to pay 
 taxes — all, as though in collusion, saying the same thing. 
 One says he will only pay when they tell him what object 
 the money taken from him will be spent on. “ If it is for 
 good deeds,” he says, “ he will give it of his own accord, 
 and more even than is required of him. If for evil deeds, 
 then he will give nothing voluntarily, because by the law of 
 Christ, whose follower he is, he cannot take part in evil 
 deeds.” The others, too, say the same in other words, and 
 will not voluntarily pay the taxes. 
 
 Those who have anything to be taken have their prop- 
 erty taken from them by force ; as for those who have 
 nothing, they are left alone. 
 
 “ What, didn’t you pay the tax ? ” 
 
 “ No, I didn’t pay it.” 
 
 “And what happened — nothing?” 
 
 “ Nothing.” 
 
 There is the institution of passports. Everyone moving 
 from his place of residence is bound to carry one, and to 
 pay a duty on it. Suddenly people are to be found in 
 various places declaring that to carry a passport is not 
 necessary, that one ought not to recognize one’s depend- 
 ence on a state which exists by means of force ; and these 
 people do not carry passports, or pay the duty on them. 
 And again, it’s impossible to force those people by any 
 means to do what is required. They send them to jail, 
 and let them out again, and these people live without pass- 
 ports. 
 
 All peasants are bound to fill certain police offices — that 
 of village constable, and of watchman, and so on. Sud- 
 denly in Kharkov a peasant refuses to perform this duty, 
 justifying his refusal on the ground that by the law of 
 Christ, of which he is a follower, he cannot put any man in 
 fetters, lock him up, or drag him from place to place. The 
 same declaration is made by a peasant in Tver, another in 
 
IS WITHIN YOU." 
 
 225 
 
 Tambov. These peasants are abused, beaten, shut up in 
 prison, but they stick to their resolution and don’t fill these 
 offices against their convictions. And at last they cease to 
 appoint them as constables. And again nothing happens. 
 
 All citizens are obliged to take a share in law proceedings 
 in the character of jurymen. Suddenly the most different 
 people — mechanics, professors, tradesmen, peasants, serv- 
 ants, as though by agreement refuse to fill this office, and 
 not on the grounds allowed as sufficient by law, but because 
 any process at law is, according to their views, unchristian. 
 They fine these people, trying not to let them have an 
 opportunity of explaining their motives in public, and 
 replace them by others. And again nothing can be done. 
 
 All young men of twenty-one years of age are obliged to 
 draw lots for service in the army. All at once one young 
 man in Moscow, another in Tver, a third in Kharkov, and 
 a fourth in Kiev present themselves before the authorities, 
 and, as though by previous agreement, declare that they 
 will not take the oath, they will not serve because they are 
 Christians. I will give the details of one of the first cases, 
 since they have become more frequent, which I happen to 
 know about.* The same treatment has been repeated in 
 every other case. A young man of fair education refuses 
 in the Moscow Townhall to take the oath. No attention 
 is paid to what he says, and it is requested that he should 
 pronounce the words of the oath like the rest. He declines, 
 quoting a particular passage of the Gospel in which swear- 
 ing is forbidden. No attention is paid to his arguments, 
 and he is again requested to comply with the order, but he 
 does not comply with it. Then it is supposed that he is a 
 sectary and therefore does not understand Christianity in 
 the right sense, that is to say, not in the sense in which the 
 priests in the pay of the government understand it. And 
 
 All the details of this case, as well as those preceding it, are authentic. 
 
226 
 
 “ THE KINGDOM OF GOD 
 
 the young man is conducted under escort to the priests, 
 that they may bring him to reason. The priests begin to 
 reason with him, but their efforts in Christ’s name to per- 
 suade him to renounce Christ obviously have no influence 
 on him ; he is pronounced incorrigible and sent back again 
 to the army. He persists in not taking the oath and openly 
 refuses to perform any military duties. It is a case that 
 has not been provided for by the laws. To overlook such 
 a refusal to comply with the demands of the authorities is 
 out of the question, but to put such a case on a par with 
 simple breach of discipline is also out of the question. 
 
 After deliberation. among themselves, the military au- 
 thorities decide to get rid of the troublesome young man, 
 to consider him as a revolutionist, and they dispatch him 
 under escort to the committee of the secret police. The 
 police authorities and gendarmes cross-question him, but 
 nothing that he says can be brought under the head of any 
 of the misdemeanors which come under their jurisdiction. 
 And there is no possibility of accusing him either of revo- 
 lutionary acts or revolutionary plotting, since he declares 
 that he does not wish to attack anything, but, on the con- 
 trary, is opposed to any use of force, and, far from plotting 
 in secret, he seeks every opportunity of saying and doing 
 all that he says and does in the most open manner. And 
 the gendarmes, though they are bound by no hard-and-fast 
 rules, still find noground fora criminal charge in the young 
 man, and, like the clergy, they send him back to the army. 
 Again the authorities deliberate together, and decide to ac- 
 cept him though he has not taken the oath, and to enrol 
 him among the soldiers. They put him into the uniform, 
 enrol him, and send him under guard to the place where 
 the army is quartered. There the chief officer of the 
 division which he enters again expects the young man to 
 perform his military duties, and again he refuses to obey, 
 and in the presence of other soldiers explains the reason of 
 
75 WITHIN you:' 
 
 227 
 
 his refusal, saying that he as a Christian cannot voluntarily 
 prepare himself to commit murder, which is forbidden by 
 the law of Moses. 
 
 This incident occurs in a provincial town. The case 
 awakens the interest, and even the sympathy, not only of 
 outsiders, but even of the officers. And the chief officers 
 consequently do not decide to punish this refusal of obedi- 
 ence with disciplinary measures. To save appearances, 
 though, they shut the young man up in prison, and write 
 to the highest military authorities to inquire what they are 
 to do. To refuse to serve in the army, in which the Tzar 
 himself serves, and which enjoys the blessing of the Church, 
 seems insanity from the official point of view. Consequently 
 they write from Petersburg that, since the young man 
 must be out of his mind, they must not use any severe 
 treatment with him, but must send him to a lunatic asylum, 
 that his mental condition may be inquired into and be 
 scientifically treated. They send him to the asylum in the 
 hope that he will remain there, like another young man, 
 who refused ten years ago at Tver to serve in the army, 
 and who was tortured in the asylum till he submitted. But 
 even this step does not rid the military authorities of the 
 inconvenient man. The doctors examine him, interest 
 themselves warmly in his case, and naturally finding in him 
 no symptoms of mental disease, send him back to the army. 
 There they receive him, and making believe to have forgot- 
 ten his refusal, and his motives for it, they again request 
 him to go to drill, and again in the presence of the other 
 soldiers he refuses and explains the reason of his refusal. 
 The affair continues to attract more and more attention, 
 both among the soldiers and the inhabitants of the town. 
 Again they write to Petersburg, and thence comes the 
 decree to transfer the young man to some division of the 
 army stationed on the frontier, in some place where the 
 army is under martial law, where he can be shot for refus- 
 
228 
 
 “ THE KHSIGDOM OF GOD 
 
 ing to obey, and where the matter can proceed without 
 attracting observation, seeing that there are few Russians 
 and Christians in such a distant part, but the majority are 
 foreigners and Mohammedans. This is accordingly done. 
 They transfer him to a division stationed on the Zacaspian 
 border, and in company with convicts send him to a chief 
 officer who is notorious for his harshness and severity. 
 
 All this time, through all these changes from place to 
 place, the young man is roughly treated, kept in cold, hun- 
 ger, and filth, and life is made burdensome to him generally. 
 But all these sufferings do not compel him to change his 
 resolution. On the Zacaspian border, where he is again 
 requested to go on guard fully armed, he again declines to 
 obey. He does not refuse to go and stand near the hay- 
 stacks where they place him, but refuses to take his arms, 
 declaring that he will not use violence in any case against 
 anyone. All this takes place in the presence of the other 
 soldiers. To let such a refusal pass unpunished is impossi- 
 ble, and the young man is put on his trial for breach of 
 discipline. The trial takes place, and he is sentenced to 
 confinement in the military prison for two years. He is 
 again transferred, in company with convicts, by etape, to 
 Caucasus, and there he is shut up in prison and falls under ^ 
 the irresponsible power of the jailer. There he is perse- 
 cuted for a year and a half, but he does not for all that 
 alter his decision not to bear arms, and he explains why he 
 will not do this to everyone with whom he is brought in 
 contact. At the end of the second year they set him free, 
 before the end of his term of imprisonment, reckoning it 
 contrary to law to keep him in prison after his time of mili- 
 tary service was over, and only too glad to get rid of him 
 as soon as possible. 
 
 Other men in various parts of Russia behave, as though 
 by agreement, precisely in the same way as this young man, 
 and in all these cases the government has adopted the 
 
/S WITHIN YOU." 
 
 229 
 
 same timorous, undecided, and secretive course of action. 
 Some of these men are sent to the lunatic asylum, some 
 are enrolled as clerks and transferred to Siberia, some are 
 sent to work in the forests, some are sent to prison, some 
 are fined. And at this very time some men of this kind 
 are in prison, not charged with their real offense — that is, 
 denying the lawfulness of the action of the government, 
 but for non-fulfillment of special obligations imposed by 
 government. Thus an officer of reserve, who did not re- 
 port his change of residence, and justified this on the 
 ground that he would not serve in the army any longer, 
 was fined thirty rubles for non-compliance with the orders 
 of the superior authority. This fine he also declined volun- 
 tarily to pay. In the same way some peasants and soldiers 
 who have refused to be drilled and to bear arms have been 
 placed under arrest on a charge of breach of discipline and 
 insolence. 
 
 And cases of refusing to comply with the demands of 
 government when they are opposed to Christianity, and 
 especially cases of refusing to serve in the army, are occur- 
 ring of late not in Russia only, but everywhere. Thus I 
 happen to know that in Servia men of the so-called sect of 
 Nazarenes steadily refuse to serve in the army, and the 
 Austrian Government has been carrying on a fruitless con- 
 test with them for years, punishing them with imprison- 
 ment. In the year 1885 there were 130 such cases. I know 
 that in Switzerland in the year 1890 there were men in 
 prison in the castle of Chillon for declining to serve in the 
 army, whose resolution was not shaken by their punishment. 
 There have been such cases in Sweden, and the men who 
 refused obedience were sent to prison in exactly the same 
 way, and the government studiously concealed these cases 
 from the people. There have been similar cases also in 
 Prussia. I know of the case of a sub-lieutenant of the 
 Guards, who in 1891 declared to the authorities in Berlin 
 
230 
 
 THE KINGDOM OF COD 
 
 that he would not, as a Christian, continue to serve, and in 
 spite of all admonitions, threats, and punishments he stuck 
 to his resolution. In the south of France a society has 
 arisen of late bearing the name of the Hinschists (these 
 facts are taken from the Peace Herald, July, 1891), the 
 members of which refuse to enter military service on the 
 grounds of their Christian principles. At first they were 
 enrolled in the ambulance corps, but now, as their numbers 
 increase, they are subjected to punishment for non-compli- 
 ance, but they still refuse to bear arms just the same. 
 
 The socialists, the communists, the anarchists, with 
 their bombs and riots and revolutions, are not nearly so 
 much dreaded by governments as these disconnected indi- 
 viduals coming from different parts, and all justifying their 
 non-compliance on the grounds of the same religion, which 
 is known to all the world. 
 
 Every government knows by what means and in what 
 manner to defend itself from revolutionists, and has re- 
 sources for doing so, and therefore does not dread these 
 external foes. But what are governments to do against 
 men who show the uselessness, superfluousness, and perni- 
 ciousness of all governments, and who do not contend 
 against them, but simply do not need them and do without 
 them, and therefore are unwilling to take any part in them ? 
 
 The revolutionists say ; The form of government is bad 
 in this respect and that respect ; we must overturn it and 
 substitute this or that form of government. The Christian 
 says : I know nothing about the form of government, I 
 don’t know whether it is good or bad, and I don’t want to 
 overturn it precisely because I don’t know whether it’s 
 good or bad, but for the very same reason I don’t want to 
 support it either. And I not only don’t want to, but I 
 can’t, because what it demands of me is against my con- 
 science. 
 
 All state obligations are against the conscience of a 
 
IS WinilN' YOU." 
 
 231 
 
 Christian — the oath of allegiance, taxes, law proceedings, 
 and military service. And the whole power of the govern- 
 ment rests on these very obligations. 
 
 Revolutionary enemies attack the government from 
 without. Christianity does not attack it at all, but, from 
 within, it destroys all the foundations on which govern- 
 ment rests. 
 
 Among the Russian people, especially since the age of 
 Peter I., the protest of Christianity against the govern- 
 ment has never ceased, and the social organization has 
 been such that men emigrate in communes to Turkey, to 
 China, and to uninhabited lands, and not only feel no need 
 of state aid, but always regard the state as a useless 
 burden, only to be endured as a misfortune, whether it 
 happens to be Turkish, Russian, or Chinese. And so, too, 
 among the Russian people more and more frequent 
 examples have of late appeared of conscious Christian 
 freedom from subjection to the state. And these examples 
 are the more alarming for the government from the fact 
 that these non-compliant persons often belong not to the 
 so-called lower uneducated classes, but are men of fair or 
 good education ; and also from the fact that they do not in 
 these days justify their position by any mystic and excep- 
 tional views, as in former times, do not associate them- 
 selves with any superstitious or fanatic rites, like the sects 
 who practice self-immolation by fire, or the wandering 
 pilgrims, but put their refusal on the very simplest and 
 clearest grounds, comprehensible to all, and recognized as 
 true by all. 
 
 Thus they refuse the voluntary payment of taxes, 
 because taxes are spent on deeds of violence — on the pay 
 of men of violence — soldiers, on the construction of 
 prisons, fortresses, and cannons. They as Christians 
 regard it as sinful and immoral to have any hand in such 
 deeds. 
 
232 
 
 “ THE KINGDOM OF GOD 
 
 Those who refuse to take the oath of allegiance refuse 
 because to promise obedience to authorities, that is, to men 
 who are given to deeds of violence, is contrary to the 
 sense of Christ’s teaching. They refuse to take the oath 
 in the law courts, because oaths are directly forbidden by 
 the Gospel. They refuse to perform police duties, because 
 in the performance of these duties they must use force 
 against their brothers and ill treat them, and a Christian 
 cannot do that. They refuse to take part in trials at law, 
 because they consider every appeal to law is fulfilling the 
 law of vengeance, which is inconsistent with the Christian 
 law of forgiveness and love. They refuse to take any part 
 in military preparations and in the army, because they can- 
 not be executioners, and they are unwilling to prepare 
 themselves to be so. 
 
 The motives in all these cases are so excellent that, how- 
 ever despotic governments may be, they could hardly 
 punish them openly. To punish men for refusing to act 
 against their conscience the government must renounce all 
 claim to good sense and benevolence. And they assure 
 people that they only rule in the name of good sense and 
 benevolence. 
 
 What are governments to do against such people ? 
 
 Governments can of course flog to death or execute or 
 keep in perpetual imprisonment all enemies who want to 
 overturn them by violence, they can lavish gold on that 
 section of the people who are ready to destroy their enemies. 
 But what can they do against men who, without wishing to 
 overturn or destroy anything, desire simply for their part 
 to do nothing against the law of Christ, and who, therefore, 
 refuse to perform the commonest state requirements, which 
 are, therefore, the most indispensable to the maintenance 
 of the state ? 
 
 If they had been revolutionists, advocating and practic- 
 ing violence and murder, their suppression would have been 
 
IS WITHIN YOU.” 
 
 233 
 
 an easy matter ; some of them could have been bought 
 over, some could have been duped, some could have been 
 overawed, and these who could not be bought over, duped, 
 or overawed would have been treated as criminals, enemies 
 of society, would have been executed or imprisoned, and 
 the crowd would have approved of the action of the govern- 
 ment. If they had been fanatics, professing some peculiar 
 belief, it might have been possible, in disproving the super- 
 stitious errors mixed in with their religion, to attack also 
 the truth they advocate. But what is to be done with men 
 who profess no revolutionary ideas nor any peculiar 
 1‘eligious dogmas, but merely because they are unwilling to 
 do evil to any man, refuse to take the oath, to pay taxes, to 
 take part in law proceedings, to serve in the army, to fulfill, 
 in fact, any of the obligations upon which the whole fabric 
 of a state rests ? What is to done with such people? To 
 buy them over with bribes is impossible ; the very risks to 
 which they voluntarily expose themselves show that they 
 are incorruptible. To dupe them into believing that this is 
 their duty to God is also impossible, since their refusal is 
 based on the clear, unmistakable law of God, recognized 
 even by those who are trying to compel men to act against 
 it. To terrify them by threats is still less possible, because 
 the deprivations and sufferings to which they are subjected 
 only strengthen their desire to follow the faith by which 
 they are commanded : to obey God rather than men, and 
 not to fear those who can destroy the body, but to fear 
 him who can destroy body and soul. To kill them or keep 
 them in perpetual imprisonment is also impossible. These 
 men have friends, and a past ; their way of thinking and 
 acting is well known ; they are known by everyone for 
 good, gentle, peaceable people, and they cannot be regarded 
 as criminals who must be removed for the safety of society. 
 And to put men to death who are regarded as good men is 
 to provoke others to champion them and justify their 
 
234 
 
 “ THE KINGDOM OF GOD 
 
 refusal. And it is only necessary to explain the reasons of 
 their refusal to make clear to everyone that these reasons 
 have the same force for all other men, and that they all 
 ought to have done the same long ago. These cases put 
 the ruling powers into a desperate position. They see that 
 the prophecy of Christianity is coming to pass, that it is 
 loosening the fetters of those in chains, and setting free 
 them that are in bondage, and that this must inevitably be 
 the end of all oppressors. The ruling authorities see this, 
 they know that their hours are numbered, and they can do 
 nothing. All that they can do to save themselves is only 
 deferring the hour of their downfall. And this they do, 
 but their position is none the less desperate. 
 
 It is like the position of a conqueror who is trying to save 
 a town which has been been set on fire by its own inhabit- 
 ants. Directly he puts out the conflagration in one place, 
 it is alight in two other places ; directly he gives in to the 
 fire and cuts off what is on fire from a large building, the 
 building itself is alight at both ends. These separate 
 fires may be few, but they are burning with a flame which, 
 however small a spark it starts from, never ceases till it has 
 set the whole ablaze. 
 
 Thus it is that the ruling authorities are in such a defense- 
 less position before men who advocate Christianity, that but 
 little is necessary to overthrow this sovereign power which 
 seems so powerful, and has held such an exalted position 
 for so many centuries. And yet social reformers are busy 
 promulgating the idea that it is not necessary and is even 
 pernicious and immoral for every man separately to work 
 out his own freedom. As though, while one set of men 
 have been at work a long while turning a river into a new 
 channel, and had dug out a complete water-course and had 
 only to open the floodgates for the water to rush in and do 
 the rest, another set of men should come along and begin to 
 advise them that it would be much better, instead of letting 
 
75 WITHIN YOU." 
 
 235 
 
 the water out, to construct a machine which would ladlethe 
 water up from one side and pour it over the other side. 
 
 But the thing has gone too far. Already ruling govern- 
 ments feel their weak and defenseless position, and men of 
 Christian principles are awakening from their apathy, and 
 already begin to feel their power. 
 
 “ I am come to send a fire on the earth,” said Christ, 
 “ and what will I, if it be already kindled ? ” 
 
 And this fire is beginning to burn. 
 
 CHAPTER X. 
 
 EVIL CANNOT BE SUPPRESSED BY THE PHYSICAL FORCE OF 
 THE GOVERNMENT — THE MORAL PROGRESS OF HUMANITY 
 IS BROUGHT ABOUT NOT ONLY BY INDIVIDUAL RECOGNI- 
 TION OF TRUTH, BUT ALSO THROUGH THE ESTABLISH- 
 MENT OF A PUBLIC OPINION. 
 
 Christianity Destroys the State — But Which is Most Necessary : Chris- 
 tianity or the State ? — There are Some who Assert the Necessity of a 
 State Organization, and Others who Deny it, both Arguing from same 
 First Principles — Neither Contention can be Proved by Abstract Argu- 
 ment — The Question must be Decided by the Stage in the Develop- 
 ment of Conscience of Each Man, which will either Prevent or Allow 
 him to Support a Government Organization — Recognition of the 
 Futility and Immorality of Supporting a State Organization Contrary 
 to Christian Principles will Decide the Question for Every Man, in 
 Spite of any Action on Part of the State — Argument of those who 
 Defend the Government, that it is a Form of Social Life, Needed to 
 Protect the Good from the Wicked, till all Nations and all Members 
 of each Nation have Become Christians — The Most Wicked are Always 
 those in Power — The whole History of Humanity is the History of the 
 Forcible Appropriation of Power by the Wicked and their Oppression 
 of the Good — The Recognition by Governments of the Necessity of 
 Opposing Evil by Force is Equivalent to Suicide on their Part — The 
 Abolition of State-violence cannot Increase the Sum Total of Acts of 
 Violence — The Suppression of the Use of Force is not only Possible, 
 but is even Taking Place before Our Eyes— But it will Never be Sup- 
 
236 
 
 “ THE KINGDOM OF GOD 
 
 pressed by the Violence of Government, but through Men who have 
 Attained Power by Evidence Recognizing its Emptiness and Becoming 
 Better and I^ess Capable of Using Force — Individual Men and also 
 Wliole Nations Pass Through this Process — By this Means Christianity 
 is Diffused Through Consciousness of Men, not only in Spite of Use of 
 Violence by Government, but even Through its Action, and therefore the 
 Suppression is not to be Dreaded, but is Brought About by the National 
 Progress of Life — Objection of those who Defend State Organization 
 that Universal Adoption of Christianity is hardly Likely to be Realized 
 at any Time — The General Adoption of the Truths of Christianity is 
 being Brought About not only by the Gradual and Inward Means, that is, 
 by Knowledge of the Truth, Prophetic Insight, and Recognition of the 
 Emptiness of Power, and Renunciation of it by Individuals, but also by 
 Another External Means, the Acceptance of a New Truth by Whole 
 Masses of Men on a Lower Level of Development Through Simple 
 Confidence in their Leaders — When a Certain Stage in the Diffusion 
 of a Truth has been Reached, a Public Opinion is Created which Im- 
 pels a Whole Mass of Men, formerly Antagonistic to the New Truth, 
 to Accept it — And therefore all Men may Quickly be Brought to 
 Renounce the use of Violence when once a Christian Public Opinion 
 is Established — The Conviction of Force being Necessary Hinders the 
 Establishment of a Christian Public Opinion — The Use of Violence 
 Leads Men to Distrust the Spiritual Force which is the Only Force by 
 which they Advance — Neither Nations nor Individuals have been 
 really Subjugated by Force, but only by Public Opinion, which no Force 
 can Resist — Savage Nations and Savage Men can only be Subdued by 
 the Diffusion of a Christian Standard among them, while actually 
 Christian Nations in order to Subdue them do all they can to Destroy 
 a Christian Standard — These Fruitless Attempts to Civilize Savages 
 Cannot be Adduced as Proofs that Men Cannot be Subdued by Chris- 
 tianity — Violence by Corrupting Public Opinion, only Hinders the 
 Social Organization from being What it Ought to Be — And by the Use 
 of Violence being Suppressed, a Christian Public Opinion would be 
 Established — Whatever might be the Result of the Suppression of Use 
 of Force, this Unknown Future could not be Worse than the Present 
 Condition, and so there is no Need to Dread it — To Attain Knowledge of 
 the Unknown, and to Move Toward it, is the Essence of Life. 
 
 Christianity in its true sense puts an end to govern- 
 ment. So it was understood at its very commencement ; it 
 was for that cause that Christ was crucified. So it has 
 
IS WITIinV YOU. 
 
 237 
 
 alvva3?s been understood by people who were not under the 
 necessity of justifying a Christian government. Only from 
 the time that the heads of government assumed an external 
 and nominal Christianity, men began to invent all the 
 impossible, cunningly devised theories by means of which 
 Christianity can be reconciled with government. But no 
 honest and serious-minded man of our day can help seeing 
 the incompatibility of true Christianity — the doctrine of 
 meekness, forgiveness of injuries, and love — with govern- 
 ment, with its pomp, acts of violence, executions, and wars. 
 The profession of true Christianity not only excludes the 
 possibility of recognizing government, but even destroys 
 its very foundations. 
 
 But if it is so, and we are right in saying that Christianity 
 is incompatible with government, then the question naturally 
 presents itself : which is more necessary to the good of 
 humanity, in which way is men’s happiness best to be 
 secured, by maintaining the organization of government or 
 by destroying it and replacing it by Christianity ? 
 
 Some people maintain that government is more necessary 
 for humanity, that the destruction of the state organization 
 would involve the destruction of all that humanity has 
 gained, that the state has been and still is the only form in 
 which humanity can develop. The evil which we see 
 among peoples living under a government organization they 
 attribute not to that type of society, but to its abuses, which, 
 they say, can be corrected without destroying it, and thus 
 humanity, without discarding the state organization, can 
 develop and attain a high degree of happiness. And men 
 of this way of thinking bring forward in support of their 
 views arguments which they think irrefutable drawn from 
 history, philosophy, and even religion. But there are men 
 who hold on the contrary that, as there was a time when 
 humanity lived without government, such an organization 
 is temporary, and that a time must come when men need a 
 
238 
 
 THE KINGDOM OF GOD 
 
 new organization, and that that time has come now. And 
 men of this way of thinking also bring forward in support 
 of their views arguments which they think irrefutable from 
 philosophy, history, and religion. 
 
 Volumes may be written in defense of the former view 
 (and volumes indeed have long ago been written and 
 more will still be written on that side), but much also 
 can be written against it (and much also, and most briU 
 iantly, has been written — though more recently — on this 
 side). 
 
 And it cannot be proved, as the champions of the state 
 maintain, that the destruction of government involves a 
 social chaos, mutual spoliation and murder, the destruction 
 of all social institutions, and the return of mankind to bar- 
 barism. Nor can it be proved as the opponents of govern- 
 ment maintain that men have already become so wise and 
 good that they will not spoil or murder one another, but 
 will prefer peaceful associations to hostilities ; that of their 
 own accord, unaided by the state, they will make all the 
 arrangements that they need, and that therefore govern- 
 ment, far from being any aid, under show of guarding men 
 exerts a pernicious and brutalizing influence over them. It 
 is impossible to prove either of these contentions by 
 abstract reasoning. Still less possible is it to prove them 
 by experiment, since the whole matter turns on the ques- 
 tion, ought we to try the experiment ? The question 
 whether or not the time has come to make an end of gov- 
 ernment would be unanswerable, except that there exists 
 another living means of settling it beyond dispute. 
 
 We may dispute upon the question whether the nestlings 
 are ready to do without the mother-hen and to come out of 
 the eggs, or whether they are not yet advanced enough. 
 But the young birds will decide the question without any 
 regard for our arguments when they find themselves 
 cramped for space in the eggs. Then they will begin to 
 
IS WITHImV you." 239 
 
 try them with their beaks and come out of them of their 
 own accord. 
 
 It is the same with the question whether the time has 
 come to do away with the governmental type of society 
 and to replace it by a new type. If a man, through the 
 growth of a higher conscience, can no longer comply with 
 the demands of government, he finds himself cramped by 
 it and at the same time no longer needs its protection. 
 When this comes to pass, the question whether men are 
 ready to discard the governmental type is solved. And 
 the conclusion will be as final for them as for the young 
 birds hatched out of the eggs. Just as no power in the 
 world can put them back into the shells, so can no power 
 in the world bring men again under the governmental type 
 of society when once they have outgrown it. 
 
 “ It may well be that government was necessary and is 
 still necessary for all the advantages which you attribute 
 to it,” says the man who has mastered the Christian theory 
 of life. “ I only know that on the one hand, government is 
 no longer necessary for 7ne, and on the other hand, / can 
 no longer carry out the measures that are necessary to the 
 existence of a government. Settle for yourselves what you 
 need for your life. I cannot prove the need or the harm 
 of governments in general. I know only what I need and 
 do not need, what I can do and what I cannot. I know 
 that I do not need to divide myself off from other nations, 
 and therefore I cannot admit that I belong exclusively to 
 any state or nation, or that I owe allegiance to any govern- 
 ment. I know that I do not need all the government 
 institutions organized within the state, and therefore 
 I cannot deprive people who need my labor to give it in 
 the form of taxes to institutions which I do not need, 
 which for all I know may be pernicious. I know that 
 I have no need of the administration or of courts of 
 justice founded upon force, and therefore I can take no 
 
240 
 
 THE KINGDOM OF GOD 
 
 part in either. I know that I do not need to attack and 
 slaughter other nations or to defend myself from them with 
 arms, and therefore I can take no part in wars or prepara- 
 tions for wars. It may well be that there are people who 
 cannot help regarding all this as necessary and indispens- 
 able. I cannot dispute the question with them, I can only 
 speak for myself ; but I can say with absolute certainty 
 that I do not need it, and that I cannot do it. And I do 
 not need this and I cannot do it, not because such is my 
 own, my personal will, but because such is the will of him 
 who sent me into life, and gave me an indubitable law for 
 my conduct through life.” 
 
 Whatever arguments may be advanced in support of the 
 contention that the suppression of government authority 
 would be injurious and would lead to great calamities, 
 men who have once outgrown the governmental form of 
 society cannot go back to it again. And all the reasoning 
 in the world cannot make the man who has outgrown the 
 governmental form of society take part in actions dis- 
 allowed by his conscience, any more than the full-grown 
 bird can be made to return into the egg-shell. 
 
 “ But even it be so,” say the champions of the existing 
 order of things, “ still the suppression of government 
 violence can only be possible and desirable when all men 
 have become Christians. So long as among people nomi- 
 nally Christians there are unchristian wicked men, who for 
 the gratification of their own lusts are ready to do harm to 
 others, the suppression of government authority, far from 
 being a blessing to others, would only increase their mis- 
 eries. The suppression of the governmental type of society 
 is not only undesirable so long as there is only a minority 
 of true Christians ; it would not even be desirable if the 
 whole of a nation were Christians, but among and around 
 them were still unchristian men of other nations. For 
 these unchristian men would rob, outrage, and kill the 
 
IS WITHIN YOU. 
 
 241 
 
 Christians with impunity and would make their lives miser- 
 able. All that would result, would be that the bad would 
 oppress and outrage the good with impunity. And there- 
 fore the authority of government must not be suppressed 
 till all the wicked and rapacious people in the world are 
 extinct. And since this will either never be, or at least 
 cannot be for a long time to come, in spite of the efforts of 
 individual Christians to be independent of government 
 authority, it ought to be maintained in the interests of the 
 majority. The champions of government assert that with- 
 out it the wicked will oppress and outrage the good, and 
 that the power of the government enables the good to 
 resist the wicked.” 
 
 But in this assertion the champions of the existing order 
 of things take for granted the proposition they want to 
 prove. When they say that except for the government the 
 bad would oppress the good, they take it for granted that 
 the good are those who at the present time are in posses- 
 sion of power, and the bad are those who are in subjection 
 to it. But this is just what wants proving. It would only 
 be true if the custom of our society were what is, or rather 
 is supposed to be, the custom in China ; that is, that the 
 good always rule, and that directly those at the head of 
 government cease to be better than those they rule over, 
 the citizens are bound to remove them. This is supposed 
 to be the custom in China. In reality it is not so and can 
 never be so. For to remove the heads of a government 
 ruling by force, it is not the right alone, but the power to 
 do so that is needed. So that even in China this is only 
 an imaginary custom. And in our Christian world we do 
 not even suppose such a custom, and we have nothing on 
 which to build up the supposition that it is the good or the 
 superior who are in power ; in reality it is those who have 
 seized power aud who keep it for their own and their 
 retainers’ benefit. 
 
242 
 
 THE KINGDOM OF GOD 
 
 The good cannot seize power, nor retain it ; to do this 
 men must love power. And love of power is inconsistent 
 with goodness ; but quite consistent with the very opposite 
 qualities — pride, cunning, cruelty. 
 
 Without the aggrandizement of self and the abasement 
 of others, without hypocrisies and deceptions, without 
 prisons, fortresses, executions, and murders, no power can 
 come into existence or be maintained. 
 
 “ If the power of government is suppressed the more 
 wicked will oppress the less wicked,” say the champions 
 of state authority. But when the Egyptians conquered 
 the Jews, the Romans conquered the Greeks, and the 
 Barbarians conquered the Romans, is it possible that all 
 the conquerors were always better than those they con- 
 quered ? And the same with the transitions of power wuth- 
 in a state from one personage to another : has the power 
 always passed from a worse person to a better one ? When 
 Louis XVI. was removed and Robespierre came to power, 
 and afterward Napoleon — who ruled then, a better man or 
 a worse ? And when were better men in power, when the 
 Versaillist party or when the Commune was in power ? 
 When Charles I. was ruler, or when Cromwell ? And when 
 Peter III. was Tzar, or when he was killed and Catherine 
 was Tzaritsa in one-half of Russia and Pougachef ruled 
 the other ? Which was bad then, and which was good ? 
 All men who happen to be in authority assert that their 
 authority is necessary to keep the bad from oppressing the 
 good, assuming that they themselves are the good par ex- 
 cellence, who protect other good people from the bad. 
 
 But ruling means using force, and using force means 
 doing to him to whom force is used, what he does not like 
 and what he who uses the force would certainly not like 
 done to himself. Consequently ruling means doing to 
 others what we would not they should do unto us, that is, 
 doing wrong. 
 
75 WITHIN YOU. 
 
 243 
 
 To submit means to prefer suffering to using force. 
 And to prefer suffering to using force means to be good, 
 or at least less wicked than those who do unto others what 
 they would not like themselves. 
 
 And therefore, in all probability, not the better but the 
 worse have always ruled and are ruling now. There may 
 be bad men among those who are ruled, but it cannot be 
 that those who are better have generally ruled those who 
 are worse. 
 
 It might be possible to suppose this with the inexact 
 heathen definition of good ; but with the clear Christian 
 definition of good and evil, it is impossible to imagine 
 it. 
 
 If the more or less good, and the more or less bad can- 
 not be distinguished in the heathen world, the Christian 
 conception of good and evil has so clearly defined the 
 characteristics of the good and the wicked, that it is impos- 
 sible to confound them. According to Christ’s teaching 
 the good are those who are meek and long-suffering, do 
 not resist evil by force, forgive injuries, and love their 
 enemies ; those are wicked who exalt themselves, oppress, 
 strive, and use force. Therefore by Christ’s teaching there 
 can be no doubt whether the good are to be found among 
 rulers or ruled, and whether the wicked are among the 
 ruled or the rulers. Indeed it is absurd even to speak of 
 Christians ruling. 
 
 Non-Christians, that is those who find the aim of their 
 lives in earthly happiness, must always rule Christians, the 
 aim of whose lives is the renunciation of such earthly 
 happiness. 
 
 This difference has always existed and has become more 
 and more defined as the Christian religion has been more 
 widely diffused and more correctly understood. 
 
 The more widely true Christianity was diffused and the 
 more it penetrated men’s conscience, the more impossible 
 
244 
 
 “ THE KINGDOM OF GOD 
 
 it was for Christians to be rulers, and the easier it became 
 for non-Christians to rule them. 
 
 “To get rid of governmental violence in a society in which 
 all are not true Christians, will only result in the wicked 
 dominating the good and oppressing them with impunity,” 
 say the champions of the existing order of things. But it 
 has never been, and cannot be otherwise. So it has always 
 been from the beginning of the world, and so it is still. 
 The wicked ivill always dominaie the good, and will always 
 oppress them. Cain overpowered Abel, the cunning Jacob 
 oppressed the guileless Esau and was in his turn deceived 
 by Laban, Caiaphas and Pilate oppressed Christ, the 
 Roman emperors oppressed Seneca, Epictetus, and the 
 good Romans who lived in their times. John IV. with his 
 favorites, the syphilitic drunken Peter with his buffoons, the 
 vicious Catherine with her paramours, ruled and oppressed 
 the industrious religious Russians of their times. 
 
 William is ruling over the Germans, Stambouloff over 
 the Bulgarians, the Russian officials over the Russian 
 people. The Germans have dominated the Italians, now 
 they dominate the Hungarians and Slavonians ; the Turks 
 have dominated and still dominate the Slavonians and 
 Greeks ; the English dominate the Hindoos, the Mongo- 
 lians dominate the Chinese. 
 
 So that whether governmental violence is suppressed or 
 not, the position of good men, in being oppressed by the 
 wicked, will be unchanged. 
 
 To terrify men with the prospect of the wicked dominat- 
 ing the good is impossible, for that is just what has always 
 been, and is now, and cannot but be. 
 
 The whole history of pagan times is nothing but a recital 
 of the incidents and means by which the more wicked 
 gained possession of power over the less wicked, and 
 retained it by cruelties and deceptions, ruling over the good 
 under the pretense of guarding the right and protecting the 
 
IS WITHIN- YOU." 
 
 245 
 
 good from the wicked. All the revolutions in history are 
 only examples of the more wicked seizing power and 
 oppressing the good. In declaring that if their authority 
 did not exist the more wicked would oppress the good, the 
 ruling authorities only show their disinclination to let 
 other oppressors come to power who would like to snatch 
 it from them. 
 
 But in asserting this they only accuse themselves. They 
 say that their power, /. e., violence, is needed to defend 
 men from other possible oppressors in the present or the 
 future.* 
 
 The weakness of the use of violence lies in the fact that 
 all the arguments brought forward by oppressors in their 
 own defense can with even better reason be advanced 
 against them. They plead the danger of violence — most 
 often imagined in the future — but they are all the while 
 continuing to practice actual violence themselves. “ You 
 say that men used to pillage and murder in the past, and 
 that you are afraid that they will pillage and murder one 
 another if your power were no more. That may happen — 
 or it may not happen. But the fact that you ruin thou- 
 sands of men in prisons, fortresses, galleys, and exile, break 
 up millions of families and ruin millions of men, physically 
 as well as morally, in the army, that fact is not an imaginary 
 but a real act of violence, which, according to your own 
 argument, one ought to oppose by violence. And so you 
 are yourselves these wicked men against whom, according 
 
 * I may quote in this connection the amazingly naive and comic decla- 
 ration of the Russian authorities, the oppressors of other nationalities — 
 the Poles, the Germans of the Baltic provinces, and the Jews. The 
 Russian Government has oppressed its subjects for centuries, and has 
 never troubled itself about the Little Russians of Poland, or the Letts of 
 the Baltic provinces, or the Russian peasants, exploited by everyone. 
 And now it has all of a sudden become the champion of the oppressed — > 
 the very oppressed whpm it is itself oppressing, 
 
246 
 
 “ THE KINGDOM OF GOD 
 
 to your own argument, it is absolutely necessary to use 
 violence,” the oppressed are sure to say to their oppressors. 
 And non-Christian men always do say, and think and act 
 on this reasoning. If the oppressed are more wicked than 
 their oppressors, they attack them and try to overthrow 
 them ; and in favorable circumstances they succeed in 
 overthrowing them, or what is more common, they rise into 
 the ranks of the oppressors and assist in their acts of 
 violence. 
 
 So that the very violence which the champions of gov- 
 ernment hold up as a terror — pretending that except for its 
 oppressive power the wicked would oppress the good — has 
 really always existed and will exist in human society. And 
 therefore the suppression of state violence cannot in any 
 case be the cause of increased oppression of the good by the 
 wicked. 
 
 If state violence ceased, there would be acts of violence 
 perhaps on the part of different people, other than those who 
 had done deeds of violence before. But the total amount 
 of violence could not in any case be increased by the mere 
 fact of power passing from one set of men to another. 
 
 “ State violence can only cease when there are no more 
 wicked men in society,” say the champions of the existing 
 order of things, assuming in this of course that since there 
 will always be wicked men, it can never cease. And that 
 would be right enough if it were the case, as they assume, 
 that the oppressors are always the best of men, and that the 
 sole means of saving men from evil is by violence. Then, 
 indeed, violence could never cease. But since this is not 
 the case, but quite the contrary, that it is not the better 
 oppress the worse, but the worse oppress the better, and 
 since violence will never put an end to evil, and there is, 
 moreover, another means of putting an end to it, the asser- 
 tion that violence will never cease is incorrect. The use of 
 violence grows less and less and evidently must disappear. 
 
IS WITHIN YOU." 
 
 247 
 
 But this will not come to pass, as some champions of the 
 existing order imagine, through the oppressed becoming 
 better and better under the influence of government (on the 
 contrary, its influence causes their continual degradation), 
 but through the fact that all men are constantly growing 
 better and better of themselves, so that even the most 
 wicked, who are in power, will become less and less wicked, 
 till at last they are so good as to be incapable of using 
 violence. sj 
 
 The progressive movement of humanity does not proceed 
 from the better elements in society seizing power and 
 making those who are subject to them better, by forcible 
 means, as both conservatives and revolutionists imagine. 
 It proceeds first and principally from the fact that all men 
 in general are advancing steadily and undeviatingly toward 
 a more and more conscious, assimilation of the Christian 
 theory of life ; and secondly, from the fact that, even 
 apart from conscious spiritual life, men are unconsciously 
 brought into a more Christian attitude to life by the very 
 process of one set of men grasping the power, and again " 
 being replaced by others. 
 
 The worse elements of society, gaining possession of 
 power, under the sobering influence which always accom- 
 panies power, grow less and less cruel, and become inca- 
 pable of using cruel forms of violence. Consequently others 
 are able to seize their place, and the same p rocess of soft- 
 ening and, so to say, unconscious Christianizing goes on with 
 them. It is something like the process of ebullition. The 
 majority of men, having the non-Christian view of life, 
 always strive for power and struggle to obtain it. In this 
 struggle the most cruel, the coarsest, the least Christian 
 elements of society overpower the most gentle, well-dis- 
 posed, and Christian, and rise by means of their violence 
 to the upper ranks of society. And in them is Christ’s 
 prophecy fulfilled : “ Woe to you that are rich ! woe unto 
 
248 
 
 THE KINGDOM OF GOD 
 
 you that are full ! woe unto you when all men shall speak 
 well of you ! ” For the men who are in possession of power 
 and all that results from it — glory and wealth — and have at- 
 tained the various aims they set before themselves, recog- 
 nize the vanity of it all and return to the position from 
 which they came. Charles V., John IV., Alexander I., 
 recognizing the emptiness and the evil of power, renounced 
 it because they were incapable of using violence for their 
 own benefit as they had done. 
 
 But they are not the solitary examples of this recogni- 
 tion of the emptiness and evil of power. Everyone who 
 gains a position of power he has striven for, every general, 
 every minister, every millionaire, every petty official who 
 has gained the place he has coveted for ten years, every 
 rich peasant who has laid by some hundred rubles, passes 
 through this unconscious process of softening. 
 
 And not only individual men, but societies of men, whole 
 nations, pass through this process. 
 
 The seductions of power, and all the wealth, honor, and 
 luxury it gives, seem a sufficient aim for men’s efforts only 
 so long as they are unattained. Directly a man reaches 
 them he sees all their vanity, and they gradually lose all 
 their power of attraction. They are like clouds which have 
 form and beauty only from the distance ; directly one as- 
 cends into them, all their splendor vanishes. 
 
 Men who are in possession of power and wealth, some- 
 times even those who have gained for themselves their 
 power and wealth, but more often their heirs, cease to be 
 so eager for power, and so cruel in their efforts to obtain it. 
 
 Having learnt by experience, under the operation of 
 Christian influence, the vanity of all that is gained by vio- 
 lence, men sometimes in one, sometimes in several genera- 
 tions lose the vices which are generated by the passion for 
 power and wealth. They become less cruel and so cannot 
 maintain their position, and are expelled from power by 
 
IS V/ITHIM YOU. 
 
 249 
 
 Others less Christian and more wicked. Thus they return 
 to a rank of society lower in position, but higher in morality, 
 raising thereby the average level of Christian consciousness 
 in men. But directly after them again the worst, coarsest, 
 least Christian elements of society rise to the top, and are 
 subjected to the same process as their predecessors, and 
 again in a generation or so, seeing the vanity of what is 
 gained by violence, and having imbibed Christianity, they 
 come down again among the oppressed, and their place is 
 again filled by new oppressors, less brutal than former op- 
 pressors, though more so than those they oppress. So 
 that, although power remains externally the same as it was, 
 with every change of the men in power there is a constant 
 increase of the number of men who have been brought by 
 experience to the necessity of assimilating the Christian 
 conception of life, and with every change — though it is the 
 coarsest, cruelest, and least Christian who come into pos- 
 session of power, they are less coarse and cruel and more 
 Christian than their predecessors when they gained posses- 
 sion of power. 
 
 Power selects and attracts the worst elements of society, 
 transforms them, improves and softens them, and returns 
 them to society. ’ 
 
 Such is the process by means of which Christianity, in 
 spite of the hindrances to human progress resulting from 
 the violence of power, gains more and more hold of men, 
 Christianity penetrates to the consciousness of men, not 
 only in spite of the violence of power, but also by means of 
 it. 
 
 And therefore the assertion of the champions of the 
 state, that if the power of government were suppressed the 
 wicked would oppress the good, not only fails to show that 
 that is to be dreaded, since it is just what happens now, 
 but proves, on the contrary, that it is governmental power 
 which enables the wicked to oppress the good, and is the 
 
250 
 
 “ THE KINGDOM OF GOD 
 
 evil most desirable to suppress, and that it is being gradu- 
 ally suppressed in the natural course of things. 
 
 “But if it be true that governmental power will disap. 
 pear when those in power become so Christian that they 
 renounce power of their own accord, and there are no men 
 found willing to take their place, and even if this process 
 I is already going on,” say the champions of the existing 
 I order, “when will that come to pass? If, after eighteen 
 hundred years, there are still so many eager for power, and 
 so few anxious to obey, there seems no likelihood of its 
 i happening very soon — or indeed of its ever happening at 
 
 L 
 
 “ Even if there are, as there have always been, some men 
 who prefer renouncing power to enjoying it, the mass of 
 men in reserve, who prefer dominion to subjection, is so 
 great that it is difficult to imagine a time when the number 
 will be exhausted. 
 
 “Before this Christianizing process could so affect all 
 men one after another that they would pass from the 
 heathen to the Christian conception of life, and would 
 voluntarily abandon power and wealth, it would be neces- 
 sary that all the coarse, half-savage men, completely inca- 
 pable of appreciating Christianity or acting upon it, of 
 whom there are always a great many in every Christian 
 society, should be converted to Christianity. More than 
 this, all the savage and absolutely non-Christian peoples, 
 who are so numerous outside the Christian world, must 
 also be converted. And therefore, even if we admit that 
 this Christianizing process will some day affect everyone, 
 still, judging by the amount of progress it has made in 
 eighteen hundred years, it will be many times eighteen 
 centuries before it will do so. And it is therefore impos- 
 sible and unprofitable to think at present of anything so 
 impracticable as the suppression of authority. We ought 
 only to try to put authority into the best hands.” 
 
IS WITHIN YOU. 
 
 251 
 
 And this criticism would be perfectly just, if the transi- 
 tion from one conception of life to another were only 
 accomplished by the single process of all men, separately 
 and successively, realizing, each for himself, the emptiness 
 of power, and reaching Christian truth by the inner spiritual 
 path. That process goes on unceasingly, and men are 
 passing over to Christianity one after another by this innet-— ^ 
 way. 
 
 But there is also another external means by which men 
 reach Christianity and by which the transition is less 
 gradual. 
 
 This transition from one organization of life to another . 
 is not accomplished by degrees like the sand running 
 through the hourglass grain after grain. It is more like 
 the water filling a vessel floating on water. At first the 
 water only runs in slowly on one side, but as the vessel 
 grows heavier it suddenly begins to sink, and almos^' 
 instantaneously fills with water. 
 
 It is just the same with the transitions of mankind from 
 one conception — and so from one organization of life — to 
 another. At first only gradually and slowly, one after 
 another, men attain to the new truth by the inner spiritual 
 way, and follow it out in life. But when a certain point in 
 the diffusion of the truth has been reached, it is suddenly 
 assimilated by everyone, not by the inner way, but, as it 
 were, involuntarily. 
 
 That is why the champions of the existing order are 
 wrong in arguing that, since only a small section of man- 
 kind has passed over to Christianity in eighteen centuries, 
 it must be many times eighteen centuries before all the 
 remainder do the same. For in that argument they do not 
 take into account any other means, besides the inward 
 spiritual one, by which men assimilate a new truth and pass 
 from one order of life to another. 
 
 Men do not only assimilate a truth through recognizing 
 
 
252 
 
 “ THE KINGDOM OF COD 
 
 it by prophetic insight, or by experience of life. When 
 the truth has become sufficiently widely diffused, men at a 
 lower stage of development accept it all at once simply 
 through confidence in those who have reached it by the 
 inner spiritual wa}^ and are applying it to life. 
 
 Every new truth, by which the order of human life is 
 changed and humanity is advanced, is at first accepted by 
 only a very small number of men who understand it through 
 inner spiritual intuition. The remainder of mankind who 
 accepted on trust the preceding truth on which the exist- 
 ing order is based, are always opposed to the diffusion of 
 the new truth. 
 
 But seeing that, to begin with, men do not stand still, 
 but are steadily advancing to a greater recognition of the 
 truth and a closer adaptation of their life to it, and secondly, 
 all men in varying degrees according to their age, their 
 education, and their race are capable of understanding the 
 new truths, at first those who are nearest to the men who 
 have attained the new truth by spiritual intuition, slowly 
 and one by one, but afterward more and more quickly, pass 
 over to the new truth. Thus the number of men who 
 accept the new truth becomes greater and greater, and the 
 truth becomes more and more comprehensible. 
 
 And thus more confidence is aroused in the remainder, 
 who are at a less advanced stage of capacity for under- 
 standing the truth. And it becomes easier for them to 
 grasp it, and an increasing number accept it. 
 
 And so the movement goes on more and more quickly, 
 and on an ever-increasing scale, like a snowball, till at 
 last a public opinion in harmony with the new truth is 
 created, and then the whole mass of men is carried over all 
 at once by its momentum to the new truth and establishes 
 a new social order in accordance with it. 
 
 Those men who accept a new truth when it has gained a 
 certain degree of acceptance, always pass over all at once 
 
75 WITHIN- YOU." 
 
 253 
 
 in masses. They are like the ballast with which every ship 
 is always loaded, at once to keep it upright and enable it 
 to sail properly. If there were no ballast, the ship would 
 not be low enough in the water, and would shift its position 
 at the slightest change in its conditions. This ballast, 
 which strikes one at first as superfluous and even as hinder- 
 ing the progress of the vessel, is really indispensable to its 
 good navigation. 
 
 It is the same with the mass of mankind, who not indi- 
 vidually, but always in a mass, under the influence of a 
 new social idea pass all at once from one organization of 
 life to another. This mass always hinders, by its inertia, 
 frequent and rapid revolutions in the social order which 
 have not been sufficiently proved by human experience. 
 And it delays every truth a long while till it has stood the 
 test of prolonged struggles, and has thoroughly permeated 
 the consciousness of humanity. 
 
 And that is why it is a mistake to say that because only 
 a very small minority of men has assimilated Christianity 
 in eighteen centuries, it must take many times as many 
 centuries for all mankind to assimilate it, and that since 
 that time is so far off, we who live in the present need not 
 even think about it. It is a mistake, because the men at 
 a lower stage of culture, the men and the nations who are 
 represented as the obstacle to the realization of the Chris- 
 tian order of life, are the very people who always pass over 
 in masses all at once to any truth that has once been recog- 
 nized by public opinion. 
 
 And therefore the transformation of human life, through 
 which men in power will renounce it, and there will be none 
 anxious to take their place, will not come only by all men 
 consciously and separately assimilating the Christian con- 
 ception of life. It will come when a Christian public 
 opinion has arisen, so definite and easily comprehensible 
 as to reach the whole of the inert mass, which is not able 
 
2S4 
 
 THE KINGDOM OF GOD 
 
 ( i 
 
 to attain truth by its own intuition, and therefore is always 
 under the sway of public opinion. 
 
 Public opinion arises spontaneously and spreads for 
 hundreds and thousands of years, but it has the power of 
 working on men by infection, and with great rapidity gains 
 a hold on great numbers of men. 
 
 “ But,” say the champions of the existing order, “ even 
 if it is true that public opinion, when it has attained a 
 certain degree of definiteness and precision, can convert 
 the inert mass of men outside the Christian world — the 
 non-Christian races — as well as the coarse and depraved 
 who are living in its midst, what proofs have we that this 
 Christian public opinion has arisen and is able to replace 
 force and render it unnecessary. 
 
 “ We must not give up force, by which the existing order 
 is maintained, and by relying on the vague and impalpable 
 influence of public opinion expose Christians to the risk of 
 being pillaged, murdered, and outraged in every way by the 
 savages inside and outside of civilized society. 
 
 “ Since, even supported by the use of force, we can 
 hardly control the non-Christian elements which are always 
 ready to pour down on us and to destroy all that has been 
 gained by civilization, is it likely that public opinion could 
 take the place of force and render us secure ? And be- 
 sides, how are we to find the moment when public opinion 
 has become strong enough to be able to replace the use of 
 force? To reject the use of force and trust to public 
 opinion to defend us would be as insane as to remove all 
 weapons of defense in a menagerie, and then to let loose 
 all the lions and tigers, relying on the fact that the animals 
 seemed peaceable when kept in their cages and held in 
 check by red-hot irons. And therefore people in power, 
 who have been put in positions of authority by fate or by 
 God, have not the right to run the risk, ruining all that has 
 been gained by civilization, just because they want to try 
 
IS WITHIN YOU." 255 
 
 an experiment to see whether public opinion is or is not 
 able to replace the protection given by authority.” 
 
 A French writer, forgotten now, Alphonse Karr, said 
 somewhere, trying to show the impossibility of doing away 
 with the death penalty : “Que messieurs les assassins com- 
 mencent par nous donner I’exemple.” Often have I heard 
 this bon inot repeated by men who thought that these words 
 were a witty and convincing argument against the abolition 
 of capital punishment. And yet all the erroneousness of 
 the argument of those who consider that governments can- 
 not give up the use off force till all people are capable of 
 doing the same, could not be more clearly expressed than 
 it is in that epigram. 
 
 “ Let the murderers,” say the champions of state violence, 
 “ set us the example by giving up murder and then we will 
 give it up.” But the murderers say just the same, only 
 with much more right. They say : “ Let those who have 
 undertaken to teach us and guide us set us the example of 
 giving up legal murder, and then we will Imitate them.” 
 And they say this, not as a jest, but seriously, because it is 
 the actual state of the case. 
 
 “ We cannot give up the use of violence, because we are 
 surrounded by violent ruffians.” Nothing in our days 
 hinders the progress of humanity and the establishment 
 of the organization corresponding to its present develop- 
 ment more than this false reasoning. Those in authority 
 are convinced that men are only guided and only progress 
 through the use of force, and therefore they confidently 
 make use of it to support the existing organization. The 
 existing order is maintained, not by force, but by public 
 opinion, the action of which is disturbed by the use of 
 force. So that the effect of using force is to disturb and 
 to weaken the very thing it tries to maintain. 
 
 Violence, even in the most favorable case, when it is not 
 used simply for some personal aims of those in power. 
 
256 
 
 “ THE KINGDOM OF GOD 
 
 always punishes under the one inelastic formula of the law 
 what has long before been condemned by public opinion. 
 But there is this difference, that while public opinion cen- 
 sures and condemns all the acts opposed to the moral law, 
 including the most varied cases in its reprobation, the law 
 which rests on violence only condemns and punishes a cer- 
 tain very limited range of acts, and by so doing seems to 
 justify all other acts of the same kind which do not come 
 under its scope. 
 
 Public opinion ever since the time of Moses has regarded 
 covetousness, profligacy, and cruelty as wrong, and cen- 
 sured them accordingly. And it condemns every kind of 
 manifestation of covetousness, not only the appropriation of 
 the property of others by force or fraud or trickery, but 
 even the cruel abuse of wealth ; it condemns every form of 
 profligacy, whether with concubine, slave, divorced woman, 
 or even one’s own wife ; it condemns every kind of cruelty, 
 whether shown in blows, in ill-treatment, or in murder, not 
 only of men, but even of animals. The law resting on force 
 only punishes certain forms of covetousness, such as rob- 
 bery and swindling, certain forms of profligacy and cruelty, 
 such as conjugal infidelity, murder, and wounding. And in 
 this way it seems to countenance all the manifestations of 
 covetousness, profligacy, and cruelty which do not come 
 under its narrow definition. 
 
 But besides corrupting public opinion, the use of force 
 leads men to the fatal conviction that they progress, not 
 through the spiritual impulse which impels them to the at- 
 tainment of truth and its realization in life, and which con- 
 stitutes the only source of every progressive movement of 
 humanity, but by means of violence, the very force which, 
 far from leading men to truth, always carries them further 
 away from it. This is a fatal error, because it leads men to 
 neglect the chief force underlying their life — their spiritual 
 activity — and to turn all their attention and energy to the 
 
IS WITHIN YOU." 
 
 257 
 
 use of violence, which is superficial, sluggish, and most 
 generally pernicious in its action. 
 
 They make the same mistake as men who, trying to set 
 a steam engine in motion, should turn its wheels round with 
 their hands, not suspecting that the underlying cause of its 
 movement was the expansion of the steam, and not the 
 motion of the wheels. By turning the wheels by hand and 
 by levers they could only produce a semblance of move- 
 ment, and meantime they would be wrenching the wheels 
 and so preventing their being fit for real movement. 
 
 That is just what people are doing who think to make 
 men advance by means of external force. 
 
 They say that the Christian life cannot be established 
 without the use of violence, because there are savage races 
 outside the pale of Christian societies in Africa and in 
 Asia (there are some who even represent the Chinese as a 
 danger to civilization), and that in the midst of Christian 
 societies there are savage, corrupt, and, according to the 
 new theory of heredity, congenital criminals. And vio- 
 lence, they say, is necessary to keep savages and criminals 
 from annihilating our civilization. 
 
 But these savages within and without Christian society, 
 who are such a terror to us, have never been subjugated by 
 violence, and are not subjugated by it now. Nations have 
 never subjugated other nations by violence alone. If a 
 nation which subjugated another was on a lower level of 
 civilization, it has never happened that it succeeded in 
 introducing its organization of life by violence. On the 
 contrary, it was always forced to adopt the organization of 
 life existing in the conquered nation. If ever any of the 
 nations conquered by force have been really subjugated, or 
 even nearly so, it has always been by the action of public 
 opinion, and never by violence, which only tends to drive a 
 people to further rebellion. 
 
 When whole nations have been subjugated by a new 
 
“ THE KINGDOM OF GOD 
 
 258 
 
 religion, and have become Christian or Mohammedan, such 
 a conversion has never been brought about because the 
 authorities made it obligatory (on the contrary, violence has 
 much oftener acted in the opposite direction), but because 
 public opinion made such a change inevitable. Nations, on 
 the contrary, who have been driven by force to accept the 
 faith of their conquerors have always remained antagonistic 
 to it. 
 
 It is just the same with the savage elements existing in 
 the midst of our civilized societies. Neither the increased 
 nor the diminished severity of punishment, nor the modifi- 
 cations of prisons, nor the increase of police will increase or 
 diminish the number of criminals. Their number will only 
 be diminished by the change of the moral standard of 
 society. No severities could put an end to duels and 
 vendettas in certain districts. It spite of the number of 
 Tcherkesses executed for robbery, they continue to be 
 robbers from their youth up, for no maiden will marry a 
 Tcherkess youth till he has given proof of his bravery by 
 carrying off a horse, or at least a sheep. If men cease to 
 fight duels, and the Tcherkesses cease to be robbers, it will 
 not be from fear of punishment (indeed, that invests the 
 crime with additional charm for youth), but through a 
 change in the moral standard of public opinion. It is the 
 same with all other crimes. Force can never suppress what 
 is sanctioned by public opinion. On the contrary, public 
 opinion need only be in direct opposition to force to 
 neutralize the whole effect of the use of force. It has 
 always been so and always will be in every case of martyr, 
 dom. 
 
 What would happen if force were not used against hostile 
 nations and the criminal elements of society we do not 
 know. But we do know by prolonged experience that 
 neither enemies nor criminals have been successfully sup- 
 pressed by force. 
 
IS WITHIN YOU. 
 
 259 
 
 And indeed how could nations be subjugated by violence 
 who are led by their whole education, their traditions, and 
 even their religion to see the loftiest virtue in warring with 
 their oppressors and fighting for freedom ? And how are 
 we to suppress by force acts committed in the midst of our 
 society which are regarded as crimes by the government and 
 as daring exploits by the people ? 
 
 To exterminate such nations and such criminals by vio- 
 lence is possible, and indeed is done, but to subdue them is 
 impossible. 
 
 The sole guide which directs men and nations has always 
 been and is the unseen, intangible, underlying force, the 
 resultant of all the spiritual forces of a certain people, or 
 of all humanity, which finds its outward expression in pub- 
 lic opinion. 
 
 The use of violence only weakens this force, hinders it 
 and corrupts it, and tries to replace it by another which, far 
 from being conducive to the progress of humanity, is detri- 
 mental to it. 
 
 To bring under the sway of Christianity all the savage 
 nations outside the pale of the Christian world — all the 
 Zulus, Mandchoos, and Chinese, whom many regard as 
 savages — and the savages who live in our midst, there is 
 only one mea?is. That means is the propagation among 
 these nations of the Christian ideal of society, which can 
 only be realized by a Christian life, Christian actions, and 
 Christian examples. And meanwhile, though this is the one 
 only means of gaining a hold over the people who have 
 remained non-Christian, the men of our day set to work in 
 the directly opposite fashion to attain this result. 
 
 To bring under the sway of Christianity savage nations 
 who do not attack us and whom we have therefore no excuse 
 for oppressing, we ought before all things to leave them in 
 peace, and in case we need or wish to enter into closer 
 relations with them, we ought only to influence them by 
 
26 o 
 
 “ THE KINGDOM OF GOD 
 
 Christian manners and Christian teaching, setting them the 
 example of the Christian virtues of patience, meekness, 
 endurance, purity, brotherhood, and love. Instead of that 
 we begin by establishing among them new markets for our 
 commerce, with the sole aim of our own profit ; then we 
 appropriate their lands, i. e., rob them ; then we sell them 
 spirits, tobacco, and opium, /. <?., corrupt them ; then we 
 establish our morals among them, teach them the use of 
 violence and new methods of destruction, t. e., we teach them 
 nothing but the animal law of strife, below which man can- 
 not sink, and we do all we can to conceal from them all 
 that is Christian in us. After this we send some dozens of 
 missionaries prating to them of the hypocritical absurdities 
 of the Church, and then quote the failure of our efforts to 
 turn the heathen to Christianity as an incontrovertible proof 
 of the impossibility of applying the truths of Christianity in 
 practical life. 
 
 It is just the same with the so-called criminals living in 
 our midst. To bring these people under the sway of Chris- 
 tianity there is one only means, that is, the Christian social 
 ideal, which can only be realized among them by true 
 Christian teaching and supported by a true example of the 
 Christian life. And to preach this Christian truth and to 
 support it by Christian example we set up among them 
 prisons, guillotines, gallows, preparations for murder ; we 
 diffuse among the common herd idolatrous superstitions to 
 stupefy them ; we sell them spirits, tobacco, and opium to 
 brutalize them ; we even organize legalized prostitution ; 
 we give land to those who do not need it ; we make a dis- 
 play of senseless luxury, in the midst of suffering poverty ; 
 we destroy the possibility of anything like a Christian public 
 opinion, and studiously try to suppress what Christian pub- 
 lic opinion is existing. And then, after having ourselves 
 assiduously corrupted men, we shut them up like wild beasts 
 in places from which they cannot escape, and where they 
 
IS WITH IN' YOU." 
 
 261 
 
 become still more brutalized, or else we kill them. And 
 these very men whom we have corrupted and brutalized by 
 every means, we bring forward as a proof that one cannot 
 deal with criminals except by brute force. 
 
 We are just like ignorant doctors who put a man, recov- 
 ering from illness by the force of nature, into the most 
 unfavorable conditions of hygiene, and dose him with the 
 most deleterious drugs, and then assert triumphantly that 
 their hygiene and their drugs saved his life, when the 
 patient would have been well long before if they had left 
 him alone. 
 
 Violence, which is held up as the means of supporting 
 the Christian organization of life, not only fails to produce 
 that effect, it even hinders the social organization of life 
 from being what it might and ought to be. The social 
 organization is as good as it is not as a result of force, but 
 in spite of it. 
 
 And therefore the champions of the existing order are 
 mistaken in arguing that since, even with the aid of force, 
 the bad and non-Christian elements of humanity can hardly 
 be kept from attacking us, the abolition of the use of force 
 and the substitution of public opinion for it would leave 
 humanity quite unprotected. 
 
 They are mistaken, because force does not protect human- 
 ity, but, on the contrary, deprives it of the only possible 
 means of really protecting itself, that is, the establishment 
 and diffusion of a Christian public opinion. Only by the 
 suppression of violence will a Christian public opinion 
 cease to be corrupted, and be enabled to be diffused with- 
 out hindrance, and men will then turn their efforts in the 
 spiritual direction by which alone they can advance. 
 
 “ But how are we to cast off the visible tangible pro- 
 tection of an armed policeman, and trust to something so 
 intangible as public opinion ? Does it yet exist ? More- 
 over, the condition of things in which we are living now. 
 
262 
 
 “ THE KINGDOM OF GOD 
 
 we know, good or bad ; we know its shortcomings and are 
 used to it, we know what to do, and how to behave under 
 present conditions. But what will happen when we give 
 it up and trust ourselves to something invisible and intan- 
 gible, and altogether unknown ?” 
 
 The unknown world on which they are entering in 
 renouncing their habitual ways of life appears itself as 
 dreadful to them. It is all very well to dread the unknown 
 when our habitual position is sound and secure. But our 
 position is so far from being secure that we know, beyond 
 all doubt, that we are standing on the brink of a precipice. 
 
 If we must be afraid let us be afraid of what is really 
 alarming, and not what we imagine as alarming. 
 
 Fearing to make the effort to detach ourselves from our 
 perilous position because the future is not fully clear to us, 
 we are like passengers in a foundering ship who, through 
 being afraid to trust themselves to the boat which would 
 carry them to the shore, shut themselves up in the cabin 
 and refuse to come out of it ; or like sheep, who, terrified 
 by their barn being on fire, huddle in a corner and do not 
 go out of the wide-open door. 
 
 We are standing on the threshold of the murderous war 
 of social revolution, terrific in its miseries, beside which, as 
 those who are preparing it tell us, the horrors of 1793 will 
 be child’s play. And can we talk of the danger threaten- 
 ing us from the warriors of Dahomey, the Zulus, and such, 
 who live so far away and are not dreaming of attacking us, 
 and from some thousands of swindlers, thieves, and 
 murderers, brutalized and corrupted by ourselves, whose 
 number is in no way lessened by all our sentences, prisons, 
 and executions ? 
 
 Moreover this dread of the suppression of the visible 
 protection of the policeman is essentially a sentiment of 
 townspeople, that is, of people who are living in abnormal 
 and artificial conditions. People living in natural condi- 
 
IS WITHIN YOU. 
 
 263 
 
 tions of life, not in towns, but in the midst of nature, and 
 carrying on the struggle with nature, live without this pro- 
 tection and know how little force can protect us from the 
 real dangers with which we are surrounded. There is 
 something sickly in this dread, which is essentially depend- 
 ent on the artificial conditions in which many of us live 
 and have been brought up. 
 
 A doctor, a specialist in insanity, told a story that one 
 summer day when he was leaving the asylum, the lunatics 
 accompanied him to the street door. “Come for a walk in 
 the town with me ? ” the doctor suggested to them. The 
 lunatics agreed, and a small band followed the doctor. 
 But the further they proceeded along the street where 
 healthy people were freely moving about, the more timid 
 they became, and they pressed closer and closer to the 
 doctor, hindering him from walking. At last they all be- 
 gan to beg him to take them back to the as}dum, to their 
 meaningless but customary way of life, to their keepers, to 
 blows, strait waistcoats, and solitary cells. 
 
 This is just how men of to-day huddle in terror and draw 
 back to their irrational manner of life, their factories, law 
 courts, prisons, executions, and wars, when Christianity calls 
 them to liberty, to the free, rational life of the future com- 
 ing age. 
 
 People ask, “ How will our security be guaranteed when 
 the existing organization is suppressed ? What precisely 
 will the new organization be that is to replace it ? So long 
 as we do not know precisely how our life will be organized, 
 we will not stir a step forward.” 
 
 An explorer going to an unknown country might as well 
 ask for a detailed map of the country before he would start. 
 
 If a man, before he passed from one stage to another, 
 could know his future life in full detail, he would have 
 nothing to live for. It is the same with the life of human- 
 ity. If it had a programme of the life which awaited it 
 
264 
 
 THE KINGDOM OF GOD 
 
 before entering a new stage, it would be the surest sign 
 that it was not living, nor advancing, but simply rotating in 
 the same place. 
 
 The conditions of the new order of life cannot be known 
 by us because we have to create them by our own labors. 
 That is all that life is, to learn the unknown, and to adapt 
 our actions to this new knowledge. 
 
 That is the life of each individual man, and that is the 
 life of human societies and of humanity. 
 
 CHAPTER XI. 
 
 THE CHRISTIAN CONCEPTION OF LIFE HAS ALREADY 
 ARISEN IN OUR SOCIETY, AND WILL INFALLIBLY PUT 
 AN END TO THE PRESENT ORGANIZATION OF OUR LIFE 
 BASED ON FORCE — WHEN THAT WILL BE. 
 
 The Condition and Organization of our Society are Terrible, but they 
 Rest only on Public Opinion, and can be Destroyed by it — Already 
 Violence is Regarded from a Different Point' of View ; the Number of 
 those who are Ready to Serve the Government is Diminishing ; and 
 even the Servants of Government are Ashamed of their Position, and 
 so often Do Not Perform their Duties — These Facts are all Signs of 
 the Rise of a Public Opinion, which Continually Growing will Lead to 
 No One being Willing to Enter Government Service — Moreover, it 
 Becomes More and More Evident that those Offices are of No Practical 
 Use — Men already Begin to Understand the Futility of all Institutions 
 Based on Violence, and if a Few already Understand it, All will One 
 Day Understand it — The Day of Deliverance is Unknown, but it 
 Depends on Men Themselves, on how far Each Man Lives According 
 to the Light that is in Him. 
 
 The position of Christian humanity with its prisons, 
 galleys, ^Fbbets, its factories and accumulation of capital, 
 its taxes, churches, gin-palaces, licensed brothels, its eYer- 
 increasing armament and its millions of brutalized men, 
 ready, like chained dogs, to attack anyone against whom 
 
Is WITHIM you:'' 
 
 265 
 
 their master incites them, would be terrible indeed if it 
 were the product of violence, but it is_pre-eminenlly the 
 product of public opinion. And what has been established 
 by public opinion can be destroyed by public opinion — and, 
 indeed, is being destroyed by public opinion. 
 
 Money lavished by hundreds of millions, tens of millions 
 of disciplined troops, weapons of astounding destructive 
 power, all organizations carried to the highest point of 
 perfection, a whole army of men charged with the task of 
 deluding and hypnotizing the people, and all this, by means 
 of electricity which annihilates distance, under the diiect 
 control of men who regard such an organization of society 
 not only as necessary for profit, but even for self-preserva- 
 tion, and therefore exert every effort of their ingenuity to 
 preserve it — what an invincible power it would seem ! 
 And yet we need only imagine for a moment what will 
 really inevitably come to pass, that is,^he Christian socialj 
 standard replacing the heathen social .standard and estab- 
 lished with the same power and universality, and the 
 majority of men as much ashamed of taking any part in 
 violence or in profiting by it, as they are to-day of thiev- 
 ing, swindling, begging, and cowardice ; and at once we 
 see the whole of this complex, and seemingly powerful 
 organization of society falls into ruins of itself without a 
 struggle. 
 
 And to bring this to pass, nothing new need be brought 
 before men’s minds. Only let the mist, which veils fiom 
 men’s eyes the true meaning of certain acts of violence, 
 pass away, and the Chr istianp iiblic opin^ n which is spring- 
 ing up would overpowm' flTe''^^tinct public opinion which 
 permitted and justified acts of violence. People need only| 
 come to be as much ashamed to do deeds of violence, to 
 assist in them or to profit by them, as they now aie of 
 being, or being reputed a swindler, a thief, a coward, or a 
 beggar. jAnd already this change is beginning to take 
 
266 
 
 “ THE KINGDOM OF GOD 
 
 place. We do not notice it just as we do not notice the 
 movement of the earth, because we are moved together 
 with everything around us. 
 
 It is true that the organization of society remains in its 
 principal features just as much an organization based on 
 violence as it was one thousand years ago, and even in some 
 respects, especially in the preparation for war and in war 
 itself, it appears still more brutal. But the rising Christian 
 ideal, which must at a certain stage of development replace 
 the heathen ideal of life, already makes its influence felt. 
 A dead tree stands apparently as firmly as ever — it may even 
 seem firmer because it is harder — but it is rotten at the 
 core, and soon must fall. It is just so with the present 
 order of society, based on force. The external aspect is 
 unchanged. There is the same division of oppressors and 
 oppressed, but their view of the significance and dignity of 
 their respective positions is no longer what it once was. 
 
 The oppressors, that is, those who take part in govern- 
 ment, and those who profit by oppression, that is, the rich, 
 no longer imagine, as they once did, that they are the elect 
 of the world, and that they constitute the ideal of human 
 happiness and greatness, to attain which was once the 
 highest aim of the oppressed. 
 
 Very often now it is not the oppressed who strive to 
 attain the position of the oppressors, and try to imitate 
 them, but on the contrary the oppressors who voluntarily 
 abandon the advantages of their position, prefer the con- 
 dition of the oppressed, and try to resemble them in the 
 simplicity of their life. 
 
 Not to speak of the duties and occupations now openly 
 despised, such as that of spy, agent of secret police, money- 
 lender, and publican, there are a great number of professions 
 formerly regarded as honorable, such as those of police 
 officials, courtiers, judges, and administrative functionaries, 
 clergymen, military officers, speculators, and bankers, which 
 
IS IVITHIM YOU." 
 
 267 
 
 are no longer considered desirable positions by everyone, 
 and are even despised by a special circle of the most 
 respected people. There are already men who voluntarily 
 abandon these professions which were once reckoned irre- 
 proachable, and prefer less lucrative callings which are in 
 no way connected with the use of force. 
 
 And there are even rich men who, not through religious 
 sentiment, but simply through special sensitiveness to the 
 social standard that is springing up, relinquish their in- 
 herited property, believing that a man can only justly con- 
 sume what he has gained by his own labor. 
 
 The position of a government official or of a rich man is 
 no longer, as it once was, and still is among non-Christian 
 peoples, regarded as necessarily honorable and deserving of 
 respect, and under the special blessing of God. The most 
 delicate and moral people (they are generally also the most 
 cultivated) avoid such positions and prefer more humble 
 callings that are not dependent on the use of force. 
 
 The best of our young people, at the age when they are 
 still uncorrupted by life and are choosing a career, prefer 
 the calling of doctor, engineer, teacher, artist, writer, or 
 even that of simple farmer living on his own labor, to legal, 
 administrative, clerical, and military positions in the pay of 
 government, or to an idle existence living on their incomes. 
 
 Monuments and memorials in these days are mostly not 
 erected in honor of government dignitaries, or generals, or 
 still less of rich men, but rather of artists, men of science, 
 and inventors, persons who have nothing in common with 
 the government, and often have even been in conflict with 
 it. They are the men whose praises are celebrated in 
 poetry, who are honored by sculpture and received with 
 triumphant jubilations. 
 
 The best men of our day are all striving for such places 
 of honor. Consequently the class from which the wealthy 
 and the government officials are drawn grows less in num- 
 
268 
 
 THE KINGDOM OF GOD 
 
 ber and lower in intelligence and education, and still more 
 in moral qualities. So that nowadays the wealthy class 
 and men at the head of government do not constitute, as 
 they did in former days, the dite of society ; on the con- 
 trary, they are inferior to the middle class. 
 
 In Russia and Turkey as in America and France, how- 
 ever often the government change its officials, the majority 
 of them are self-seeking and corrupt, of so low a moral 
 standard that they do not even come up the elementary 
 requirements of common honesty expected by the govern- 
 ment. One may often nowadays hear from persons in 
 authority the naive complaint that the best people are 
 always, by some strange — as it seems to them — fatality, to 
 be found in the camp of the opposition. As though men 
 were to complain that those who accepted the office of 
 hangman were — by some strange fatality — all persons of 
 very little refinement or beauty of character. 
 
 The most cultivated and refined people of our society are 
 not nowadays to be found among the very rich, as used 
 formerly to be the rule. The rich are mostly coarse money 
 grubbers, absorbed only, in increasing their hoard, generally 
 by dishonest means, or else the degenerate heirs of such 
 money grubbers, who, far from playing any prominent part 
 in society, are mostly treated with general contempt. 
 
 And besides the fact that the class from which the 
 servants of government and the wealthy are drawn grows 
 less in number and lower in caliber, they no longer them- 
 selves attach the same importance to their positions as they 
 once did ; often they are ashamed of the ignominy of their 
 calling and do not perform the duties they are bound to 
 perform in their position. Kings and emperors scarcely 
 govern at all ; they scarcely ever decide upon an internal 
 reform or a new departure in foreign politics. They mostly 
 leave the decision of such questions to government institu- 
 tions or to public opinion. All their duties are reduced to 
 
/S WITHIN YOU. 
 
 269 
 
 representing the unity and majesty of government. And 
 even this duty they perform less and less successfully. 
 The majority of them do not keep up their old unapproach- 
 able majesty, but become more and more democratized and 
 even vulgarized, casting aside the external prestige that 
 remained to them, and thereby destroying the very thing it 
 was their function to maintain. 
 
 It is just the same with the army. Military officers of 
 the highest rank, instead of encouraging in their soldiers 
 the brutality and ferocity necessary for their work, diffuse 
 education among the soldiers, inculcate humanity, and often 
 even themselves share the socialistic ideas of the masses 
 and denounce war. In the last plots against the Russian 
 Government many of the conspirators were in the army. 
 And the number of the disaffected in the army is always 
 increasing. And it often happens (there was a case, indeed, 
 within the last few days) that when called upon to quell 
 disturbances they refuse to fire upon the people. Military 
 exploits are openly reprobated by the military themselves, 
 and are often the subject of jests among them. 
 
 It is the same with judges and public prosecutors. The 
 judges, whose duty it is to judge and condemn criminals, 
 conduct the proceedings so as to whitewash them as far as 
 possible. So that the Russian Government, to procure the 
 condemnation of those whom they want to punish, never 
 intrust them to the ordinary tribunals, but have them tried 
 before a court martial, which is only a parody of justice. 
 The prosecutors themselves often refuse to proceed, and 
 even when they do proceed, often in spite of the law, really 
 defend those they ought to be accusing. The learned 
 jurists whose business it is to justify the violence of 
 authority, are more and more disposed to deny the right of 
 punishment and to replace it by theories of irresponsibility 
 and even of moral insanity, proposing to deal with those 
 they call criminals by medical treatment only. 
 
270 
 
 “ THE KINGDOM OF GOD 
 
 Jailers and overseers of galleys generally become the 
 champions of those whom they ought to torture. Police 
 officers and detectives are continually assisting the escape 
 of those they ought to arrest. The clergy preach tolerance, 
 and even sometimes condemn the use of force, and the more 
 educated among them try in their sermons to avoid the very 
 deception which is the basis of their position and which it 
 is their duty to support. Executioners refuse to perform 
 their functions, so that in Russia the death penalty cannot 
 be carried out for want of executioners. And in spite of 
 all the advantages bestowed on these men, who are selected 
 from convicts, there is a constantly diminishing number of 
 volunteers for the post. Governors, police officials, tax 
 collectors often have compassion on the people and try to 
 find pretexts for not collecting the tax from them. The 
 rich are not at ease in spending their wealth only on them- 
 selves, and lavish it on works of public utility. Land- 
 owners build schools and hospitals on their property, and 
 some even give up the ownership of their land and transfer 
 it to the cultivators, or establish communities upon it. 
 Millovvners and manufacturers build hospitals, schools, 
 savings banks, asylums, and dwellings for their work- 
 people. Some of them form co-operative associations in 
 which they have shares on the same terms as the others. 
 Capitalists expend a part of their capital on educational, 
 artistic, philanthropic, and other public institutions. And 
 many, who are not equal to parting with their wealth in 
 their lifetime, leave it in their wills to public institutions. 
 
 All these phenomena might seem to be mere exceptions, 
 except that they can all be referred to one common cause. 
 Just as one might fancy the first leaves on the budding 
 trees in April were exceptional if we did not know that they 
 all have a common cause, the spring, and that if we see the 
 branches on some trees shooting and turning green, it is 
 certain that it will soon be so with all. 
 
IS WITHIN YOU." 
 
 271 
 
 So it is with the manifestation of the Christian standard 
 of opinion on force and all that is based on force. If this 
 standard alread)'’ influences some, the most impressionable, 
 and impels each in his own sphere to abandon advantages 
 based on the use of force, then its influence will extend 
 further and further till it transforms the whole order of 
 men’s actions and puts it into accord with the Christian ideal 
 which is already a living force in the vanguard of humanity. 
 
 And if there are now rulers, who do not decide on 
 any step on their own authority, who try to be as unlike 
 monarchs, and as like plain mortals as possible, who state 
 their readiness to give up their prerogatives and become 
 simply the first citizens of a republic ; if there are already 
 soldiers who realize all the sin and harm of war, and are 
 not willing to fire on men either of their own or a foreign 
 country ; judges and prosecutors who do not like to try 
 and to condemn criminals ; priests, who abjure deception ; 
 tax-gatherers who try to perform as little as they can of 
 their duties, and rich men renouncing their wealth — then 
 the same thing will inevitably happen to other rulers, other 
 soldiers, other judges, priests, tax-gatherers, and rich men. 
 And when there are no longer men willing to fill these 
 offices, these offices themselves will disappear too. 
 
 But this is not the only way in which public opinion is 
 leading men to the abolition of the prevailing order and 
 the substitution of a new order. As the positions based on 
 the rule of force become less attractive and fewer men are 
 found willing to fill them, the more will their uselessness 
 be apparent. 
 
 Everywhere throughout the Christian world the same 
 rulers, and the same governments, the same armies, the 
 same law courts, the same tax-gatherers, the same priests, 
 the same rich men, landowners, manufacturers, and capital- 
 ists, as ever, but the attitude of the world to them, and 
 their attitude to themselves is altogether changed. 
 
2)2 
 
 “ THE KINGDOM OF GOD 
 
 The same sovereigns have still the same audiences and 
 interviews, hunts and banquets, and balls and uniforms ; 
 there are the same diplomats and the same deliberations 
 on alliances and wars ; there are still the same parliaments, 
 with the same debates on the Eastern question and Africa, 
 on treaties and violations of treaties, and Home Rule and 
 the eight-hour day ; and one set of ministers replacing 
 another in the same way, and the same speeches and the 
 same incidents. But for men who observe how one news- 
 paper article has more effect on the position of affairs than 
 dozens of royal audiences or parliamentary sessions, it 
 becomes more and more evident that these audiences and 
 interviews and debates in parliaments do not direct the 
 course of affairs, but something independent of all that, 
 which cannot be concentrated in one place. 
 
 The same generals and officers and soldiers, and cannons 
 and fortresses, and reviews and maneuvers, but no war 
 breaks out. One year, ten, twenty years pass by. And it 
 becomes less and less possible to rely on the army for the 
 pacification of riots, and more and more evident, conse- 
 quently, that generals, and officers, and soldiers are only 
 figures in solemn processions — objects of amusement for 
 governments — a sort of immense — and far too expensive — 
 corps de ballet. 
 
 The same lawyers and judges, and the same assizes, but 
 it becomes more and more evident that the civil courts 
 decide cases on the most diverse grounds, but regardless 
 of justice, and that criminal trials are quite senseless, be- 
 cause the punishments do not attain the objects aimed at 
 by the judges themselves. These institutions therefore 
 serve no other purpose than to provide a means of liveli- 
 hood for men who are not capable of doing anything more 
 useful. 
 
 The same priests and archbishops and churches and 
 synods, but it becomes more and more evident that they 
 
75 WITHIN YOU." 
 
 273 
 
 have long ago ceased to believe in what they preach, and 
 therefore they can convince no one of the necessity of 
 believing what they don’t believe themselves. 
 
 The same tax collectors, but they are less and less capa- 
 ble of taking men’s property from them by force, and it 
 becomes more and more evident that people can collect all 
 that is necessary by voluntary subscription without their 
 aid. 
 
 The same rich men, but it becomes more and more evi- 
 dent that they can only be of use by ceasing to administer 
 their property in person and giving up to society the whole 
 or at least a part of their wealth. 
 
 And when all this has become absolutely evident to 
 everyone, it will be natural for men to ask themselves : 
 “ But why should we keep and maintain all these kings, 
 emperors, presidents, and members of all sorts of senates 
 and ministries, since nothing comes of all their debates and 
 audiences? Wouldn’t it be better, as some humorist sug- 
 gested, to make a queen of india-rubber ? ” 
 
 And what good to us are these armies with their generals 
 and bands and horses and drums? And what need is 
 there of them when there is no war, and no one wants to 
 make war ? and if there were a war, other nations would 
 not let us gain any advantage from it ; while the soldiers 
 refuse to fire on their fellow-countrymen. 
 
 And what is the use of these lawyers and judges who 
 don’t decide civil cases with justice and recognize them- 
 selves the uselessness of punishments in criminal cases? 
 
 And what is the use of tax collectors who collect the 
 taxes unwillingly, when it is easy to raise all that is wanted 
 without them ? 
 
 What is the use of the clergy, who don’t believe in what 
 they preach ? 
 
 And what is the use of capital in the hands of private 
 persons, when it can only be of use as the property of all ? 
 
2 74 “ the kingdom of god 
 
 And when once people have asked themselves these 
 questions they cannot help coming to some decision and 
 ceasing to support all these institutions which are no 
 longer of use. 
 
 But even before those who support these institutions 
 decide to abolish them, the men who occupy these posi- 
 tions will be reduced to the necessity of throwing them up. 
 
 Public opinion more and more condemns the use of force, 
 and therefore men are less and less willing to fill positions 
 which rest on the use of force, and if they do occupy them, 
 are less and less able to make use of force in them. And 
 hence they must become more and more superfluous. 
 
 I once took part in Moscow in a religious meeting which 
 used to take place generally in the week after Easter near 
 the church in the Ohotny Row. A little knot of some 
 twenty men were collected together on the pavement, 
 engaged in serious religious discussion. At the same time 
 there was a kind of concert going on in the buildings of 
 the Court Club in the same street, and a police officer 
 noticing the little group collected near the church sent a 
 mounted policeman to disperse it. It was absolutely un- 
 necessary for the officer to disperse it. A group of twenty 
 men was no obstruction to anyone, but he had been stand- 
 ing there the whole morning, and he wanted to do some- 
 thing. The policeman, a young fellow, with a resolute 
 flourish of his right arm and a clink of his saber, came up 
 to us and commanded us severely : “ Move on ! what’s 
 this meeting about ?” Everyone looked at the policeman, 
 and one of the speakers, a quiet man in a peasant’s dress, 
 answered with a calm and gracious air, “ We are speaking 
 of serious matters, and there is no need for us to move on ; 
 you would do better, young man, to get off your horse and 
 listen. It might do you good”; and turning round he 
 continued his discourse. The policeman turned his horse 
 and went off without a word. 
 
IS WITHIN YOU.” 
 
 275 
 
 That is just what should be done in all cases of violence. 
 
 The officer was bored, he had nothing to do. He had 
 been put, poor fellow, in a position in which he had no 
 choice but to give orders. He was shut off from all human 
 existence ; he could do nothing but superintend and give 
 orders, and give orders and superintend, though his super- 
 intendence and his orders served no useful purpose what- 
 ever. And this is the position in which all these unlucky 
 rulers, ministers, members of parliament, governors, 
 generals, officers, archbishops, priests, and even rich men 
 find themselves to some extent already, and will find them- 
 selves altogether as time goes on. They can do nothing 
 but give orders, and they give orders and send their mes- 
 sengers, as the officer sent the policeman, to interfere with 
 people. And because the people they hinder turn to 
 them and request them not to interfere, they fancy they 
 are very useful indeed. 
 
 But the time will come and is com.ing when it will be 
 perfectly evident to everyone that they are not of any use 
 at all, and only a hindrance, and those whom they interfere 
 with will say gently and quietly to them, like my friend in 
 tbe street meeting, “ Pray don’t interfere with u s.”^ And 
 all the messengers and those who send them too will be 
 obliged to follow this good advice, that is to say, will leave 
 olf galloping about, with their arms akimbo, interfering 
 with people, and getting off their horses and removing their 
 spurs, will listen to what is being said, and mixing with 
 others, will take their place with them in some real human 
 work. 
 
 The time will come and is inevitably coming when all 
 institutions based on force will disappear through their 
 uselessness, stupidity, and even inconvenience becoming 
 obvious to all. 
 
 The time must come when the men of our modern world 
 who fill offices based upon violence will find themselves in 
 
276 
 
 ‘ THE KINGDOM OF GOD 
 
 the position of the emperor in Andersen’s tale of “ The 
 Emperor’s New Clothes,” when the child seeing the 
 emperor undressed, cried in all simplicity, “ Look, he is 
 naked ! ” And then all the rest, who had seen him and 
 said nothing, could not help recognizing it too. 
 
 The story is that there was once an emperor, very fond 
 of new clothes. And to him came two tailors, who prom- 
 ised to make him some extraordinary clothes. The 
 emperor engages them and they begin to sew at them, but 
 they explain that the clothes have the extraordinary prop- 
 erty of remaining invisible to anyone who is unfit for his 
 position. The courtiers come to look at the tailors’ work 
 and see nothing, for the men are plying their needles in 
 empty space. But remembering the extraordinary property 
 of the clothes, they all declare they see them and are loud 
 in their admiration. The emperor does the same himself. 
 The day of the procession comes in which the emperor is 
 to go out in his new clothes. The emperor undresses and 
 puts on his new clothes, that is to say, remains naked, and 
 naked he walks through the town. But remembering the 
 magic property of the clothes, no one ventures to say that 
 he has nothing on till a little child cries out : “ Look, he is 
 naked ! ” 
 
 This will be exactly the situation of all who continue 
 through inertia to fill offices which have long become use- 
 less directly someone who has no interest in concealing 
 their uselessness exclaims in all simplicity: “But these 
 people have been of no use to anyone for a long time 
 past ! ” 
 
 The condition of Christian humanity with its fortresses, 
 cannons, dynamite, guns, torpedoes, prisons, gallows, 
 churches, factories, customs offices, and palaces is really 
 terrible. But still cannons and guns will not fire them- 
 selves, prisons will not shut men up of themselves, gallows 
 will not hang them, churches will not delude them, nor 
 
IS WITHIN YOU: 
 
 277 
 
 customs offices hinder them, and palaces and factories are 
 not built nor kept up of themselves. All those things are the 
 work of men. If men come to understand that they ought 
 not to do these things, then they will cease to be. And 
 already they are beginning to understand it. Though all do 
 not understand it yet, the advanced guard understand and 
 the rest will follow them. And the advanced guard cannot 
 cease to understand what they have once understood ; and 
 what they understand the rest not only can but must 
 inevitably understand hereafter. 
 
 So that the prophecy that the time will come when men 
 will be taught of God, will learn war no more, will beat 
 their swords into plowshares and their spears into reap- 
 ing-hooks, which means, translating it into our language, 
 the fortresses, prisons, barracks, palaces, and churches will 
 remain empty, and all the gibbets and guns and cannons 
 will be left unused, is no longer a dream, but the definite 
 new form of life to which mankind is approaching with 
 ever-increasing rapidity. 
 
 But when will it be ? 
 
 Eighteen hundred years ago to this question Christ 
 answered that the end of the world (that is, of the pagan 
 organization of life) shall come when the tribulation of men 
 is greater than it has ever been, and when the Gospel of 
 the kingdom of God, that is, the possibility of a new organ- 
 ization of life, shall be preached in the world unto all 
 nations. (Matt. xxiv. 3-28.) But of that day and hour 
 knoweth no man but the Father only (Matt. xxiv. 3-6), 
 said Christ. For it may come any time, in such an hour as 
 ye think not. 
 
 To the question when this hour cometh Christ answers 
 that we cannot know, but just because we cannot know 
 when that hour is coming we ought to be always ready to 
 meet it, just as the master ought to watch who guards his 
 house from thieves, as the virgins ought to watch with 
 
278 
 
 THE KINGDOM OF GOD 
 
 lamps alight for the bridegroom ; and further, we ought to 
 work with all the powers given us to bring that hour to 
 pass, as the servants ought to work with the talents 
 intrusted to them. (Matt. xxiv. 43, and xxvi. 13, 14-30.) 
 
 And there could be no answer but this one. Men can- 
 not know when the day and the hour of the kingdom of 
 God will come, because its coming depends on themselves 
 alone. 
 
 The answer is like that of the wise man who, when asked 
 whether it was far to the town, answered, “ Walk ! ” 
 
 How can we tell whether it is far to the goal which 
 humanity is approaching, when we do not know how men 
 are going toward it, while it depends on them whether they 
 go or do not go, stand still, slacken their pace or hasten it ? 
 
 All we can know is what we who make up mankind 
 ought to do, and not to do, to bring about the coming of 
 the kingdom of God. And that we all know. And we need 
 only each begin to do what we ought to do, we need only 
 each live with all the light that is in us, to bring about at 
 once the promised kingdom of God to which every man’s 
 heart is yearning. 
 
 CHAPTER XII. 
 
 CONCLUSION — REPENT YE, FOR THE KINGDOM OF HEAVEN 
 IS AT HAND. 
 
 I. Chance Meeting with a Train Carrying Soldiers to Restore Order 
 Among the Famishing Peasants — Reason of the Expedition — How the 
 Decisions of the Higher Authorities are Enforced in Cases of Insub- 
 ordination on Part of the Peasants — What Happened at Orel, as an 
 Example of How the Rights of the Propertied Classes are Maintained 
 by Murder and Torture — All the Privileges of the Wealthy are Based 
 on Similar Acts of Violence. 
 
 2. The Elements that Made up the Force Sent to Toula, and the Con- 
 duct of the Men Composing it — How these Men Could Carry Out such 
 Acts — The Explanation is Not to be Found in Ignorance, Conviction, 
 
IS WITHIN YOU. 
 
 279 
 
 Cruelty, Heartlessness, or Want of Moral Sense — They do these 
 Things Because they are Necessary to Support the Existing Order, 
 which they Consider it Every Man’s Duty to Support — The Basis of 
 this Conviction that the Existing Order is Necessary and Inevitable — 
 In the Upper Classes this Conviction is Based on the Advantages of 
 the Existing Order for Themselves — But what Forces Men of the 
 Lower Classes to Believe in the Immutability of the Existing Order, 
 from which they Derive no Advantage, and which they Aid in Main- 
 taining, Facts Contrary to their Conscience? — This is the Result of the 
 Lower Classes being Deluded by the Upper, Both as to the Inevi- 
 tability of the Existing Order and the Lawfulness of the Acts of 
 Violence Needed to Maintain it — Deception in General — Special Form 
 of Deception in Regard to Military Service — Conscription. 
 
 3. How can Men Allow that Murder is Permissible while they Preach 
 Principles of Morality, and How can they Allow of the Existence in 
 their Midst of a Military Organization of Physical Force which is a 
 Constant Menace to Public Security ? — It is only Allowed by the 
 Upper Classes, who Profit by this Organization, Because their Privi- 
 leges are Maintained by it — The Upper Classes Allow it, and the 
 Lower Classes Carry it into Effect in Spite of their Consciousness of 
 the Immorality of the Deeds of Violence, the More Readily Because 
 Through the Arrangements of the Government the Moral Responsi- 
 bility for such Deeds is Divided among a Great Number of Partici- 
 pants in it, and Everyone Throws the Responsibility on Someone 
 Else — Moreover, the Sense of Moral Responsibility is Lost through 
 the Delusion of Inequality, and the Consequent Intoxication of Power 
 on the Part of Superiors, and Servility on the Part of Inferiors — The 
 Condition of these Men, Acting against the Dictates of their Con- 
 science, is Like that of Hypnotized Subjects Acting by Suggestion — 
 The Difference between this Obedience to Government Suggestion, 
 and Obedience to Public Opinion, and to the Guidance of Men of a 
 Higher Moral Sense — The Existing Order of Society, which is the 
 Result of an Extinct Public Opinion and is Inconsistent with the Al- 
 ready Existing Public Opinion of the Future, is only Maintained by the 
 Stupefaction of the Conscience, Produced Spontaneously by Self-inter- 
 est in the Upper Classes and Through Hypnotizing in the Lower 
 Classes — The Conscience or the Common Sense of such Men may 
 Awaken ,and there are Examples of its Sudden Awakening, so that one 
 can Never be Sure of the Deeds of Violence they are Prepared for — It 
 Depends Entirely on the Point which the Sense of the Unlawfulness of 
 Acts of Violence has Reached, and this Sense may Spontaneously 
 
28 o 
 
 “ THE KINGDOM OF GOD 
 
 Awaken in Men, or may be Reawakened by the Influence of Men of 
 more Conscience. 
 
 4. Everything Depends on the Strength of the Consciousness of Chris- 
 tian Truths in Each Individual Man — The Leading Men of Modern 
 Times, however, do not Think it.Necessary to Preach or Practice the 
 Truths of Christianity, but Regard the Modification of the External 
 Conditions of Existence within the Limit Imposed by Governments as 
 Sufficient to Reform the Life of Humanity — On this Scientific Theory 
 of Hypocrisy, which has Replaced the Plypocrisy of Religion, Men of 
 the Wealthy Classes Base their Justification of their Position — Through 
 this Hypocrisy they can Enjoy the Exclusive Privileges of their Posi- 
 tion by Force and Fraud, and Still Pretend to be Christians to One 
 Another and be Easy in their Minds — This Hypocrisy Allows Men 
 who Preach Christianity to Take Part in Institutions Based on Vio- 
 lence — No External Reformation of Life will Render it Less Miser- 
 able — Its Misery the Result of Disunion Caused by P'ollowing Lies, not 
 the Truth — Union only Possible in Truth — Hypocrisy Hinders this 
 Union, since Hypocrites Conceal from themselves and Others the 
 Truth they Know — Hypocrisy Turns all Reforms of Life to Evil — 
 Hypocrisy Distorts the Idea of Good and Evil, and so Stands in the 
 Way of the Progress of Men toward Perfection — Undisguised Crimi- 
 nals and Malefactors do Less Plarm than those who Live by Legalized 
 Violence, Disguised by Hypocrisy — All Men Feel the Iniquity of our 
 Life, and would Long Ago have Transformed it if it had not been Dis- 
 simulated by Hypocrisy — But Seem to have Reached the Extreme 
 Limits of Hypocrisy, and we Need only Make an Effort of Conscience 
 to Awaken as from a Nightmare to a Different Reality. 
 
 5. Can Man Make this Effort ? — According to the Hypocritical 
 Theory of the Day, Man is not Free to Transform his Life — Man is 
 not Free in his Actions, but he is Free to Admit or to Deny the Truth 
 he Knows — When Truth is Once Admitted, it Becomes the Basis of 
 Action — Man’s Threefold Relation to Truth — The Reason of the Ap- 
 parent Insolubility of the Problem of Free Will — Man’s Freedom Con- 
 sists in the Recognition of the Truth Revealed to him. There is no 
 Other Freedom — Recognition of Truth Gives Freedom, and Shows the 
 Path Along which. Willingly or Unwillingly by Mankind, Man Must 
 Advance — The Recognition of Truth and Real Freedom Enables Man 
 to Share in the Work of God, not as the Slave, but as the Creator of 
 Life — Men Need only Make the Effort to Renounce all Thought of 
 Bettering the External Conditions of Life and Bend all their Efforts to 
 Recognizing and Preaching the Truth they Know, to put an End to the 
 
IS WITHIN YOU." 
 
 281 
 
 Existing Miserable State of Things, and to Enter upon the Kingdom 
 of God so far as it is yet Accessible to Man — All that is Needed is to 
 Make an End of Lying and Hypocrisy — But then what Awaits us in 
 the Future ? — What will Happen to Humanity if Men Follow the Dic- 
 tates of their Conscience, and how can Life go on with the Conditions 
 of Civilized Life to which we are Accustomed ? — All Uneasiness on 
 these Points may be Removed by the Reflection that Nothing True and 
 Good can be Destroyed by the Realization of Truth, but will only be 
 Freed from the Alloy of Falsehood. 
 
 6. Our Life has Reached the Extreme Limit of Misery and Cannot be 
 Improved by any Systems of Organization — All our Life and all our 
 Institutions are Quite Meaningless — Are we Doing what God Wills of 
 us by Preserving our Privileges and Duties to Government? — We are 
 put in this Position not Because the World is so Made and it is Inevi- 
 table, but Because we Wish it to be so. Because it is to the Advantage of 
 Some of us — Our Conscience is in Opposition to our Position and all 
 our Conduct, and the Way Out of the Contradiction is to be Found in 
 the Recognition of the Christian Truth : Do Not unto Others what 
 you Would Not they should Do unto You — As our Duties to Self 
 Must be Subordinated to our Duties to Others, so Must our Duties to 
 Others be Subordinated to our Duties to God — TheOnly Way Outof 
 our Position Lies, if not in Renouncing our Position and our Privileges, 
 at Least in Recognizing our Sin and not Justifying it nor Disguising it — 
 The Only Object of Life is to Learn the Truth and to Act on it — Ac- 
 ceptance of the Position and of State Action Deprives Life of all Ob- 
 ject — It is God’s Will that we should Serve Him in our Life, that is, 
 that w'e should Bring About the Greatest Unity of all that has Life, a 
 Unity only Possible in Truth. 
 
 I WAS finishing this book, which I had been working at 
 for two years, when I happened on the 9th of September 
 to be traveling by rail through the governments of Toula 
 and Riazan, where the peasants were starving last year 
 and where the famine is even more severe now. At one of 
 the railway stations my train passed an extra train which 
 was taking a troop of soldiers under the conduct of the 
 governor of the province, together with muskets, cartridges, 
 and rods, to flog and murder these same famishing peasants. 
 The punishment of flogging by way of carrying the 
 
282 
 
 THE KINGDOM OF GOD 
 
 decrees of the authorities into effect has been more and 
 more frequently adopted of late in Russia, in spite of the 
 fact that corporal punishment was abolished by law thirty 
 years ago. 
 
 I had heard of this, I had even read in the newspapers 
 of the fearful floggings which had been inflicted in Tcher- 
 nigov, Tambov, Saratov, Astrakhan, and Orel, and of those 
 of which the governor of Nijni-Novgorod, General Bara- 
 nov, had boasted. But I had never before happened to 
 see men in the process of carrying out these punishments. 
 
 And here I saw the spectacle of good Russians full of 
 the Christian spirit traveling with guns and rods to torture 
 and kill their starving brethren. The reason for their 
 expedition was as follows : 
 
 On one of the estates of a rich landowner the peasants 
 had common rights on the forest, and having always 
 enjoyed these rights, regarded the forest as their own, or 
 at least as theirs in common with the owner. The land- 
 owner wished to keep the forest entirely to himself and 
 began to fell the trees. The peasants lodged a complaint. 
 The judges in the first instance gave an unjust decision (I 
 say unjust on the authority of the lawyer and governor, 
 who ought to understand the matter), and decided the case 
 in favor of the landowner. All the later decisions, even 
 that of the senate, though they could see that the matter 
 had been unjustly decided, confirmed the judgment and 
 adjudged the forest to the landowner. He began to cut 
 down the trees, but the peasants, unable to believe that 
 such obvious injustice could be done them by the higher 
 authorities, did not submit to the decision and drove away 
 the men sent to cut down the trees, declaring that the 
 forest belonged to them and they would go to the Tzar 
 before they would let them cut it down. 
 
 The matter was referred to Petersburg, and the order 
 was transmitted to the governor to carry the decision of 
 
/s WITHIN your 
 
 283 
 
 the court into effect. The governor asked for a troop of 
 soldiers. And here were the soldiers with bayonets and 
 cartridges, and moreover, a supply of rods, expressly pre- 
 pared for the purpose and heaped up in one of the trucks, 
 going to carry the decision of the higher authorities into 
 effect. 
 
 The decisions of the higher authorities are carried into 
 effect by means of murder or torture, or threats of one or 
 the other, according to whether they offer resistance or not. 
 
 In the first case if the peasants offer resistance the prac- 
 tice is in Russia, and it is the same everywhere where a 
 state organization and private property exist, as follows : 
 
 The governor delivers an address in which he demands 
 submission. The excited crowd, generally deluded by 
 their leaders, don’t understand a word of what the repre- 
 sentative of authority is saying in the pompous official 
 language, and their excitement continues. Then the 
 governor announces that if they do not submit and dis- 
 perse, he will be obliged to have recourse to force. If the 
 crowd does not disperse even on this, the governor gives the 
 order to fire over the heads of the crowd. If the crowd does 
 not even then disperse, the governor gives the order to fire 
 straight into the crowd ; the soldiers fire and the killed and 
 wounded fall about the street. Then the crowd usually runs 
 away in all directions, and the troops at the governor’s com- 
 mand take those who are supposed to be the ringleaders 
 and lead them off under escort. Then they pick up the 
 dying, the wounded, and the dead, covered with blood, some- 
 times women and children among them. The dead they 
 bury and the wounded they carry to the hospital. Those 
 whom they regard as the ringleaders they take to the town 
 hall and have them tried by a special court-martial. And if 
 they have had recourse to violence on their side, they are 
 condemned to be hanged. And then the gallows is erected. 
 And they solemnly strangle a few defenseless creatures.' 
 
284 
 
 “ THE KINGDOM OF GOD 
 
 This is what has often been done in Russia, and is and 
 must always be done where the social order is based on 
 force. 
 
 But in the second case, when the peasants do submit, 
 something quite special, peculiar to Russia, takes place. 
 The governor arrives on the scene of action and delivers 
 an harangue to the people, reproaching them for their 
 insubordination, and either stations troops in the houses of 
 the villages, where sometimes for a whole month the sol- 
 diers drain the resources of the peasants, or contenting 
 him.self with threats, he mercifully takes leave of the peo- 
 ple, or what is the most frequent course, he announces 
 that the ringleaders must be punished, and quite arbitrarily 
 without any trial selects a certain number of men, regarded 
 as ringleaders, and commands them to be flogged in his 
 presence. 
 
 In order to give an idea of how such things are done I 
 will describe a proceeding of the kind which took place in 
 Orel, and received the full approval of the highest author- 
 ities. 
 
 This is what took place in Orel. Just as here in the 
 Toula province, a landlord wanted to appropriate the 
 property of the peasants and just in the same way the 
 peasants opposed it. The matter in dispute was a fall of 
 water, which irrigated the peasants’ fields, and which the 
 landowner wanted to cut off and divert to turn his mill. 
 The peasants rebelled against this being done. The land- 
 owner laid a complaint before the district commander, who 
 illegally (as was recognized later even by a legal decision) 
 decided the matter in favor of the landowner, and allowed 
 him to divert the water course. The landowner sent work- 
 men to dig the conduit by which the water was to be let off 
 to turn the mill. The peasants were indignant at this 
 unjust decision, and sent their women to prevent the land- 
 owner’s men from digging this conduit. The women went 
 
IS WITHIN YOU." 
 
 285 
 
 to the dykes, overturned the carts, and drove away the men. 
 The landowner made a complaint against the women for 
 thus taking the law into their own hands. The district 
 commander made out an order that from every house 
 throughout the vilage one woman was to be taken and put 
 in prison. The order was not easily executed. For in 
 every household there were several women, and it was 
 impossible to know which one was to be arrested. Conse- 
 quently the police did not carry out the order. The land- 
 owner complained to the governor of the neglect on the 
 part of the police, and the latter, without examining into 
 the affair, gave the chief official of the police strict orders 
 to carry out the instructions of the district commander 
 without delay. The police official, in obedience to his 
 superior, went to the village and with the insolence peculiar 
 to Russian officials ordered his policemen to take one 
 woman out of each house. But since there were more 
 than one woman in each house, and there was no knowing 
 which one was sentenced to imprisonment, disputes and 
 opposition arose. In spite of these disputes and opposition, 
 however, the officer of police gave orders that some woman, 
 whichever came first, should be taken from each household 
 and led away to prison. The peasants began to defend 
 their wives and mothers, would not let them go, and beat 
 the police and their officer. This was a fresh and terrible 
 crime : resistance was offered to the authorities. A report 
 of this new offense was sent to the town. And so this gov- 
 ernor — precisely as the governor of Toula was doing on 
 that day — with a battalion of soldiers with guns and rods, 
 hastily brought together by means of telegraphs and tele- 
 phones and railways, proceeded by a special train to the 
 scene of action, with a learned doctor whose duty it was 
 to insure the flogging being of an hygienic character. 
 Herzen’s prophecy of the modern Ghenghis Khan with his 
 telegrams is completely realized by this governor. 
 
286 
 
 THE KlNGDOiM OF GOD 
 
 Before the town hall of the district were the soldiery, a 
 battalion of police with their revolvers slung round them 
 with red cords, the persons of most importance among the 
 peasants, and the culprits. A crowd of one thousand or 
 more people were standing round. The governor, on arriv- 
 ing, stepped out of his carriage, delivered a prepared 
 harangue, and asked for the culprits and a bench. The 
 latter demand was at first not understood. But a police 
 constable whom the governor always took about with him, 
 and who undertook to organize such executions — by no 
 means exceptional in that province — explained that what 
 was meant was a bench for flogging. A bench was brought 
 as well as the rods, and then the executioners were sum- 
 moned (the latter had been selected beforehand from some 
 horsestealers of the same village, as the soldiers refused 
 the office). When everything was ready, the governor 
 ordered the first of the twelve culprits pointed out by the 
 landowner as the most guilty to come forward. The first 
 to come forward was the head of a family, a man of forty 
 who had always stood up manfully for the rights of his 
 class, and therefore was held in the greatest esteem by all 
 the villagers. He was led to the bench and stripped, and 
 then ordered to lie down. 
 
 The peasant attempted to supplicate for mercy, but 
 seeing it was useless, he crossed himself and lay down. 
 Two police constables hastened to hold him down. The 
 learned doctor stood by, in readiness to give his aid and 
 his medical science when they should be needed. The 
 convicts spit into their hands, brandished the rods, and 
 began to flog. It seemed, however, that the bench was too 
 narrow, and it was difficult to keep the victim writhing in 
 torture upon it. Then the governor ordered them to bring 
 another bench and to put a plank across them. Soldiers, 
 with their hands raised to their caps, and respectful mur- 
 murs of “ Yes, your Excellency,” hasten obediently to carry 
 
IS WITHIN YOU." 
 
 287 
 
 out this order. Meanwhile the tortured man, half naked, 
 pale and scowling, stood waiting, his eyes fixed on the 
 ground and his teeth chattering. When another bench had 
 been brought they again made him lie down, and the con- 
 victed thieves again began to flog him. 
 
 The victim’s back and thighs and legs, and even his 
 sides, became more and more covered with scars and wheals, 
 and at every blow there came the sound of the deep groans 
 which he could no longer restrain. In the crowd standing 
 round were heard the sobs of wives, mothers, children, the 
 families of the tortured man and of all the others picked 
 out for punishment. 
 
 The miserable governor, intoxicated with power, was 
 counting the strokes on his fingers, and never left off 
 smoking cigarettes, while several officious persons hastened 
 on every opportunity to offer him a burning match to light 
 them. When more than fifty strokes had been given, the 
 peasant ceased to shriek and writhe, and the doctor, who 
 had been educated in a government institution to serve 
 his sovereign and his country with his scientific attainments, 
 went up to the victim, felt his pulse, listened to his heart, 
 and announced to the representative of authority that the 
 man undergoing punishment had lost consciousness, and 
 that, in accordance with the conclusions of science, to con- 
 tinue the punishment would endanger the victim’s life. But 
 the miserable governor, now completely intoxicated by the 
 sight of blood, gave orders that the punishment should go 
 on, and the flogging was continued up to seventy strokes, 
 the number which the governor had for some reason fixed 
 upon as necessary. When the seventieth stroke had been 
 reached, the governor said “ Enough ! Next one ! ” And 
 the mutilated victim, his back covered with blood, was 
 lifted up and carried away unconscious, and another was 
 led up. The sobs and groans of the crowd grew louder. 
 But the representative of the state continued the torture. 
 
288 
 
 “ THE KINGDOM OF GOD 
 
 Thus they flogged each of them up to the twelfth, and 
 each of them received seventy strokes. They all implored 
 mercy, shrieked and groaned. The sobs and cries of the 
 crowd of women grew louder and more heart-rending, and 
 the men’s faces grew darker and darker. But they were 
 surrounded by troops, and the torture did not cease till it 
 had reached the limit which had been fixed by the caprice 
 of the miserable half-drunken and insane creature they 
 called the governor. 
 
 The officials, and officers, and soldiers not only assisted 
 in it, but were even partly responsible for the affair, since 
 by their presence they prevented any interference on the 
 part of the crowd. 
 
 When I inquired of one of the governors why they made 
 use of this kind of torture when people had already sub- 
 mitted and soldiers were stationed in the village, he replied 
 with the important air of a man who thoroughly under- 
 stands all the subtleties of statecraft, that if the peasants 
 were not thoroughly subdued by flogging, they would begin 
 offering opposition to the decisions of authorities again. 
 When some of them had been thoroughly tortured, the 
 authority of the state would be secured forever among 
 them. 
 
 And so that was why the Governor of Toula was going 
 in his turn with his subordinate officials, officers, and 
 soldiers to carry out a similar measure. By precisely the 
 same means, i. e., by murder and torture, obedience to the 
 decision of the higher authorities was to be secured. And 
 this decision was to enable a young landowner, who had an 
 income of one hundred thousand, to gain three thousand 
 rubles more by stealing a forest from a whole community 
 of cold and famished peasants, to spend it, in two or three 
 weeks in the saloons of Moscow, Petei'sburg, or Paris. 
 That was what those people whom I met were going to do. 
 
 After my thoughts had for two years been turned in the 
 
/S WITHIN YOU." 
 
 289 
 
 same direction, fate seemed expressly to have brought me 
 face to face for the first time in my life with a fact which 
 showed me absolutely unmistakably in practice what had 
 long been clear to me in theory, that the organization of 
 our society rests, not as people interested in maintaining 
 the present order of things like to imagine, on certain 
 principles of jurisprudence, but on simple brute force, on 
 the murder and torture of men. 
 
 People who own great estates or fortunes, or who receive 
 great revenues drawn from the class who are in want even 
 of necessities, the working class, as well as all those who 
 like merchants, doctors, artists, clerks, learned professors, 
 coachmen, cooks, writers, valets, and barristers, make their 
 living about these rich people, like to believe that the 
 privileges they enjoy are not the result of force, but of 
 absolutely free and just interchange of services, and that 
 their advantages, far from being gained by such punish- 
 ments and murders as took place in Orel and several parts 
 of Russia this year, and are always taking place all over 
 Europe and America, have no kind of connection with 
 these acts of violence. They like to believe that their 
 privileges exist apart and are the result of free contract 
 among people ; and that the violent cruelties perpetrated 
 on the people also exist apart and are the result of some 
 general judicial, political, or economical laws. They try 
 not to see that they all enjoy their privileges as a result of 
 the same fact which forces the peasants who have tended 
 the forest, and who are in the direct need of it for fuel, to 
 give it up to a rich landowner who has taken no part in 
 caring for its growth and has no need of it whatever — the 
 fact, that is, that if they don’t give it up they will be flogged 
 or killed. 
 
 And yet if it is clear that it was only by means of menaces, 
 blows, or murder, that the mill in Orel was enabled to yield 
 a larger income, or that the forest which the peasants had 
 
290 
 
 THE KINGDOM OF GOD 
 
 planted became the property of a landowner, it should be 
 equally clear that all the other exclusive rights enjoyed by 
 the rich, by robbing the poor of their necessities, rest on 
 the same basis of violence. If the peasants, who need 
 land to maintain their families, may not cultivate the land 
 about their houses, but one man, a Russian, English, Aus- 
 trian, or any other great landowner, possesses land enough 
 to maintain a thousand families, though he does not culti- 
 vate it himself, and if a merchar^t profiting by the misery 
 of the cultivators, taking corn from them at a third of its 
 value, can keep this corn in his granaries with perfect 
 security while men are starving all around him, and sell it 
 again for three times its value to the very cultivators he 
 bought it from, it is evident that all this too comes from 
 the same cause. And if one man may not buy of another 
 a commodity from the other side of a certain fixed line, 
 called the frontier, without paying certain duties on it to 
 men who have taken no part whatever in its production — 
 and if men are driven to sell their last cow to pay taxes 
 which the government distributes among its functionaries, 
 and spends on maintaining soldiers to murder these very 
 taxpayers — it would appear self-evident that all this does 
 not come about as the result of any abstract laws, but is 
 based on just what was done in Orel, and which may be 
 done in Toula, and is done periodically in one form or 
 another throughout the whole world wherever there is a 
 government, and where there are rich and poor. 
 
 Simply because torture and murder are not employed in 
 every instance of oppression by force, those who enjoy the 
 exclusive privileges of the ruling classes persuade themselves 
 and others that their privileges are not based on torture 
 and murder, but on some mysterious general causes, abstract 
 laws, and so on. Yet one would think it was perfectly clear 
 that if men, who consider it unjust (and all the working 
 classes do consider it so nowadays), still pay the principal 
 
IS WITHIN' YOU." 
 
 291 
 
 part of the produce of their labor away to the capitalist 
 and the landowner, and pay taxes, though they know to 
 what a bad use these taxes are put, they do so not from 
 recognition of abstract laws of which they have never heard, 
 but only because they know they will be beaten and killed 
 if they don’t do so. 
 
 And if there is no need to imprison, beat, and kill men 
 every time the landlord collects his rents, every time those 
 who are in want of bread have to pay a swindling merchant 
 three times its value, every time the factory hand has to be 
 content with a wage less than half of the profit made by 
 the employer, and every time a poor man pays his last 
 ruble in taxes, it is because so many men have been beaten 
 and killed for trying to resist these demands, that the les- 
 son has now been learnt very thoroughly. 
 
 Just as a trained tiger, who does not eat meat put under 
 his nose, and jumps over a stick at the word of command, 
 does not act thus because he likes it, but because he re- 
 members the red-hot irons or the fast with which he was 
 punished every time he did not obey ; so men submitting 
 to what is disadvantageous or even ruinous to them, and 
 considered by them as unjust, act thus because they remem- 
 ber what they suffered for resisting it. 
 
 As for those who profit by the privileges gained by 
 previous acts of violence, they often forget and like to for- 
 get how these privileges were obtained. But one need 
 only recall the facts of history, not the history of the ex- 
 ploits of different dynasties of rulers, but real history, the 
 history of the oppression of the majority by a small number 
 of men, to see that all the advantages the rich have over 
 the poor are based on nothing but flogging, imprisonment, 
 and murder. 
 
 One need but reflect on the unceasing, persistent strug- 
 gle of all to better their material position, which is the 
 guiding motive of men of the present day, to be convinced 
 
292 
 
 “ THE KINGDOM OF GOD 
 
 that the advantages of the rich over the poor could never 
 and can never be maintained by anything but force. 
 
 There may be cases of oppression, of violence, and of 
 punishments, though they are raicg ^the a im of which is not 
 to secure the privileges of the propertied classes. But one 
 may confidently assert that in any society where, for every 
 man living in ease, there are ten exhausted by labor, 
 envious, covetous, and often suffering with their families 
 from direct privation, all the privileges of the rich, all their 
 luxuries and superfluities, are obtained and maintained 
 only by tortures, imprisonment, and murder. 
 
 The train I met on the 9th of September going with 
 soldiers, guns, cartridges, and rods, to confirm the rich 
 landowner in the possession of a small forest which he 
 had taken from the starving peasants, which they were in 
 the direst need of, and he was in no need of at all, was a 
 striking proof of how men are capable of doing deeds 
 directly opposed to their principles and their conscience 
 without perceiving it. 
 
 The special train consisted of one first-class carriage for 
 the governor, the officials, and officers, and several luggage 
 vans crammed full of soldiers. The latter, smart young 
 fellows in their clean new uniforms, were standing about 
 in groups or sitting swinging their legs in the wide open 
 doorways of the luggage vans. Some were smoking, 
 nudging each other, joking, grinning, and laughing, others 
 were munching sunflower seeds and spitting out the husks 
 with an air of dignity. Some of them ran along the plat- 
 form to drink some water from a tub there, and when they 
 met the officers they slackened their pace, made their stupid 
 gesture of salutation, raising their hands to their heads with 
 serious faces as though they were doing something of the 
 greatest importance. They kept their eyes on them till 
 they had passed by them, and then set off running still 
 more merrily, stamping their heels on the platform, laugh- 
 
IS WITH IX YOU." 
 
 293 
 
 ing and chattering after the manner of healthy, good-natured 
 young fellows, traveling in lively company. 
 
 They were going to assist at the murder of their fathers 
 or grandfathers just as if they were going on a party of 
 pleasure, or at any rate on some quite ordinary busi- 
 ness. 
 
 The same impression was produced by the well-dressed 
 functionaries and officers who were scattered about the 
 platform and in the first-class carriage. At a table covered 
 with bottles was sitting the governor, who was responsible 
 for the whole expedition, dressed in his half-military uni- 
 form and eating something while he chatted tranquilly 
 about the weather with some acquaintances he had met, as 
 though the business he was upon was of so simple and ordi- 
 nary a character that it could not disturb his serenity and 
 his interest in the change of weather. 
 
 At a little distance from the table sat the general of the 
 police. He was not taking any refreshment, and had an 
 impenetrable bored expression, as though he were weary of 
 the formalities to be gone through. On all sides officers 
 were bustling noisily about in their red uniforms trimmed 
 with gold ; one sat at a table finishing his bottle of beer, 
 another stood at the buffet eating a cake, and brushing the 
 crumbs off his uniform, threw down his money with a self- 
 confident air ; another was sauntering before the carriages 
 of our train, staring at the faces of the women. 
 
 All these men who were going to murder or to torture 
 the famishing and defenseless creatures who provide them 
 their sustenance had the air of men who knew very well 
 that they were doing their duty, and some were even proud, 
 were “glorying” in what they were doing. 
 
 What is the meaning of it ? 
 
 All these people are within half an hour of reaching the 
 place where, in order to provide a wealthy young man with 
 three thousand rubles stolen from a whole community of 
 
294 
 
 THE KINGDOM OF GOD 
 
 famishing peasants, they may be forced to commit the most 
 horrible acts one can conceive, to murder or torture, as was 
 done in Orel, innocent beings, their brothers. And they 
 see the place and time approaching with untroubled 
 serenity. 
 
 To say that all these government officials, officers, and 
 soldiers do not know what is before them is impossible, for 
 they are prepared for it. The governor must have given 
 directions about the rods, the officials must have sent an 
 order for them, purchased them, and entered the item in 
 their accounts. The military officers have given and re- 
 ceived orders about cartridges. They all know that they 
 are going to torture, perhaps to kill, their famishing fellow- 
 creatures, and that they must set to work within an hour. 
 
 To say, as is usually said, and as they would themselves 
 repeat, that they are acting from conviction of the necessity 
 for supporting the state organization, would be a mistake. 
 For in the first place, these men have probably never even 
 thought about state organization and the necessity of it ; 
 in the second place, they cannot possibly be convinced that 
 the act in which they are taking part will tend to support 
 rather than to ruin the state ; and thirdly, in reality the ma- 
 jority, if not all, of these men, far from ever sacrificing 
 their own pleasure or tranquillity to support the state, never 
 let slip an opportunity of profiting at the expense of the 
 state in every way they can increase their own pleasure 
 and ease. So that they are not acting thus for the sake of 
 the abstract principle of the state. 
 
 What is the meaning of it ? 
 
 Yet I know all these men. If I don’t know all of them 
 personally, I know their characters pretty nearly, their past, 
 and their way of thinking. They certainly all have mothers, 
 some of them wives and* children. They are certainly for 
 the most part good, kind, even tender-hearted fellows, who 
 hate every sort of cruelty, not to speak of murder ; many 
 
IS WITIinV YOU." 
 
 295 
 
 of them would not kill or hurt an animal. Moreover, they 
 are all professed Christians and regard all violence di- . 
 rected against the defenseless as base and disgraceful. ■ 
 
 Certainly not one of them would be capable in everyday ■ 
 life, for his own personal profit, of doing a hundredth part 
 of what the Governor of Orel did. Every one of them | 
 would be insulted at the supposition that he was capable 1 
 of doing anything of the kind in private life. 
 
 And yet they are within half an hour of reaching the 
 place where they may be reduced to the inevitable neces- 
 sity of committing this crime. 
 
 What is the meaning of it ? 
 
 But it is not only these men who are going by train pre- 
 pared for murder and torture. How could the men who 
 began the whole business, the landowner, the commis- 
 sioner, the judges, and those who gave the order and are 
 responsible for it, the ministers, the Tzar, who are also 
 good men, professed Christians, how could they elaborate 
 such a plan and assent to it, knowing its consequences ? 
 The spectators even, who took no part in the affair, how 
 could they, who are indignant at the sight of any cruelty 
 in private life, even the overtaxing of a horse, allow such 
 a horrible deed to be perpetrated ? How was it they did 
 not rise in indignation and bar the roads, shouting, “ No ; 
 flog and kill starving men because they won’t let their last 
 possession be stolen from them without resistance, that we 
 won’t allow ! ” But far from anyone doing this, the 
 majority, even of those who were the cause of the affair, 
 such as the commissioner, the landowner, the judge, and 
 those who took part in it and arranged it, as the governor, 
 the ministers, and the Tzar, are perfectly tranquil and do 
 not even feel a prick of conscience. And apparently all 
 the men who are going to carry out this crime are equally 
 undisturbed. 
 
 The spectators, who one would suppose could have no 
 
296 
 
 “ THE KINGDOM OF GOD 
 
 personal interest in the affair, looked rather with sympathy 
 than with disapproval at all these people preparing to 
 carry out this infamous action. In the same compartment 
 with me was a wood merchant, who had risen from a 
 peasant. He openly expressed aloud his sympathy with 
 such punishments. “ They can’t disobey the authorities,” 
 he said ; “ that’s what the authorities are for. Let them 
 have a lesson ; send their fleas flying ! They’ll give over 
 making commotions, I warrant you. That’s what they 
 want.” 
 
 What is the meaning of it ? 
 
 It is not possible to say that all these people who have 
 provoked or aided or allowed this deed are such worthless 
 creatures that, knowing all the infamy of what they are 
 doing, they do it against their principles, some for pay and 
 for profit, others through fear of punishment. All of them 
 in certain circumstances know how to stand up for their 
 principles. Not one of these officials would steal a purse, 
 read another man’s letter, or put up with an affront without 
 demanding satisfaction. Not one of these officers would 
 consent to cheat at cards, would refuse to pay a debt of 
 honor, would betray a comrade, run away on the field 
 of battle, or desert the flag. Not one of these soldiers 
 would spit out the holy sacrament or eat meat on Good 
 Friday. All these men are ready to face any kind of 
 privation, suffering, or danger rather than consent to do 
 what they regard as wrong. They have therefore the 
 strength to resist doing what is against their principles. 
 
 It is even less possible to assert that all these men are 
 such brutes that it is natural and not distasteful to them to 
 do such deeds. One need only talk to these people a little 
 to see that all of them, the landowner even, and the judge, 
 and the minister and the Tzar and the government, the 
 officers and the soldiers, not only disapprove of such things 
 in the depth of their soul, but suffer from the consciousness 
 
Is WITHIN YOU." 297 
 
 of their participation in them when they recollect what they 
 imply. But they try not to think about it. 
 
 One need only talk to any of these who are taking part 
 in the affair from the landowner to the lowest policeman or 
 soldier to see that in the depth of their soul they all know 
 it is a wicked thing, that it would be better to have nothing 
 to do with it, and are suffering from the knowledge. 
 
 A lady of liberal views, who was traveling in the same 
 train with us, seeing the governor and the officers in the 
 first-class saloon and learning the object of the expedition, 
 began, intentionally raising her voice so that they should 
 hear, to abuse the existing order of things and to cry shame 
 on men who would take part in such proceedings. Every- 
 one felt awkward, none knew where to look, but no one 
 contradicted her. They tried to look as though such 
 remarks were not worth answering. But one could see by 
 their faces and their averted eyes that they were ashamed. 
 
 I noticed the same thing in the soldiers. They too knew 
 that what they were sent to do was a shameful thing, but 
 they did not want to think about what was before them. 
 
 When the wood merchant, as I suspect insincerely only 
 to show that he was a man of education, began to speak of 
 the necessity of such measures, the soldiers who heard him 
 all turned away from him, scowling and pretending not to 
 hear. 
 
 All the men who, like the landowner, the commissioner, 
 the minister, and the Tzar, were responsible for the per- 
 petration of this act, as well as those who were now going 
 to execute it, and even those who were mere spectators of 
 it, knew that it was a wickedness, and were ashamed of tak- 
 ing any share in it, and even of being present at it. 
 
 Then why did they do it, or allow it to be done ? 
 
 Ask them the question. And the landowner who started 
 the affair, and the judge who pronounced a clearly unjust j 
 even though formally legal decision, and those who com- / 
 
298 
 
 “ THE KINGDOM OE GOD 
 
 I manded the execution of the decision, and those who, like 
 the policemen, soldiers, hnd peasants, will execute the deed 
 with their own hands, flogging and killing their brothers, all 
 who have devised, abetted, decreed, executed, or allowed 
 such crimes, will make substantially the same reply. 
 
 The authorities, those who have started, devised, and 
 decreed the matter, will say that such acts are necessary for 
 the maintenance of the existing order ; the maintenance 
 of the existing order is necessary for the welfare of the 
 country and of humanity, for the possibility of social 
 \ existence and human progress. 
 
 Men of the poorer class, peasants and soldiers, who will 
 have to execute the deed of violence with their own hands, 
 say that they do so because it is the command of their 
 superior authority, and the superior authority knows what 
 he is about. That those are in authority who ought to be 
 in authority, and that they know what they are doing ap- 
 pears to them a truth of which there can be no doubt. If 
 they could admit the possibility of mistake or error, it 
 would only be in functionaries of a lower grade ; the 
 highest authority on which all the rest depends seems to 
 them immaculate beyond suspicion. 
 
 Though expressing the motives of their conduct differ- 
 ently, both those in command and their subordinates are 
 agreed in saying that they act thus because the existing 
 order is the order which must and ought to exist at the 
 present time, and that therefore to support it is the sacred 
 duty of every man. 
 
 On this acceptance of the necessity and therefore immu- 
 tability of the existing order, all who take part in acts of 
 violence on the part of government base the argument 
 always advanced in their justification. “Since the existing 
 order is immutable,” they say, “the refusal of a single 
 individual to perform the duties laid upon him will effect 
 no change in things, and will only mean that some other 
 
IS WITHIN YOU." 
 
 299 
 
 man will be put in his place who may do the work worse, 
 that is to say, more cruelly, to the still greater injury of the 
 victims of the act of violence.” 
 
 This conviction that the existing order is the necessary 
 and therefore immutable order, which it is a sacred duty 
 for every man to support, enables good men, of high prin- 
 ciples in private life, to take part with conscience more or 
 less untroubled in crimes such as that perpetrated in Orel, 
 and that which the men in the Toula train were going ^ 
 perpetrate. 
 
 But what is this conviction based on ? It is easy to un- 
 derstand that the landowner prefers to believe that the 
 existing order is inevitable and immutable, because this ex- 
 isting order secures him an income from his hundreds and 
 thousands of acres, by means of which he can lead his 
 habitual indolent and luxurious life. 
 
 It is easy to understand that the judge readily believes 
 in the necessity of an order of things through which he 
 receives a wage fifty times as great as the most industrious 
 laborer can earn, and the same applies to all the higher 
 officials. It is only under the existing regime that as gov- 
 ernor, prosecutor, senator, members of the various councils, 
 they can receive their several thousands of rubles a year, 
 without which they and their families would at once sink 
 into ruin, since if it were not for the position they occupy 
 they would never by their own abilities, industry, or acquire- 
 ments get a thousandth part of their salaries. The minister, 
 the Tzar, and all the higher authorities are in the same posi- 
 tion. The only distinction is that the higher and the more 
 exceptional their position, the more necessary it is for them 
 to believe that the existing order is the only possible order 
 of things. For without it they would not only be unable to 
 gain an equal position, but would be found to fall lower 
 than all other people. A man who has of his own free will 
 entered the police force at a wage of ten rubles, which he 
 
300 
 
 “ THE KINGDOM OF GOD 
 
 could easily earn in any other position, is hardly dependent 
 on the preservation of the existing regime, and so he may 
 not believe in its immutability. But a king or an emperor, 
 who receives millions for his post, and knows that there are 
 thousands of people round him who would like to dethrone 
 him and take his place, who knows that he will never 
 receive such a revenue or so much honor in any other posi- 
 tion, who knows, in most cases through his more or less 
 despotic rule, that if he were dethroned he would have to 
 answer for all his abuse of power — he cannot but believe 
 in the necessity and even sacredness of the existing order. 
 The higher and the more profitable a man’s position, the 
 more unstable it becomes, and the more terrible and dan- 
 gerous a fall from it for him, the more firmly the man 
 believes in the existing order, and therefore with the more 
 ease of conscience can such a man perpetrate cruel and 
 wicked acts, as though they were not in his own interest, 
 but for the maintenance of that order. 
 
 This is the case with all men in authority, who occupy 
 positions more profitable than they could occupy except 
 for the present regime, from the lowest police officer to the 
 Tzar. All of them are more or less convinced that the 
 existing order is immutable, because — the chief considera- 
 tion — it is to their advantage. But the peasants, the sol- 
 diers, who are at the bottom of the social scale, who have no 
 kind of advantage from the existing order, who are in the 
 very lowest position of subjection and humiliation, what 
 forces them to believe that the existing order in which they 
 are in their humble and disadvantageous position is the 
 order which ought to exist, and which they ought to sup- 
 port even at the cost of evil actions contrary to their con- 
 science ? 
 
 What forces these men to the false reasoning that the 
 existing order is unchanging, and that therefore they 
 ought to support it, when it is so obvious, on the contrary. 
 
IS WITHIN YOU." 
 
 301 
 
 that it is only unchanging because they themselves sup- 
 port it ? 
 
 What forces these peasants, taken only yesterday from 
 the plow and dressed in ugly and unseemly costumes with 
 blue collars and gilt buttons, to go with guns and sabers 
 and murder their famishing fathers and brothers ? They 
 gain no kind of advantage and can be in no fear of losing 
 the position they occupy, because it is worse than that 
 from which they have been taken. 
 
 The persons in authority of the higher orders — land- 
 owners, merchants, judges, senators, governors, ministers, 
 tzars, and officers — take part in such doings because the 
 existing order is to their advantage. In other respects they 
 are often good and kind-hearted men, and they are more 
 able to take part in such doings because their share in them 
 is limited to suggestions, decisions, and orders. These per- 
 sons in authority never do themselves what they suggest, 
 decide, or command to be done. For the most part they 
 do not even see how all the atrocious deeds they have 
 suggested and authorized are carried out. But the unfor- 
 tunate men of the lower orders, who gain no kind of advan- 
 tage from the existing rigime, but, on the contrary, are 
 treated with the utmost contempt, support it even by 
 dragging people with their own hands from their families, 
 handcuffing them, throwing them in prison, guarding them, 
 shooting them. 
 
 Why do they do it ? What forces them to believe that 
 the existing order is unchanging and they must support it ? 
 
 All violence rests, we know, on those who do the beat- 
 ing, the handcuffing, the imprisoning, and the killing with 
 their own hands. If there were no soldiers or armed 
 policemen, ready to kill or outrage anyone as they are 
 ordered, not one of those people who sign sentences of 
 death, imprisonment, or galley-slavery for life would make 
 up his mind to hang, imprison, or torture a thousandth 
 
302 
 
 “ THE KINGDOM OF GOD 
 
 part of those whom, quietly sitting in his study, he now 
 orders to be tortured in all kinds of ways, simply because 
 he does not see it nor do it himself, but only gets it done 
 at a distance by these servile tools. 
 
 All the acts of injustice and cruelty which are committed 
 in the ordinary course of daily life have only become 
 habitual because there are these men always ready to 
 carry out such acts of injustice and cruelty. If it were 
 not for them, far from anyone using violence against the 
 immense masses who are now ill-treated, those who now 
 command their punishment would not venture to sentence 
 them, would not even dare to dream of the sentences they 
 decree with such easy confidence at present. And if it 
 were not for these men, ready to kill or torture anyone at 
 their commander’s will, no one would dare to claim, as all 
 the idle landowners claim with such assurance, that a piece 
 of land, surrounded by peasants, who are in wretchedness 
 from want of land, is the property of a man who does not 
 cultivate it, or that stores of corn taken by swindling from 
 the peasants ought to remain untouched in the midst of a 
 population dying of hunger because the merchants must 
 make their profit. If it were not for these servile instru- 
 ments at the disposal of the authorities, it could never have 
 entered the head of the landowner to rob the peasants of 
 the forest they had tended, nor of the officials to think they 
 are entitled to their salaries, taken from the famishing peo- 
 ple, the price of their oppression ; least of all could anyone 
 dream of killing or exiling men for exposing falsehood and 
 telling the truth. All this can only be done because the 
 authorities are confidently assured that they have always 
 these servile tools at hand, ready to carry all their demands 
 into effect by means of torture and murder. 
 
 All the deeds of violence of tyrants from Napoleon to 
 the lowest commander of a company who fires upon a 
 crowd, can only be explained by the intoxicating effect of 
 
/S WlTHm YOU." 
 
 303 
 
 their absolute power over these slaves. All force, there- 
 fore, rests on these men, who carry out the deeds of violence 
 with their own hands, the men who serve in the police or 
 the army, especially the army, for the police only venture 
 to do their work because the army is at their back. 
 
 What, then, has brought these masses of honest men, on 
 whom the whole thing depends, who gain nothing by it, 
 and who have to do these atrocious deeds with their own 
 hands, what has brought them to accept the amazing delu- 
 sion that the existing order, unprofitable, ruinous, and fatal 
 as it is for them, is the order which ought to exist ? 
 
 Who has led them into this amazing delusion ? 
 
 They can never have persuaded themselves that they 
 ought to do what is against their conscience, and also the 
 source of misery and ruin for themselves, and all their 
 class, who make up nine-tenths of the population. 
 
 “ How can you kill people, when it is written in God’s 
 commandment ; ‘ Thou shalt not kill ’ ? ” I have often 
 inquired of different soldiers. And I always drove them 
 to embarrassment and confusion by reminding them of 
 what they did not want to think about. They knew they 
 were bound by the law of God, “ Thou shalt not kill,” and 
 knew too that they were bound by their duty as soldiers, 
 but had never reflected on the contradiction between these 
 duties. The drift of the timid answers I received to this 
 question was always approximately this : that killing in 
 war and executing criminals by command of the govern- 
 ment are not included in the general prohibition of murder. 
 But when I said this distinction was not made in the law 
 of God, and reminded them of the Christian duty of frater- 
 nity, forgiveness of injuries, and love, which could not be 
 reconciled with murder, the peasants usually agreed, but in 
 their turn began to ask me questions. “ How does it hap- 
 pen,” they inquired, “ that the government [which accord- 
 ing to their ideas cannot do wrong] sends the army to war 
 
3*4 
 
 “ THE KINGDOM OF GOD 
 
 and orders criminals to be executed.” When I answered 
 that the government does wrong in giving such orders, the 
 peasants fell into still greater confusion, and either broke 
 off the conversation or else got angry with me. 
 
 “ They must have found a law for it. The archbishops 
 know as much about it as we do, I should hope,” a Russian 
 soldier once observed to me. And in saying this the soldier 
 obviously set his mind at rest, in the full conviction that 
 his spiritual guides had found a law which authorized his 
 ancestors, and the tzars and their descendants, and millions 
 of men, to serve as he was doing himself, and that the 
 question I had put him was a kind of hoax or conundrum 
 on my part. 
 
 Everyone in our Christian society knows, either by tradi- 
 tion or by revelation or by the voice of conscience, that 
 murder is one of the most fearful crimes a man can commit, 
 as the Gospel tells us, and that the sin of murder cannot 
 be limited to certain persons, that is, murder cannot be a 
 sin for some and not a sin for others. Everyone knows 
 that if murder is a sin, it is always a sin, whoever are the 
 victims murdered; just like the sin of adultery, theft, or any 
 other. At the same time from their childhood up men see 
 that murder is not only permitted, but even sanctioned by 
 the blessing of those whom they are accustomed to regard 
 as their divinely appointed spiritual guides, and see their 
 secular leaders with calm assurance organizing murder, 
 proud to wear murderous arms, and demanding of others 
 in the name of the. laws of the country, and even of God, 
 that they should take part in murder. Men see that there 
 is some inconsistency here, but not being able to analyze it, 
 involuntarily assume that this apparent inconsistency is 
 only the result of their ignorance. The very grossness 
 and obviousness of the inconsistency confirms them in this 
 conviction. 
 
 They cannot imagine that the leaders of civilization, the 
 
75 WITHIN YOU." 
 
 305 
 
 educated classes, could so confidently preach two such 
 opposed principles as the law of Christ and murder. A 
 simple uncorrupted youth cannot imagine that those who 
 stand so high in his opinion, whom he regards as holy or 
 learned men, could for any object whatever mislead him so 
 shamefully. But this is just what has always been and 
 always is done to him. It is done (i) by instilling, by 
 example and direct instruction, from childhood up, into 
 the working people, who have not time to study moral and 
 religious questions for themselves, the idea that torture and 
 murder are compatible with Christianity, and that for cer- 
 tain objects of state, torture and murder are not only 
 admissible, but ought to be employed ; and (2) by instilling 
 into certain of the people, who have either voluntarily 
 enlisted or been taken by compulsion into the army, the 
 idea that the perpetration of murder and torture with their 
 own hands is a sacred duty, and even a glorious exploit, 
 worthy of praise and reward. 
 
 The general delusion is diffused among all people by 
 means of the catechisms or books, which nowadays replace 
 them, in use for the compulsory education of children. In 
 them it is stated that violence, that is, imprisonment and 
 execution, as well as murder in civil or foreign war in the 
 defense and maintenance of the existing state organization 
 (whatever that may be, absolute or limited monarchy, con- 
 vention, consulate, empire of this or that Napoleon or 
 Boulanger, constitutional monarchy, commune or republic) 
 is absolutely lawful and not opposed to morality and 
 Christianity. 
 
 This is stated in all catechisms or books used in schools. 
 And men are so thoroughly persuaded of it that they grow 
 up, live and die in that conviction without once entertaining 
 a doubt about it. 
 
 This is one form of deception, the general deception 
 instilled into everyone, but there is another special decep- 
 
3o6 
 
 THE KINGDOM OF GOD 
 
 tion practiced upon the soldiers or police who are picked 
 out by one means or another to do the torturing and 
 murdering necessary to defend and maintain the existing 
 regime. 
 
 In all military instructions there appears in one form or 
 another what is expressed in the Russian military code in 
 the following words : 
 
 Article 87. To carry out exactly and without comment 
 the orders of a superior officer means : to carry out an 
 order received from a superior officer exactly without con- 
 sidering whether it is good or not, and whether it is pos- 
 sible to carry it out. The superior officer is responsible 
 for the consequences of the order he gives. 
 
 Article 88. The subordinate ought never to refuse to 
 carry out the orders of a superior officer except when he 
 sees clearly that in carrying out his superior officer’s com- 
 mand, he breaks [the law of God, one involuntarily expects ; 
 not at all] his oath of fidelity and allegiafice to the Tzar. 
 
 It is here said that the man who is a soldier can and 
 ought to carry out all the orders of his superior without 
 exception. And as these orders for the most part involve 
 murder, it follows that he ought to break all the laws of 
 God and man. The one law he may not break is that of 
 fidelity and allegiance to the man who happens at a given 
 moment to be in power. 
 
 Precisely the same thing is said in other words in all 
 codes of military instruction. And it could not be other- 
 wise, since the whole power of the army and the state is 
 based in reality on this delusive emancipation of men from 
 their duty to God and their conscience, and the substitu- 
 tion of duty to their superior officer for all other duties. 
 
 This, then, is the foundation of the belief of the lower 
 classes that the existing re'gime so fatal for them is the 
 rdgime which ought to exist, and which they ought there- 
 fore to support even by torture and murder. 
 
IS WITHm YOU." 
 
 307 
 
 This belief is founded on a conscious deception practiced 
 on them by the higher classes. 
 
 And it cannot be otherwise. To compel the lower classes, 
 which are more numerous, to oppress and ill treat them- 
 selves, even at the cost of actions opposed to their con- 
 science, it was necessary to deceive them. And it has 
 been done accordingly. 
 
 Not many days ago I saw once more this shameless 
 deception being openly practiced, and once more I mar- 
 veled that it could be practiced so easily and impudently. 
 
 At the beginning of November, as I was passing through 
 Toula, I saw once again at the gates of the Zemsky Court- 
 house the crowd of peasants I had so often seen before, 
 and heard the drunken shouts of the men mingled with the 
 pitiful lamentations of their wives and mothers. It was the 
 recruiting session. 
 
 I can never pass by the spectacle. It attracts me by a 
 kind of fascination of repulsion. I again went into the 
 crowd, took my stand among the peasants, looked about 
 and asked questions. And once again I was amazed that 
 this hideous crime can be perpetrated so easily in broad 
 daylight and in the midst of a large town. 
 
 As the custom is every year, in all the villages and ham- 
 lets of the one hundred millions of Russians, on the ist of 
 November, the village elders had assembled the young men 
 inscribed on the lists, often their own sons among them, 
 and had brought them to the town. 
 
 On the road the recruits have been drinking without 
 intermission, unchecked by the elders, who feel that going- 
 on such an insane errand, abandoning their wives and 
 mothers and renouncing all they hold sacred in order to 
 become a senseless instrument of destruction, would be too 
 agonizing if they were not stupefied with spirits. 
 
 And so they have come, drinking, swearing, singing, 
 fighting and scuffling with one another. They have spent 
 
3o8 
 
 “ THE KINGDOM OF GOD 
 
 the night in taverns. In the morning they have slept off 
 their drunkenness and have gathered together at the 
 Zemsky Court-house. 
 
 Some of them, in new sheepskin pelisses, with knitted 
 scarves round their necks, their eyes swollen from drink- 
 ing, are shouting wildly to one another to show their cour- 
 age ; others, crowded near the door, are quietly and mourn- 
 fully waiting their turn, between their weeping wives and 
 mothers (I had chanced upon the day of the actual enroll- 
 ing, that is, the examination of those whose names are on 
 the list) ; others meantime were crowding into the hall of 
 the recruiting office. 
 
 Inside the office the work was going on rapidly. The 
 door is opened and the guard calls Piotr Sidorov. Piotr 
 Sidorov starts, crosses himself, and goes into a little room 
 with a glass door, where the conscripts undress. A com- 
 rade of Piotr Sidorov’s, who has just been passed for 
 service, and come naked out of the revision office, is dress- 
 ing hurriedly, his teeth chattering. Sidorov has already 
 heard the news, and can see from his face too that he has 
 been taken. He wants to ask him questions, but they 
 hurry him and tell him to make haste and undress. He 
 throws off his pelisse, slips his boots off his feet, takes off 
 his waistcoat and draws his shirt over his head, and naked, 
 trembling all over, and exhaling an odor of tobacco, spirits, 
 and sweat, goes into the revision office, not knowing what 
 to do with his brawny bare arms. 
 
 Directly facing him in the revision office hangs in a great 
 gold frame a portrait of the Tzar in full uniform with decora- 
 tions, and in the corner a little portrait of Christ in a shirt 
 and a crown of thorns. In the middle of the room is a 
 table covered with green cloth, on which there are papers 
 lying and a three-cornered ornament surmounted by an 
 eagle — the zertzal. Round the table are sitting the revising 
 officers, looking collected and indifferent. One is smoking 
 
IS WITHIN YOU." 
 
 309 
 
 a cigarette ; another is looking through some papers. 
 Directly Sidorov comes in, a guard goes up to him, places 
 him under the measuring frame, raising him under his 
 chin, and straightening his legs. 
 
 The man with the cigarette — he is the doctor — comes up, 
 and without looking at the recruit’s face, but somewhere 
 beyond it, feels his body over with an air of disgust, 
 measures him, tests him, tells the guard to open his mouth, 
 tells him to breathe, to speak. Someone notes something 
 down. At last without having once looked him in the face 
 the doctor says, “ Right. Next one ! ” and with a weary 
 air sits down again at the table. The soldiers again hustle 
 and hurry the lad. He somehow gets into his trousers, 
 wraps his feet in rags, puts on his boots, looks for his scarf 
 and cap, and bundles his pelisse under his arm. Then they 
 lead him into the main hall, shutting him off apart from 
 the rest by a bench, behind which all the conscripts who 
 have been passed for service are waiting. Another village 
 lad like himself, but from a distant province, now a soldier 
 armed with a gun with a sharp-pointed bayonet at the end, 
 keeps watch over him, ready to run him through the body 
 if he should think of trying to escape. 
 
 Meantime the crowd of fathers, mothers, and wives, 
 hustled by the police, are pressing round the doors to hear 
 whose lad has been taken, whose is let off. One of the 
 rejected comes out and announces that Piotr is taken, and 
 at once a shrill cry is heard from Piotr’s young wife, for 
 whom this word “taken ” means separation for four or five 
 years, the life of a soldier’s wife as a servant, often a pros- 
 titute. 
 
 But here comes a man along the street with flowing hair 
 and in a peculiar dress, who gets out of his droskhy and 
 goes into the Zemsky Court-house. The police clear a way 
 for him through the crowd. It is the “ reverend father ’’ 
 come to administer the oath. And this “ father,” who has 
 
“ THE KINGDOM OF GOD 
 
 310 
 
 been persuaded that he is specially and exclusively devoted 
 to the service of Christ, and who, for the most part, does 
 not himself see the deception in which he lives, goes into 
 the hall where the conscripts are waiting. He throws 
 round him a kind of curtain of brocade, pulls his long hair 
 out over it, opens the very Gospel in which swearing is 
 forbidden, takes the cross, the very cross on which Christ 
 was crucified because he would not do what this false servant 
 of his is telling men to do, and puts them on the lectern. 
 And all these unhappy, defenseless, and deluded lads 
 repeat after him the lie, which he utters with the assurance 
 of familiarity. 
 
 He reads and they repeat after him : 
 
 “ I promise and swear by Almighty God upon his holy 
 Gospel,” etc., “ to defend,” etc., and that is, to murder any- 
 one I am told to, and to do everything I am told by men I 
 know nothing of, and who care nothing for me except as 
 an instrument for perpetrating the crimes by which they 
 are kept in their position of power, and my brothers in their 
 condition of misery. All the conscripts repeat these ferO’ 
 cious words without thinking. And then the so-called 
 “ father ” goes away with a sense of having correctly and 
 conscientiously done his duty. And all these poor deluded 
 lads believe that these nonsensical and incomprehensible 
 words which they have just uttered set them free for the 
 whole time of their service from their duties as men, and 
 lay upon them fresh and more binding duties as soldiers. 
 
 And this crime is perpetrated publicly and no one cries 
 out to the deceiving and the deceived : ” Think what you 
 are doing ; this is the basest, falsest lie, by which not 
 bodies only, but souls too, are destroyed.” 
 
 No one does this. On the contrary, when all have been 
 enrolled, and they are to be let out again, the military offi- 
 cer goes with a confident and majestic air into the hall 
 where the drunken, cheated lads are shut up, and cries in a 
 
IS ivimiAr YOU." 
 
 3 ” 
 
 bold, military voice : “ Your health, my lads ! I congratu- 
 late you on ‘ serving the Tzar ! ’ ” And they, poor fellows 
 (someone has given them a hint beforehand), mutter awk- 
 wardly, their voices thick with drink, something to the effect 
 that they are glad. 
 
 Meantime the crowd of fathers, mothers, and wives is 
 standing at the doors waiting. The women keep their tear- 
 ful eyes fixed on the doors. They open at last, and out 
 come the conscripts, unsteady, but trying to put a good face 
 on it. Here are Piotr and Vania and Makar trying not 
 to look their dear ones in the face. Nothing is heard but 
 the wailing of the wives and mothers. Some of the lads 
 embrace them and weep with them, others make a show of 
 courage, and others try to comfort them. 
 
 The wives and mothers, knowing that they will be left for 
 three, four, or five years without their breadwinners, weep 
 and rehearse their woes aloud. The fathers say little. They 
 only utter a clucking sound with their tongues and sigh 
 mournfully, knowing that they will see no more of the 
 steady lads they have reared and trained to help them, that 
 they will come back not the same quiet hard-working labor- 
 ers, but for the most part conceited and demoralized, 
 unfitted for their simple life. 
 
 And then all the crowd get into their sledges again and 
 move away down the street to the taverns and pot-houses, 
 and louder than ever sounds the medley of singing and 
 sobbing, drunken shouts, and the wailing of the wives and 
 mothers, the sounds of the accordeon and oaths. They 
 all turn into the taverns, whose revenues go to the govern- 
 ment, and the drinking bout begins, which stifles their 
 sense of the wrong which is being done them. 
 
 For two or three weeks they go on living at home, and 
 most of that time they are “ jaunting,” that is, drinking. 
 
 On a fixed day they collect them, drive them together 
 like a flock of sheep, and begin to train them in the military 
 
312 
 
 THE KINGDOM OF GOD 
 
 exercises and drill. Their teachers are fellows like them- 
 selves, only deceived and brutalized two or three years 
 sooner. The means of instruction are ; deception, stupe- 
 faction, blows, and vodka. And before a year has passed 
 these good, intelligent, healthy-minded lads will be as bru- 
 tal beings as their instructors. 
 
 “Come, now, suppose your father were arrested and 
 tried to make his escape ?” I asked a young soldier. 
 
 “ I should run him through with my bayonet,” he an- 
 swered with the foolish intonation peculiar to soldiers ; 
 “ and if he made off, I ought to shoot him,” he added, ob- 
 viously proud of knowing what he must do if his father 
 were escaping. 
 
 And when a good-hearted lad has been brought to a 
 state lower than that of a brute, he is just what is wanted 
 by those who use him as an instrument of violence. He is 
 ready ; the man has been destroyed and a new instrument 
 of violence has been created. And all this is done every 
 year, every autumn, everywhere, through all Russia in broad 
 daylight in the midst of large towns, where all may see it, 
 and the deception is so clever, so skillful, that though all 
 men know the infamy of it in their hearts, and see all its 
 horrible results, they cannot throw it off and be free. 
 
 When one’s eyes are opened to this awful deception 
 practiced upon us, one marvels that the teachers of the 
 Christian religion and of morals, the instructors of youth, 
 or even the good-hearted and intelligent parents who are 
 to be found in every society, can teach any kind of moral- 
 ity in a society in which it is openly admitted (it is so ad- 
 mitted, under all governments and all churches) that mur- 
 der and torture form an indispensable element in the life 
 of all, and that there must always be special men trained to 
 kill their fellows, and that any one of us may have to be- 
 come such a trained assassin. 
 
 How can children, youths, and people generally be 
 
IS WITHIN YOU. 
 
 313 
 
 taught any kind of morality — not to speak of teaching in 
 the spirit of Christianity — side by side with the doctrine 
 that murder is necessary for the public weal, and therefore 
 legitimate, and that there are men, of whom each of us may 
 have to be one, whose duty is to murder and torture and 
 commit all sorts of crimes at the will of those who are in 
 possession of authority. If this is so, and one can and 
 ought to murder and torture, there is not, and cannot be, 
 any kind of moral law, but only the law that might is right. 
 And this is just how it is. In reality that is the doctrine — 
 justified to some by the theory of the struggle for existence 
 — which reigns in our society. 
 
 And, indeed, what sort of ethical doctrine could admit 
 the legitimacy of murder for any object whatever ? It is 
 as impossible as a theory of mathematics admitting that 
 two is equal to three. 
 
 There may be a semblance of mathematics admitting 
 that two is equal to three, but there can be no real science 
 of mathematics. And there can only be a semblance of 
 ethics in which murder in the shape of war and the execu- 
 tion of criminals is allowed, but no true ethics. The 
 recognition of the life of every man as sacred is the first 
 and only basis of all ethics. 
 
 The doctrine of an eye for an eye and a tooth for a 
 tooth has been abrogated by Christianity, because it is the 
 justification of immorality, and a mere semblance of equity, 
 and has no real meaning. Life is a value which has no 
 weight nor size, and cannot be compared to any other, and 
 so there is no sense in destroying a life for a life. Be- 
 sides, every social law aims at the amelioration of man’s life. 
 What way, then, can the annihilation of the life of some 
 men ameliorate men’s life? Annihilation of life cannot be 
 a means of the amelioration of life ; it is a suicidal 
 act. 
 
 To destroy another life for the sake of justice is as 
 
314 
 
 THE KINGDOM OF GOD 
 
 though a man, to repair the misfortune of losing one arm, 
 should cut off the other arm for the sake of equity. 
 
 But putting aside the sin of deluding men into regarding 
 the most awful crime as a duty, putting aside the revolting 
 sin of using the name and authority of Christ to sanction 
 what he most condemned, not to speak of the curse on 
 those who cause these “ little ones ” to offend — how can 
 people who cherish their own way of life, their progress, 
 even from the point of view of their personal securit}^, 
 allow the formation in their midst of an overwhelming 
 force as senseless, cruel, and destructive as every govern- 
 ment is organized on the basis of an army ? Even the 
 most cruel band of brigands is not so much to be dreaded 
 as such a government. 
 
 The power of every brigand chief is at least so far 
 limited that the men of his band preserve at least some 
 human liberty, and can refuse to commit acts opposed to 
 their conscience. But, owing to the perfection to which 
 the discipline of the army has been brought, there is no 
 limit to check men who form part of a regularly organized 
 government. There are no crimes so revolting that they 
 would not readily be committed by men who form part of 
 a government or army, at the will of anyone (such as Bou- 
 langer, Napoleon, or Pougachef) who may chance to be at 
 their head. 
 
 Often when one sees conscription levies, military drills 
 and maneuvers, police officers with loaded revolvers, and 
 sentinels at their posts with bayonets on their rifles ; when 
 one hears for whole days at a time (as I hear it in Hamov- 
 niky where I live) the whistle of balls and the dull thud 
 as they fall in the sand ; when one sees in the midst of a 
 town where any effort at violence in self-defense is for- 
 bidden, where the sale of powder and of chemicals, where 
 furious driving and practicing as a doctor without a di- 
 ploma, and so on, are not allowed, thousands of disciplined 
 
IS WITHIN' YOU. 
 
 315 
 
 troops, trained to murder, and subject to one man’s will ; 
 one asks oneself how can people who prize their security 
 quietly allow it, and put up with it ? Apart from the 
 immorality and evil effects of it, nothing can possibly be 
 more unsafe. What are people thinking about? I don’t 
 mean now Christians, ministers of religion, philanthropists, 
 and moralists, but simply people who value their life, their 
 security, and their comfort. This organization, we know, 
 will work just as well in one man’s hands as another’s. 
 To-day, let us assume, power is in the hands of a ruler 
 who can be endured, but to-morrow it may be seized by a 
 Biron, an Elizabeth, a Catherine, a Pougachef, a Napoleon 
 I., or a Napoleon III. 
 
 And the man in authority, endurable to-day, may become 
 a brute to-morrow, or may be succeeded by a mad or im- 
 becile heir, like the King of Bavaria or our Paul I. 
 
 And not only the highest authorities, but all little satraps 
 scattered over everywhere, like so many General Baranovs, 
 governors, police officers even, and commanders of com- 
 panies, can perpetrate the most awful crimes before there 
 is time for them to be removed from office. And this is 
 what is constantly happening. 
 
 One involuntarily asks how can men let it go on, not 
 from higher considerations only, but from regard to their 
 own safety ? 
 
 The answer to this question is that it is not all people 
 who do tolerate it (some — the greater proportion — deluded 
 and submissive, have no choice and have to tolerate an)^- 
 thing). It is tolerated by those who only under such an 
 organization can occupy a position of profit. They tolerate 
 it, because for them the risks of suffering from a foolish or 
 cruel man being at the head of the government or the army 
 are always less than the disadvantages to which they would 
 be exposed by the destruction of the organization itself. 
 
 A judge, a commander of police, a governor, or an officer 
 
3i6 
 
 “ the kingdom oe god 
 
 
 
 V 
 
 
 
 \ 
 
 vV 
 
 will keep his position just the same under Boulanger or the 
 republic, under Pougachef or Catherine. He will lose his 
 profitable position for certain, if the existing order of things 
 which secured it to him is destroyed. And so all these 
 people feel no uneasiness as to who is at. the head of the 
 organization, they will adapt themselves to anyone ; they 
 only dread the downfall of the organization itself, and that 
 is the reason — though often an unconscious one — that they 
 support it. 
 
 One often wonders why independent people, who are not 
 forced to do so in any way, the so-called dite of society, 
 should go into the army in Russia, England, Germany, 
 Austria, and even France, and seek opportunities of be- 
 coming murderers. Why do even high-principled parents 
 send their boys to military schools ? Why do mothers 
 buy their children toy helmets, guns, and swords as play- 
 things ? (The peasant’s children never play at soldiers, 
 by the way). Why do good men and even women, who 
 have certainly no interest in war, go into raptures over 
 the various exploits of Skobeloff and others, and vie with 
 one another in glorifying them ? Why do men, who are 
 not obliged to do so, and get no fee for it, devote, like the 
 marshals of nobility in Russia, whole months of toil to 
 a business physically disagreeable and morally painful— 
 the enrolling of conscripts? Why do all kings and 
 emperors wear the military uniform ? Why do they all 
 hold military reviews, why do they organize maneuvers, 
 distribute rewards to the military, and raise monuments to 
 generals and successful commanders ? Why do rich men 
 of independent position consider it an honor to perform a 
 
 valet’s duties in attendance on crowned personages, flatter- 
 ing them and cringing to them and pretending to believe in 
 their peculiar superiority ? Why do men who have ceased 
 to believe in the superstitions of the mediseval Church, 
 and who could not possibly believe in them seriously and 
 
IS WITHIN YOU." 
 
 317 
 
 consistently, pretend to believe in and give their support 
 to the demoralizing and blasphemous institution of the 
 church? Why is it that not only governments but private 
 persons of the higher classes, try so jealously to maintain 
 the ignorance of the people ? Why do they fall with such 
 fury on any effort at breaking down religious superstitions 
 or really enlightening the people ? Why do historians, 
 novelists, and poets, who have no hope of gaining anything 
 by their flatteries, make heroes of kings, emperors, and con- 
 querors of past times ? Why do men, who call themselves 
 learned, dedicate whole lifetimes to making theories to 
 prove that violence employed by authority against the 
 people is not violence at all, but a special right ? One often 
 wonders why a fashionable lady or an artist, who, one 
 would think, would take no interest in political or military 
 questions, should always condemn strikes of working peo- 
 ple, and defend war ; and should always be found without 
 hesitation opposed to the one, favorable to the other. 
 
 But one no longer wonders when one realizes that in the j 
 higher classes there is an unerring instinct of what tends / ' 
 to maintain and of what tends to destroy the organizat ion^ 
 by virtue of which they enjoy their privilege^ The fashion- 
 able lady had certainly not reasoned out that if there were 
 no capitalists and no army to defend them, her husband 
 would have no fortune, and she could not have her enter- 
 tainments and her ball-dresses. And the artist certainly 
 does not argue that he needs the capitalists and the troop^ 
 to defend them, so that they may buy his pictures. But I 
 instinct, replacing reason in this instance, guides thetia.-A 
 unerringly. And it is precisely this instinct which leads all' 
 men, with few exceptions, to support all the religious, 
 political, and economic institutions which are to their 
 advantage. 
 
 But is it possible that the higher classes support the 
 existing order of things simply because it is to their 
 
3i8 the kingdom of god 
 
 advantage? Cannot they see that this order of things is 
 essentially irrational, that it is no longer consistent with the 
 stage of moral development attained by people, and with 
 public opinion, and that it is fraught with perils ? The 
 governing classes, or at least the good, honest, and intelli- 
 gent people of them, cannot but suffer from these funda- 
 mental inconsistencies, and see the dangers with which 
 they are threatened. And is it possible that all the millions 
 of the lower classes can feel easy in conscience when they 
 commit such obviously evil deeds as torture and murder 
 from fear of punishment ? Indeed, it could not be so, 
 neither the former nor the latter could fail to see the irra- 
 tionality of their conduct, if the complexity of government 
 organization did not obscure the unnatural senselessness of 
 their actions. 
 
 So many instigate, assist, or sanction the commission of 
 every one of these actions that no one who has a hand in 
 them feels himself morally responsible for it. 
 
 It is the custom among assassins to oblige all the wit- 
 nesses of a murder to strike the murdered victim, that the 
 responsibility may be divided among as large a number of 
 people as possible. The same principle in different forms 
 is applied under the government organization in the per- 
 petration of the crimes, without which no government 
 organization could exist. Rulers always try to implicate 
 as many citizens as possible in all the crimes committed in 
 their support. 
 
 Of late this tendency has been expressed in a very 
 obvious manner by the obligation of all citizens to take 
 part in legal processes as jurors, in the army as soldiers, in 
 the local government, or legislative assembly, as electors or 
 members. 
 
 Ju.st as in a wicker basket all the ends are so hidden 
 away that it is hard to find them, in the state organization 
 the responsibility for the crimes committed is so hidden 
 
IS WITHIN YOU." 
 
 319 
 
 away that men will commit the most atrocious acts without 
 seeing their responsibility for them. 
 
 In ancient times tyrants got credit for the crimes they I's 
 committed, but in our day the most atrocious infamies, in- * / 
 conceivable under the Neros, are perpetrated and no one 
 gets blamed for them. 
 
 One set of people have suggested, another set have pro- 
 posed, a third have reported, a fourth have decided, a fifth 
 have confirmed, a sixth have given the order, and a seventh 
 set of men have carried it out. They hang, they flog to 
 death women, old men, and innocent people, as was done 
 recently among us in Russia at the Yuzovsky factory, and 
 is always being done everywhere in Europe and America in 
 the struggle with the anarchists and all other rebels against 
 the existing order ; they shoot and hang men by hundreds 
 and thousands, or massacre millions in war, or break men’s 
 hearts in solitary confinement, and ruin their souls in the 
 corruption of a soldier’s life, and no one is responsible. 
 
 At the bottom of the social scale soldiers, armed with 
 guns, pistols, and sabers, injure and murder people, and 
 compel men through these means to enter the army, and are 
 absolutely convinced that the responsibility for the actions 
 rests solely on the officers who command them. 
 
 At the top of the scale — the Tzars, presidents, ministers, 
 and parliaments decree these tortures and murders and 
 military conscription, and are fully convinced that since they 
 are either placed in authority by the grace of God or by 
 the society they govern, which demands such decrees from 
 them, they cannot be held responsible. Between these two 
 extremes are the intermediary personages who superintend 
 the murders and other acts of violence, and are fully con- 
 vinced that the responsibility is taken off their shoulders 
 partly by their superiors who have given the order, partly by 
 the fact that such orders are expected from them by all who 
 are at the bottom of the scale. 
 
320 
 
 THE KINGDOM OF GOD 
 
 The authority who gives the orders and the authority 
 who executes them at the two extreme ends of the state 
 organization, meet together like the two ends of a ring ; 
 they support and rest on one another and inclose all that 
 lies within the ring. 
 
 Without the conviction that there is a person or persons 
 who will take the whole responsibility of his acts, not one 
 soldier would ever lift a hand to commit a murder or other 
 deed of violence. 
 
 Without the conviction that it is expected by the whole 
 people not a single king, emperor, president, or parliament 
 would order murders or acts of violence. 
 
 Without the conviction that there are persons of a higher 
 grade who will take the responsibility, and people of a 
 lower grade who require such acts for their welfare, not 
 one of the intermediate class would superintend such deeds. 
 
 The state is so organized that wherever a man is placed 
 in the social scale, his irresponsibility is the same. The 
 higher his grade the more he is under the influence of 
 demands from below, and the less he is controlled by orders 
 jrom above, and vice versa. 
 
 All men, then, bound together by state organization, 
 throw the responsibility of their acts on one another, the 
 "peasant soldier on the nobleman or merchant who is his 
 officer, and the officer on the nobleman who has been 
 appointed governor, the governor on the nobleman or 
 son of an official who is minister, the minister on the 
 member of the royal family who occupies the post of 
 Tzar, and the Tzar again on all these officials, noblemen, 
 merchants, and peasants. But that is not all. Besides the 
 fact that men get rid of the sense of responsibility for their 
 actions in this way, they lose their moral sense of responsi- 
 bility also, by the fact that in forming themselves into 
 a state organization they persuade themselves and each 
 other so continually, and so indefatigably, that they are 
 
75 WITHIN YOU." 
 
 521 
 
 not all equal, but “ as the stars apart,” that they come to 
 believe it genuinely themselves. Thus some are per- 
 suaded that they are not simple people like everyone else, 
 but special people who are to be specially honored. It is 
 instilled into another set of men by every possible means 
 that they are inferior to others, and therefore must submit 
 without a murmur to every order given them by their 
 superiors. 
 
 On this inequality, above all, on the elevation of some 
 and the degradation of others, rests the capacity men have 
 of being blind to the insanity of the existing order of life, 
 and all the cruelty and criminality of the deception prac- 
 ticed by one set of men on another. 
 
 Those in whom the idea has been instilled that they are 
 invested with a special supernatural grandeur and conse- 
 quence, are so intoxicated with a sense of their own imag- 
 inary dignity that they cease to feel their responsibility for 
 what they do. 
 
 While those, on the other hand, in whom the idea is 
 fostered that they are inferior animals, bound to obey their k / 
 superiors in everything, fall, through this perpetual humil- 
 iation, into a strange condition of stupefied servility, and 
 in this stupefied state do not see the significance of their 
 actions and lose all consciousness of responsibility for 
 what they do. 
 
 The intermediate class, who obey the orders of their 
 superiors on the one hand and regard themselves as 
 superior beings on the other, are intoxicated by power and 
 stupefied by servility at the same time and so lose the 
 sense of their responsibility. 
 
 One need only glance during a review at the commander- 
 in-chief, intoxicated with self-importance, followed by his 
 retinue, all on magnificent and gayly appareled horses, in 
 splendid uniforms and wearing decorations, and see how 
 they ride to the harmonious and solemn strains of music 
 
322 
 
 THE KINGDOM OF GOD 
 
 belore the ranks of soldiers, all presenting arms and petri- 
 fied with servility. One need only glance at this spectacle 
 to understand that at such moments, when they are in a 
 state of the most complete intoxication, commander-in- 
 chief, soldiers, and intermediate officers alike, would be 
 capable of committing crimes of which they would never 
 dream under other conditions. 
 
 The intoxication produced by such stimulants as parades, 
 reviews, religious solemnities, and coronations, is, however, 
 an acute and temporary condition ; but there are other 
 forms of chronic, permanent intoxication, to which those 
 are liable who have any kind of authority, from that of the 
 Tzar to that of the lowest police officer at the street corner, 
 and also those who are in subjection to authority and in a 
 state of stupefied servility. The latter, like all slaves, 
 always find a justification for their own servility, in ascrib- 
 ing the greatest possible dignity and importance to those 
 they serve. 
 
 It is principally through this false idea of inequality, and 
 the intoxication of power and of servility resulting from it, 
 that men associated in a state organization are enabled to 
 commit acts opposed to their conscience without the least 
 scruple or remorse. 
 
 Under the influence of this intoxication, men imagine 
 themselves no longer simply men as they are, but some 
 special beings — noblemen, merchants, governors, judges, 
 officers, tzars, ministers, or soldiers — no longer bound by 
 ordinary human duties, but by other duties far more 
 weighty — the peculiar duties of a nobleman, merchant, 
 governor, judge, officer, tzar, minister, or soldier. 
 
 Thus the landowner, who claimed the forest, acted as he 
 did only because he fancied himself not a simple man, hav- 
 ing the same rights to life as the peasants living beside 
 him and everyone else, but a great landowner, a member 
 of the nobility, and under the influence of the intoxication 
 
IS WITHIN YOU." 
 
 323 
 
 of power he felt his dignity offended by the peasants’ claims. 
 It was only through this feeling that, without considering 
 the consequences that might follow, he sent in a claim to 
 be reinstated in his pretended rights. 
 
 In the same way the judges, who wrongfully adjudged 
 the forest to the proprietor, did so simply because they 
 fancied themselves not simply men like everyone else, and 
 so bound to be guided in everything only by what they 
 consider right, but, under the intoxicating influence of 
 power, imagined themselves the representatives of the 
 justice which cannot err ; while under the intoxicating 
 influence of servility they imagined themselves bound to 
 carry out to the letter the instructions inscribed in a certain 
 book, the so-called law. In the same way all who take 
 part in such an affair, from the highest representative of 
 authority who signs his assent to the report, from the 
 superintendent presiding at the recruiting sessions, and 
 the priest who deludes the recruits, to the lowest soldier 
 who is ready now to fire on his own brothers, imagine, in 
 the intoxication of power or of servility, that they are 
 some conventional characters. They do not face the ques- 
 tion that is presented to them, whether or not they ought 
 to take part in what their conscience judges an evil act, 
 but fancy themselves various conventional personages — 
 one as the Tzar, God’s anointed, an exceptional being, 
 called to watch over the happiness of one hundred millions 
 of men ; another as the representative of nobility ; another 
 as a priest, who has received special grace by his ordination ; 
 another as a soldier, bound by his military oath to carry 
 out all he is commanded without reflection. 
 
 Only under the intoxication of the power or the servility 
 of their imagined positions could all these people act as 
 they do. 
 
 Were not they all firmly convinced that their respective 
 vocations of tzar, minister, governor, judge, nobleman. 
 
324 
 
 THE KINGDOM OF GOD 
 
 i t 
 
 landowner, superintendent, officer, and soldier are some- 
 thing real and important, not one of them would even think 
 without horror and aversion of taking part in what they 
 do now. 
 
 The conventional positions, established hundreds of 
 years, recognized for centuries and by everyone, distin- 
 guished by special names and dresses, and, moreover, con- 
 firmed by every kind of solemnity, have so penetrated into 
 men’s minds through their senses, that, forgetting the 
 ordinary conditions of life common to all, they look at 
 themselves and everyone only from this conventional point 
 of view, and are guided in their estimation of their own 
 actions and those of others by this conventional standard. 
 
 Thus we see a man of perfect sanity and ripe age, simply 
 because he is decked out with some fringe, or embroidered 
 keys on his coat tails, or a colored ribbon only fit for some 
 gayly dressed girl, and is told that he is a general, a 
 chamberlain, a knight of the order of St. Andrew, or some 
 similar nonsense, suddenly become self-important, proud, 
 and even happy, or, on the contrary, grow melancholy and 
 unhappy to the point of falling ill, because he has failed to 
 obtain the expected decoration or title. Or what is still 
 more striking, a young man, perfectly sane in every other 
 matter, independent and beyond the fear of want, simply 
 because he has been appointed judicial prosecutor or dis- 
 trict commander, separates a poor widow from her little 
 children, and shuts her up in prison, leaving her children 
 uncared for, all because the unhappy woman carried on 
 a secret trade in spirits, and so deprived the revenue of 
 twenty-five rubles, and he does not feel the least pang of 
 remorse. Or what is still more amazing ; a man, other- 
 wise sensible and good-hearted, simply because he is given 
 a badge or a uniform to wear, and told that he is a guard 
 or customs officer, is ready to fire on people, and neither 
 he nor those around him regard him as to blame for it, but. 
 
IS WITHIN YOU." 
 
 325 
 
 on the contrary, would regard him as to blame if he did 
 not fire. To say nothing of judges and juries who con- 
 demn men to death, and soldiers who kill men by thousands 
 without the slightest scruple merely because it has been 
 instilled into them that they are not simply men, but 
 jurors, judges, generals, and soldiers. 
 
 This strange and abnormal condition of men under state 
 organization is usually expressed in the following words : 
 “As a man, I pity him; but as guard, judge, general, 
 governor, tzar, or soldier, it is my duty to kill or torture 
 him.” Just as though there were some positions conferred 
 and recognized, which would exonerate us from the obliga- 
 tions laid on each of us by the fact of our common 
 humanity. 
 
 So, for example, in the case before us, men are going to 
 murder and torture the famishing, and they admit that in 
 the dispute between the peasants and the landowner the 
 peasants are right (all those in command said as much 
 to me). They know that the peasants are wretched, 
 poor, and hungry, and the landowner is rich and inspires 
 no sympathy. Yet they are all going to kill the peasants 
 to secure three thousand rubles for the landowner, only 
 because at that moment they fancy themselves not men but 
 governor, official, general of police, officer, and soldier, 
 respectively, and consider themselves bound to obey, not 
 the eternal demands of the conscience of man, but the 
 casual, temporary demands of their positions as officers or 
 soldiers. 
 
 Strange as it may seem, the sole explanation of this 
 astonishing phenomenon is that they are in the condition 
 of the hypnotized, who, they say, feel and act like the- 
 creatures they are commanded by the hypnotizer to repre- 
 sent. When, for instance, it is suggested to the hypnotized 
 subject that he is lame, he begins to walk lame, that he is 
 blind, and he cannot see, that he is a wild beast, and he 
 
326 
 
 THE KnWGDOM OF COD 
 
 begins to bite. This is the state, not only of those who 
 were going on this expedition, but of all men who fulfill 
 their state and social duties in preference to and in detri- 
 ment of their human duties. 
 
 The essence of this state is that under the influence of 
 one suggestion they lose the power of criticising their 
 actions, and therefore do, without thinking, everything con- 
 sistent with the suggestion to which they are led by 
 example, precept, or insinuation. 
 
 The difference between those hypnotized by scientific 
 men and those under the influence of the ^state hypnotism , 
 is that an imaginary position is suggested to the former 
 suddenly by one person in a very brief space of time, and 
 so the hypnotized state appears to us in a striking and 
 surprising form, while the imaginary position suggested by 
 state influence is induced slowly, little by little, impercep- 
 tibly from childhood, sometimes during years, or even 
 generations, and not in one person alone but in a whole 
 society. 
 
 “ But,” it will be said, “at all times, in all societies, the 
 majority of persons — all the children, all the women 
 absorbed in the bearing and rearing of the young, all the 
 great mass of the laboring population, who are under the 
 necessity of incessant and fatiguing physical labor, all those 
 of weak character by nature, all those who are abnormally 
 enfeebled intellectually by the effects of nicotine, alcohol, 
 opium, or other intoxicants — are always in a condition of 
 incapacity for independent thought, and are either in sub- 
 jection to those who are on a higher intellectual level, or 
 else under the influence of family or social traditions, of 
 what is called public opinion, and there is nothing unnatural 
 or incongruous in their subjection.” 
 
 And truly there is nothing unnatural in it, and the tend- 
 ency of men of small intellectual power to follow the lead 
 of those on a higher level of intelligence is a constant law. 
 
IS WITHIN YOU." 
 
 327 
 
 and it is owing to it that men can live in societies and on 
 the same principles at all. The minority consciously adopt 
 certain rational principles through their correspondence 
 with reason, while the majority act on the same principles 
 unconsciously because it is required by public opinion. 
 
 Such subjection to public opinion on the part of the 
 unintellectual does not assume an unnatural character till 
 the public opinion is split into two. 
 
 But there are times when a higher truth, revealed at first 
 to a few persons, gradually gains ground till it has taken 
 hold of such a number of persons that the old public 
 opinion, founded on a lower order of truths, begins to totter 
 and the new is ready to take its place, but has not yet been 
 firmly established. It is like the spring, this time of tran- 
 sition, when the old order of ideas has not quite broken up 
 and the new has not quite gained a footing. Men begin to 
 criticise their actions in the light of the new truth, but in 
 the meantime in practice, through inertia and tradition, 
 they continue to follow the principles which once represented 
 the highest point of rational consciousness, but are now in 
 flagrant contradiction with it. 
 
 Then men are in an abnormal, wavering condition, 
 feeling the necessity of following the new ideal, and 
 yet not bold enough to break with the old-established 
 traditions. 
 
 Such is the attitude in regard to the truth of Christian- 
 ity not only of the men in the Toula train, but of the 
 majority of men of our times, alike of the higher and the 
 lower orders. 
 
 Those of the ruling classes, having no longer any reason- 
 able justification for the profitable positions they occupy, 
 are forced, in order to keep them, to stifle their higher 
 rational faculty of loving, and to persuade themselves that 
 their positions are indispensable. And those of the lower 
 classes, exhausted by toil and brutalized of set purpose, are 
 
328 
 
 “ THE KINGDOM OF GOD 
 
 kept in a permanent deception, practiced deliberately and 
 continuously by the higher classes upon them. 
 
 Only in this way can one explain the amazing contradic- 
 tions with which our life is full, and of which a striking 
 example was presented to me by the expedition I met on 
 the 9th of September ; good, peaceful men, known to me 
 personally, going with untroubled tranquillity to perpetrate 
 the most beastly, senseless, and vile of crimes. Had not 
 they some means of stifling their conscience, not one of 
 them would be capable of committing a hundredth part of 
 such a villainy. 
 
 It is not that they have not a conscience which forbids 
 them from acting thus, just as, even three or four hundred 
 years ago, when people burnt men at the stake and put 
 them to the rack they had a conscience which prohibited 
 it ; the conscience is there, but it has been put to sleep — in 
 those in command by what the psychologists call auto-sug- 
 gestion ; in the soldiers, by the direct conscious hypnotiz- 
 ing exerted by the higher classes. 
 
 Though asleep, the conscience is there, and in spite of 
 the hypnotism it is already speaking in them, and it may 
 -awake. 
 
 All these men are in a position like that of a man under 
 hypnotism, commanded to do something opposed to every- 
 thing he regards as good and rational, such as to kill his 
 mother or his child. The hypnotized subject feels himself 
 bound to carry out the suggestion — he thinks he cannot 
 stop — but the nearer he gets to the time and the place of 
 the action, the more the benumbed conscience begins to 
 stir, to resist, and to try to awake. And no one can say 
 beforehand whether he will carry out the suggestion or 
 not ; which will gain the upper hand, the rational conscience 
 or the irrational suggestion. It all depends on their rela- 
 tive strength. 
 
 That is just the case with the men in the Toula train and 
 
/S WITHIN YOU. 
 
 329 
 
 in general with everyone carrying out acts of state violence 
 in our day. — 
 
 There was a time when men who set out with the object of 
 murder and violence, to make an example, did not return 
 till they had carried out their object, and then, untroubled 
 by doubts or scruples, having calmly flogged men to death, 
 they returned home and caressed their children, laughed, 
 amused themselves, and enjoyed the peaceful pleasures of 
 family life. In those days it never struck the landowners 
 and wealthy men who profited by these crimes, that the 
 privileges they enjoyed had any direct connection with 
 these atrocities. But now it is no longer so. Men know 
 now, or are not far from knowing, what they are doing and 
 for what object they do it. They can shut their eyes and 
 force their conscience to be still, but so lon g as .their eyes 
 are opened and their conscience undulled^ they must all 
 — those who carry out and those who profit by these crimes 
 alike — see the import of them. Sometimes they realize it 
 only after the crime has been perpetrated, sometimes they 
 realize it just before its perpetration. Thus those who com- 
 manded the recent acts of violence in Nijni-Novgorod, 
 Saratov, Orel, and the Yuzovsky factory realized their sig- 
 nificance only after their perpetration, and now those who 
 commanded and those who carried out these crimes are 
 ashamed before public opinion and their conscience. I 
 have talked to soldiers who had taken part in these crimes, 
 and they always studiously turned the conversation off the 
 subject, and when they spoke of it it was with horror and 
 bewilderment. There are cases, too, when men come to 
 themselves just before the perpetration of the crime. Thus 
 I know the case of a sergeant-major who had been beaten 
 by two peasants during the repression of disorder and had 
 made a complaint. The next day, after seeing the atroci- 
 ties perpetrated on the other peasants, he entreated the 
 commander of his company to tear up his complaint and 
 
“ TflE KINGDOM OP GOD 
 
 33 ^ 
 
 let off the two peasants. I know cases when soldiers, com- 
 manded to fire, have refused to obey, and I know many 
 cases of officers who have refused to command expeditions 
 for torture and murder. So that men sometimes come to 
 their senses long before perpetrating the suggested crime, 
 sometimes at the very moment before perpetrating it, 
 sometimes only afterward. 
 
 The men traveling in the Toula train were going with 
 the object of killing and injuring their fellow-creatures, but 
 none could tell whether they would carry out their object 
 or not. However obscure his responsibility for the affair 
 is to each, and however strong the idea instilled into all of 
 them that they are not men, but governors, officials, officers, 
 and soldiers, and as such beings can violate every human 
 duty, the nearer they approach the place of the execution, the 
 stronger their doubts as to its being right, and this doubt 
 will reach its highest point when the very moment for 
 carrying it out has come. 
 
 The governor, in spite of all the stupefying effect of his 
 surroundings, cannot help hesitating when the moment 
 comes to give final decisive command. He knows that the 
 action of the Governor of Orel has called down upon him 
 the disapproval of the best people, and he himself, influ- 
 enced by the public opinion of the circles in which he 
 moves, has more than once expressed his disapprobation of 
 him. He knows that the prosecutor, who ought to have 
 come, flatly refused to have anything to do with it, because 
 he regarded it as disgraceful. He knows, too, that there 
 may be changes any day in the government, and that what 
 was a ground for advancement yesterday may be the cause 
 of disgrace to-morrow. And he knows that there is a 
 press, if not in Russia, at least abroad, which may report 
 the affair and cover him with ignominy forever. He is 
 already conscious of a change in public opinion which con- 
 demns what was formerly a duty. Moreover, he cannot 
 
IS WITHIN YOU." 
 
 331 
 
 feel fully assured that his soldiers will at the last moment 
 obey him. He is wavering, and none can say beforehand 
 what he will do. 
 
 All the officers and functionaries who accompany him 
 experience in greater or less degree the same emotions. 
 In the depths of their hearts they all know that what they 
 are doing is shameful, that to take part in it is a discredit 
 and blemish in the eyes of some people whose opinion they 
 value. They know that after murdering and torturing the 
 defenseless, each of them will be ashamed to face his 
 betrothed or the woman he is courting. And besides, they 
 too, like the governor, are doubtful whether the soldiers’ 
 obedience to orders can be reckoned on. What a con- 
 trast with the confident air they all put on as they sauntered 
 about the station and platform ! Inwardly they were not 
 only in a state of suffering but even of suspense. Indeed 
 they only assumed this bold and composed manner to con- 
 ceal the wavering within. And this feeling increased as 
 they drew near the scene of action. 
 
 And imperceptible as it was, and strange as it seems to 
 say so, all that mass of lads, the soldiers, who seemed so 
 submissive, were in precisely the same condition. 
 
 These are not the soldiers of former days, who gave up 
 the natural life of industry and devoted their whole exist- 
 ence to debauchery, plunder, and murder, like the Roman 
 legionaries or the warriors of the Thirty Years’ War, or 
 even the soldiers of more recent times who served for 
 twenty-five years in the army. They have mostly been 
 only lately taken from their families, and are full of the 
 recollections of the good, rational, natural life they have 
 left behind them. 
 
 All these lads, peasants for the most part, know what is 
 the business they have come about ; they know that the 
 landowners always oppress their brothers the peasants, and 
 that therefore it is most likely the same thing here. More- 
 
332 
 
 THE KINGDOM OF GOD 
 
 over, a majority of them can now read, and the books they 
 read are not all such as exalt a military life ; there are 
 some which point out its immorality. Among them are 
 often free-thinking comrades — who have enlisted volun- 
 tarily — or young officers of liberal ideas, and already the 
 first germ of doubt has been sown in regard to the uncon- 
 ditional legitimacy and glory of their occupation. 
 
 It is true that they have all passed through that terrible, 
 skillful education, elaborated through centuries, which kills 
 all initiative in a man, and that they are so trained to me- 
 chanical obedience that at the word of command : “ Fire ! 
 — All the line ! — Fire ! ” and so on, their guns will rise of 
 themselves and the habitual movements will be performed. 
 But “ Fire ! ” now does not mean shooting into the sand 
 for amusement, it means firing on their broken-down, ex- 
 ploited fathers and brothers whom they see there in the 
 crowd, with women and children shouting and waving their 
 arms. Here they are — one with his scanty beard and 
 patched coat and plaited shoes of reed, just like the father 
 left at home in Kazan or Riazan province ; one with gray 
 beard and bent back, leaning on a staff like the old grand- 
 father ; one, a young fellow in boots and a red shirt, just 
 as he was himself a year ago — he, the soldier who must 
 fire upon him. There, too, a woman in reed shoes and 
 panyova, just like the mother left at home. 
 
 Is it possible they must fire on them ? And no one 
 knows what each soldier will do at the last minute. The 
 least word, the slightest allusion would be enough to stop 
 them. 
 
 At the last moment they will all find themselves in the 
 position of a hypnotized man to whom it has been suggested 
 to chop a log, who coming up to what has been indicated 
 to him as a log, with the ax already lifted to strike, sees 
 that it is not a log but his sleeping brother. He may per- 
 form the act that has been suggested to him, and he may 
 
IS WITHIN YOU. 
 
 333 
 
 come to his senses at the moment of performing it. In the 
 same way all these men may come to themselves in time or 
 they may go on to the end. 
 
 If they do not come to themselves, the most fearful 
 crime will be committed, as in Orel, and then the hypnotic 
 suggestion under which they act will be strengthened in all 
 other men. If they do come to themselves, not only this ter- 
 rible crime will not be perpetrated, but many also who hear of 
 the turn the affair lias taken will be emancipated from the 
 hypnotic influence in which they were held, or at least will 
 be nearer being emancipated from it. 
 
 Even if a few only come to themselves, and boldly ex- 
 plain to the others all the wickedness of such a crime, the 
 influence of these few may rouse the others to shake off 
 the controlling suggestion, and the atrocity will not be 
 perpetrated. 
 
 More than that, if a few men, even of those who are not 
 taking part in the affair but are only present at the prepara- 
 tions for it, or have heard of such things being done in the 
 past, do not remain indifferent but boldly and plainly ex- 
 press their detestation of such crimes to those who have to 
 execute them, and point out to them all the senselessness, 
 cruelty, and wickedness of such acts, that alone will be 
 productive of good. 
 
 That was what took place in the instance before us. It 
 was enough for a few men, some personally concerned in 
 the affair and others simply outsiders, to express their dis- 
 approval of floggings that had taken place elsewhere, and 
 their contempt and loathing for those who had taken part 
 in inflicting them, for a few persons in the Toula case to 
 express their repugnance to having any share in it ; for a 
 lady traveling by the train, and a few other bystanders at 
 the station, to express to those who formed the expedition 
 their disgust at what they were doing ; for one of the com- 
 manders of a company, who was asked for troops for the 
 
334 
 
 “ THE KINGDOM OF GOD 
 
 restoration of order, to reply that soldiers ought not to be 
 butchers — and thanks to these and a few other seemingly 
 insignificant influences brought to bear on these hypnotized 
 men, the affair took a completely different turn, and the 
 troops, when they reached the place, did not inflict any 
 punishment, but contented themselves with cutting down 
 the forest and giving it to the landowner. 
 
 Had not a few persons had a clear consciousness that 
 what they were doing was wrong, and consequently influ- 
 enced one another in that direction, what was done at Orel 
 would have taken place at Toula. Had this consciousness 
 been still stronger, and had the influence exerted been 
 therefore greater than it was, it might well have been that 
 the governor with his troops would not even have ventured 
 to cut down the forest and give it to the landowner. Had 
 that consciousness been stronger still, it might well have 
 been that the governor would not have ventured to go to 
 the scene of action at all ; even that the minister would 
 not have ventured to form this decision or the Tzar to 
 ratify it. 
 
 All depends, therefore, on the strength of the conscious- 
 ness of Christian truth on the part of each individual man. 
 
 And, therefore, one would have thought that the efforts 
 of all men of the present day who profess to wish to work 
 for the welfare of humanity would have been directed to 
 strengthening this consciousness of Christian truth in them- 
 selves and others. 
 
 But, strange to say, it is precisely those people who pro- 
 fess most anxiety for the amelioration of human life, and are 
 regarded as the leaders of public opinion, who assert that 
 there is no need to do that, and that there are other more 
 effective means for the amelioration of men’s condition. 
 They affirm that the amelioration of human life is effected 
 not by the efforts of individual men, to recognize and prop- 
 agate the truth, but by the gradual modification of the 
 
IS IF/THIM YOU. 
 
 335 
 
 general conditions of life, and that therefore the efforts of 
 individuals should be directed to the gradual modification 
 of external conditions for the better. For every advocacy 
 of a truth inconsistent with the existing order by an indi- 
 vidual is, they maintain, not only useless but injurious, 
 since in provokes coercive measures on the part of the 
 authorities, restricting these individuals from continuing 
 any action useful to society. According to this doctrine 
 all modifications in human life are brought about by pre- 
 cisely the same laws as in the life of the animals. 
 
 So that, according to this doctrine, all the founders of 
 religions, such as Moses and the prophets, Confucius, Lao- 
 Tse, Buddha, Christ, and others, preached their doctrines 
 and their followers accepted them, not because they loved 
 the truth, but because the political, social, and above all 
 economic conditions of the peoples among whom these 
 religions arose were favorable for their origination and 
 development. 
 
 And therefore the chief efforts of the man who wishes to 
 serve society and improve the condition of humanity ought, 
 according to this doctrine, to be directed not to the elucida- 
 tion and propagation of truth, but to the improvement of 
 the external political, social, and above all economic condi- 
 tions. And the modification of these conditions is partly 
 effected by serving the government and introducing liberal 
 and progressive principles into it, partly in promoting the 
 development of industry and the propagation of socialistic 
 ideas, and most of all by the diffusion of science. Accord- 
 ing to this theory it is of no consequence whether you pro- 
 fess the truth revealed to you, and therefore realize it in 
 your life, or at least refrain from committing actions opposed 
 to the truth, such as serving the government and strength- 
 ening its authority when you regard it as injurious, profit- 
 ing by the capitalistic system when you regard it as wrong, 
 showing veneration for various ceremonies which you 
 
33 ^ 
 
 “ THE KINGDOM OF GOD 
 
 believe to be degrading superstitions, giving support to the 
 law when you believe it to be founded on error, serving as 
 a soldier, taking oaths, and lying, and lowering yourself 
 generally. It is useless to refrain from all that ; what is of 
 use is not altering the existing forms of life, but submitting 
 to them against your own convictions, introducing liberal- 
 ism into the existing institutions, promoting commerce, the 
 propaganda of socialism, and the triumphs of what is called 
 science, and the diffusion of education. According to this 
 theory one can remain a landowner, merchant, manufac- 
 turer, judge, official in government pa}'-, officer or soldier, 
 and still be not only a humane man, but even a socialist and 
 revolutionist. 
 
 Hypocrisy, which had formerly only a religious basis in 
 the doctrine of original sin, the redemption, and the Church, 
 has in our day gained a new scientific basis and has con- 
 sequently caught in its nets all those who had reached 
 too high a stage of development to be able to find support 
 in religious hypocrisy. So that while in former days a man 
 who professed the religion of the Church could take part in 
 all the crimes of the state, and profit by them, and still 
 regard himself as free from any taint of sin, so long as he 
 fulfilled the external observances of his creed, nowadays all 
 who do not believe in the Christianity of the Church, find 
 similar well-founded irrefutable reasons in science for 
 regarding themselves as blameless and even highly moral 
 in spite of their participation in the misdeeds of govern- 
 ment and the advantages they gain from them. 
 
 A rich landowner — not only in Russia, but in France, 
 England, Germany, or America — lives on the rents exacted 
 from the people living on his land, and robs these generally 
 poverty-stricken people of all he can get from them. This 
 man’s right of property in the land rests on the fact that at 
 every effort on the part of the oppressed people, without 
 his consent, to make use of the land he considers his, troops 
 
IS WITHIN YOlf." 
 
 337 
 
 are called out to subject them to punishment and murder. 
 One would have thought that it was obvious that a man 
 living in this way was an evil, egoistic creature and could 
 not possibly consider himself a Christian or a liberal. One 
 would have supposed it evident that the first thing such 
 a man must do, if he wishes to approximate to Christianity 
 or liberalism, would be to cease to plunder and ruin men by 
 means of acts of state violence in support of his claim to the 
 land. And so it would be if it were not for the logic of 
 hypocrisy, which reasons that from a religious point of view 
 possession or non-possession of land is of no consequence 
 for salvation, and from the scientific point of view, giving 
 up the ownership of land is a useless individual renuncia- 
 tion, and that the welfare of mankind is not promoted in 
 that way, but by a gradual modification of external forms. 
 And so we see this man, without the least trouble of mind 
 or doubt that people will believe in his sincerity, organizing 
 an agricultural exhibition, or a temperance society, or 
 sending some soup and stockings by his wife or children to 
 three old women, and boldly in his family, in drawing 
 rooms, in committees, and in the press, advocating the 
 Gospel or humanitarian doctrine of love for one’s neighbor 
 in general and the agricultural laboring population in 
 particular whom he is continually exploiting and oppressing. 
 And other people who are in the same position as he 
 believe him, commend him, and solemnly discuss with him 
 measures for ameliorating the condition of the working- 
 class, on whose exploitation their whole life rests, devising 
 all kinds of possible methods for this, except the one with- 
 out which all improvement of their condition is impossible, 
 i. <f., refraining from taking from them the land necessary 
 for their subsistence. (A striking example of this hypoc- 
 risy was the solicitude displayed by the Russian land- 
 owners last year, their efforts to combat the famine which 
 they had caused, and by which they profited, selling not 
 
33 ^ “ THE KINGDOM OF GOD 
 
 only bread at the highest price, but even potato haulm at 
 five rubles the dessiatine (about 2-| acres) for fuel to the 
 freezing peasants.) 
 
 Or take a merchant whose whole trade — like all trade 
 indeed — is founded on a series of trickery, by means of 
 which, profiting by the ignorance or need of others, he buys 
 goods below their value and sells them again above their 
 value. One would have fancied it obvious that a man 
 whose whole occupation was based on what in his own 
 language is called swindling, if it is done under other con- 
 ditions, ought to be ashamed of his position, and could not 
 any way, while he continues a merchant, profess himself a 
 Christian or a liberal. 
 
 But the sophistry of hypocrisy reasons that the merchant 
 can pass for a virtuous man without giving up his per- 
 nicious course of action ; a religious man need only have 
 faith and a liberal man need only promote the modification 
 of external conditions — the progress of industry. And so 
 we see the merchant (who often goes further and commits 
 acts of direct dishonesty, selling adulterated goods, using 
 false weights and measures, and trading in products injuri- 
 ous to health, such as alcohol and opium) boldly regarding 
 himself and being regarded by others, so long as he does 
 not directly deceive his colleagues in business, as a pattern 
 of probity and virtue. And if he spends a thousandth part 
 of his stolen wealth on some public institution, a hospital 
 or museum or school, then he is even regarded as the bene- 
 factor of the people on the exploitation and corruption of 
 whom his whole prosperity has been founded ; if he sacri- 
 fices, too, a portion of his ill-gotten gains on a Church and 
 the poor, then he is an exemplary Christian. 
 
 A manufacturer is a man whose whole income consists of 
 value squeezed out of the workmen, and whose whole occu- 
 pation is based on forced, unnatural labor, exhausting 
 whole generations of men. It would seem obvious that if 
 
IS WITHIN YOU." 
 
 339 
 
 this man professes any Christian or liberal principles, he 
 must first of all give up ruining human lives for his own 
 profit. But by the existing theory he is promoting indus- 
 try, and he ought not to abandon his pursuit. It would 
 even be injuring society for him to do so. And so we see 
 this man, the harsh slave-driver of thousands of men, build- 
 ing almshouses with little gardens two yards square for the 
 workmen broken down in toiling for him, and a bank, and 
 a poorhouse, and a hospital — fully persuaded that he has 
 amply expiated in this way for all the human lives morally 
 and physically ruined by him — and calmly going on with 
 his business, taking pride in it. 
 
 Any civil, religious, or military official in government 
 employ, who serves the state from vanity, or, as is most 
 often the case, simply for the sake of the pay wrung from 
 the harassed and toilworn working classes (all taxes, how- 
 ever raised, always fall on labor), if he, as is very seldom 
 the case, does not directly rob the government in the usual 
 way, considers himself, and is considered by his fellows, as 
 a most useful and virtuous member of society. 
 
 A judge or a public prosecutor knows that through his 
 sentence or his prosecution hundreds or thousands of poor 
 wretches are at once torn from their families and thrown 
 into prison, where they may go out of their minds, kill 
 themselves with pieces of broken glass, or starve them- 
 selves ; he knows that they have wives and mothers and 
 children, disgraced and made miserable by separation from 
 them, vainly begging for pardon for them or some allevia- 
 tion of their sentence, and this judge f)r this prosecutor is 
 so hardened in his hypocrisy that he and his fellows and 
 his wife and his household are all fully convinced that he 
 may be a most exemplary man. According to the meta- 
 physics of hypocrisy it is held that he is doing a work of 
 public utility. And this man who has ruined hundreds, 
 thousands of men, who curse him and are driven to despera- 
 
34 ° 
 
 “ THE KINGDOM OF GOD 
 
 tion by his action, goes to mass, a smile of shining benevo- 
 lence on his smooth face, in perfect faith in good and in 
 God, listens to the Gospel, caresses his children, preaches 
 moral principles to them, and is moved by imaginary 
 sufferings. 
 
 All these men and those who depend on them, their 
 wives, tutors, children, cooks, actors, jockeys, and so on, 
 are living on the blood which by one means or another, 
 through one set of blood-suckers or another, is drawn out 
 of the working class, and every day their pleasures cost 
 hundreds or thousands of days of labor. They see the 
 sufferings and privations of these laborers and their chil- 
 dren, their aged, their wives, and their sick, they know the 
 punishments inflicted on those who resist this organized 
 plunder, and far from decreasing, far from concealing their 
 luxury, they insolently display it before these oppressed 
 laborers who hate them, as though intentionally provoking 
 them with the pomp of their parks and palaces, their 
 theaters, hunts, and races. At the same time they continue 
 to persuade themselves and others that they are all much 
 concerned about the welfare of these working classes, 
 whom they have always trampled under their feet, and on 
 Sundays, richly dressed, they drive in sumptuous carriages 
 to the houses of God built in very mockery of Christianity, 
 and there listen to men, trained to this work of deception, 
 who in white neckties or in brocaded vestments, according 
 to their denomination, preach the love for their neighbor 
 which they all gainsay in their lives. And these people 
 have so entered into their part that they seriously believe 
 that they really are what they pretend to be. 
 
 The universal hypocrisy has so entered into the flesh 
 and blood of all classes of our modern society, it has 
 reached such a pitch that nothing in that way can rouse 
 indignation. Hypocrisy in the Greek means “ acting,” and 
 acting — playing a part — is always possible. The represent- 
 
/S WJTHTN YOU." 
 
 341 
 
 atives of Christ give their blessing to the ranks of 
 murderers holding their guns loaded against their brothers ; 
 “for prayer ” priests, ministers of various Christian sects 
 are always present, as indispensably as the hangman, at 
 executions, and sanction by their presence the compati- 
 bility of murder with Christianity (a clergyman assisted at 
 the attempt at murder by electricity in America) — but such 
 facts cause no one any surprise. 
 
 There was recently held at Petersburg an international 
 exhibition of instruments of torture, handcuffs, models of 
 solitary cells, that is to say instruments of torture worse 
 than knouts or rods, and sensitive ladies and gentlemen 
 went and amused themselves by looking at them. 
 
 No one is surprised that together with its recognition of 
 liberty, equality, and fraternity, liberal science should prove 
 the necessity of war, punishment, customs, the censure, the 
 regulation of prostitution, the exclusion of cheap foreign 
 laborers, the hindrance of emigration, the justifiableness 
 of colonization, based on poisoning and destroying whole 
 races of men called savages, and so on. 
 
 People talk of the time when all men shall profess what 
 is called Christianity (that is, various professions of faith 
 hostile to one another), when all shall be well-fed and 
 clothed, when all shall be united from one end of the 
 world to the other by telegraphs and telephones, and be 
 able to communicate by balloons, when all the working 
 classes are permeated by socialistic doctrines, when the 
 Trades Unions possess so many millions of members and 
 so many millions of rubles, when everyone is educated and 
 all can read newspapers and learn all the sciences. 
 
 But what good or useful thing can come of all these im- 
 provements, if men do not speak and act in accordance 
 with what they believe to be the truth ? 
 
 The condition of men is the result of their disunion. 
 Their disunion results from their not following the truth 
 
342 
 
 THE KINGDOM OF GOD 
 
 which is one, but falsehoods which are many. The sole 
 means of uniting men is their union in the truth. And 
 therefore the more sincerely men strive toward the truth, 
 the nearer they get to unity. 
 
 But how can men be united in the truth or even approx- 
 imate to it, if they do not even express the truth they know, 
 but hold that there is no need to do so, and pretend to 
 regard as truth what they believe to be false ? 
 
 And therefore no improvement is possible so long as 
 men are hypocritical and hide the truth from themselves, 
 so long as they do not recognize that their union and there- 
 fore their welfare is only possible in the truth, and do not 
 put the recognition and profession of the truth revealed 
 --to them higher than everything else. 
 
 All the material improvements that religious and scien- 
 tific men can dream of may be accomplished ; all men may 
 accept Christianity, and all the reforms desired by the 
 Bellamys may be brought about with every possible addi- 
 tion and improvement,., but if the hypocrisy which rules 
 nowadays still exists, if men do not profess the truth they 
 know, but continue to feign belief in what they do not be- 
 lieve and veneration for what they do not respect, their 
 condition will remain the same, or even grow worse and 
 worse. The more men are freed from privation ; the more 
 telegraphs, telephones, books, papers, and journals there 
 are ; the more means there will be of diffusing inconsistent 
 lies and hypocrisies, and the more disunited and conse- 
 quently miserable will men become, which indeed is what 
 we see actually taking place. 
 
 All these material reforms ma)'^ be realized, but the posi- 
 tion of humanity will not be improved. But only let each 
 man, according to his powers, at once realize in his life the 
 truth he knows, or at least cease to support the falsehoods 
 he is supporting in the place of the truth, and at once, in 
 this year 1 893,5 we should see such reforms as we do not 
 
IS WITHIN YOU. 
 
 343 
 
 dare to hope for within a century — the emancipation of 
 men and the reign of truth upon earth. 
 
 Not without good reason was Christ’s only harsh and 
 threatening reproof directed against hypocrites and hypoc- 
 risy. It is not theft nor robbery nor murder nor fornica- 
 tion, but falsehood, the special falsehood of hypocrisy, 
 which corrupts men, brutalizes them and makes them vin- 
 dictive, destroys all distinction between right and wrong in 
 their conscience, deprives them of what is the true meaning 
 of all real human life, and debars them from all progress 
 toward perfection. 
 
 Those who do evil through ignorance of the truth pro- 
 voke sympathy with their victims and repugnance for their 
 actions, they do harm only to those they attack ; but those 
 who know the truth and do evil masked by hypocrisy, 
 injure themselves and their victims, and thousands of other 
 men as well who are led astray by the falsehood with which 
 the wrongdoing is disguised. 
 
 Thieves, robbers, murderers, and cheats, who commit 
 crimes recognized by themselves and everyone else as evil, 
 serve as an example of what ought not to be done, and 
 deter others from similar crimes. But those who commit 
 the same thefts, robberies, murders, and other crimes, dis- 
 guising them under all kinds of religious or scientific or 
 humanitarian justifications, as all landowners, merchants, 
 manufacturers, and government officials do, provoke others 
 to imitation, and so do harm not only to those who are 
 directly the victims of their crimes, but to thousands and 
 millions of men whom they corrupt by obliterating their 
 sense of the distinction between right and wrong. 
 
 A single fortune gained by trading in goods necessary to 
 the people or in goods pernicious in their effects, or by 
 financial speculations, or by acquiring land at a low price 
 the value of which is increased by the needs of the popula- 
 tion, or by an industry ruinous to the health and life of 
 
344 
 
 •' THE KINGDOM OF GOD 
 
 those employed in it, or by military or civil service of the 
 state, or by any employment which trades on men’s evil 
 iivstincts — a single fortune acquired in any of these ways, 
 not only with the sanction, but even with the approbation 
 of the leading men in society, and masked with an ostenta- 
 tion of philanthropy, corrupts men incomparably more than 
 millions of thefts and robberies committed against the 
 recognized forms of law and punishable as crimes. 
 
 A single execution carried out by prosperous educated 
 men uninfluenced by passion, with the approbation and 
 assistance of Christian ministers, and represented as some- 
 thing necessary and even just, is infinitely more corrupting 
 and brutalizing to men than thousands of murders com- 
 mitted by uneducated working people under the influence 
 of passion. An execution such as was proposed by Jou- 
 kovsky, which would produce even a sentiment of religious 
 emotion in the spectators, would be one of the most per. 
 verting actions imaginable. {See vol. iv. of the works of 
 Joukovsky.) 
 
 Every war, even the most humanely conducted, with all 
 its ordinary consequences, the destruction of harvests, 
 robberies, the license and debauchery, and the murder with 
 the justifications of its necessity and justice, the exaltation 
 and glorification of military exploits, the worship of the 
 flag, the patriotic sentiments, the feigned solicitude for the 
 wounded, and so on, does more in one year to pervert men’s 
 minds than thousands of robberies, murders, and arsons 
 perpetrated during hundreds of years by individual men 
 under the influence of passion. 
 
 The luxurious expenditure of a single respectable and 
 so-called honorable family, even within the conventional 
 limits, consuming as it does the produce of as many days 
 of labor as would suffice to provide for thousands living in 
 privation near, does more to pervert men’s minds than 
 thousands of the violent orgies of coarse tradespeople. 
 
/S WITHIN YOU." 345 
 
 officers, and workmen of drunken and debauched habits, 
 who smash up glasses and crockery for amusement. 
 
 One solemn religious procession, one service, one sermon 
 from the altar-steps or the pulpit, in which the preacher 
 does not believe, produces incomparably more evil than 
 thousands of swindling tricks, adulteration of food, and so 
 on. 
 
 We talk of the hypocrisy of the Pharisees. But the 
 hypocrisy of our society far surpasses the comparatively 
 innocent hypocrisy of the Pharisees. They had at least an 
 external religious law, the fulfillment of which hindered 
 them from seeing their obligations to their neighbors. 
 Moreover, these obligations were not nearly so clearly 
 defined in their day. Nowadays we have no such religious 
 law to exonerate us from our duties to our neighbors ( I am 
 not speaking now of the coarse and ignorant persons who 
 still fancy their sins can be absolved by confession to a 
 priest or by the absolution of the Pope). On the contrary, 
 the law of the Gospel which we all profess in one form or 
 another directly defines these duties. Besides, the duties 
 which had then been only vaguely and mystically expressed 
 by a few prophets have now been so clearly formulated, 
 have become such truisms, that they are repeated even by 
 schoolboys and journalists. And so it would seem that 
 men of to-day cannot pretend that they do not know these 
 duties. 
 
 A man of the modern world who profits by the order of 
 things based on violence, and at the same time protests 
 that he loves his neighbor and does not observe what he is 
 doing in his daily life to his neighbor, is like a brigand who 
 has spent his life in robbing men, and who, caught at last, 
 knife in hand, in the very act of striking his shrieking 
 victim, should declare that he had no idea that what he was 
 doing was disagreeable to the man he had robbed and was 
 prepared to murder. Just as this robber and murderer 
 
346 
 
 THE KINGDOM OF GOD 
 
 could not deny what was evident to everyone, so it would 
 seem that a man living upon the privations of the oppressed 
 classes cannot persuade himself and others that he desires 
 the welfare of those he plunders, and that he does not 
 know how the advantages he enjoys are obtained. 
 
 It is impossible to convince ourselves that we do not 
 know that there are a hundred thousand men in prison in 
 Russia alone to guarantee the security of our property and 
 tranquillity, and that we do not know of the law tribunals 
 in which we take part, and which, at our initiative, condemn 
 those who have attacked our property or our security to 
 prison, exile, or forced labor, whereby men no worse than 
 those who condemn them are ruined and corrupted ; or 
 that we do not know that we only possess all that we do 
 possess because it has been acquired and is defended for us 
 by murder and violence. 
 
 We cannot pretend that we do not see the armed police- 
 man who marches up and down beneath our windows to 
 guarantee our security while we eat our luxurious dinner, 
 or look at the new piece at the theater, or that we are 
 unaware of the existence of the soldiers who will make 
 their appearance with guns and cartridges directly our 
 property is attacked. 
 
 We know very well that we are only allowed to go on 
 eating our dinner, to finish seeing the new play, or to enjoy 
 to the end the ball, the Christmas fete, the promenade, the 
 races or the hunt, thanks to the policeman’s revolver or 
 the soldier’s rifle, which will shoot down the famished out- 
 cast who has been robbed of his share, and who looks 
 round the corner with covetous eyes at our pleasures, 
 ready to interrupt them instantly, were not the policeman 
 and the soldier there prepared to run up at our first call 
 for help. 
 
 And therefore just as a brigand caught in broad daylight 
 in the act cannot persuade us that he did not lift his knife 
 
/S WITHIN YOU: 
 
 347 
 
 in order to rob his victim of his purse, and had no thought 
 of killing him, we too, it would seem, cannot persuade our- 
 selves or others that the soldiers and policemen around us 
 are not to guard us, but only for defense against foreign 
 foes, and to regulate traffic and fetes and reviews ; we 
 cannot persuade ourselves and others that we do not know 
 that men do not like dying of hunger, bereft of the right 
 to gain their subsistence from the earth on which they live ; 
 that they do not like working underground, in the water, 
 or in stifling heat, for ten to fourteen hours a day, at 
 night in factories to manufacture objects for our pleasure. 
 One would imagine it impossible to deny what is so obvious. 
 Yet it is denied. 
 
 Still, there are, among the rich, especially among the 
 young, and among women, persons whom I am glad to 
 meet more and more frequently, who, when they are shown 
 in what way and at what cost their pleasures are purchased, 
 do not try to conceal the truth, but hiding their heads in 
 their hands, cry : “ Ah ! don’t speak of that. If it is so, 
 life is impossible.” But though there are such sincere 
 people who even though they cannot renounce their fault, 
 at least see it, the vast majority of the men of the modern 
 world have so entered into the parts they play in their 
 hypocrisy that they boldly deny what is staring everyone in 
 the face. 
 
 “ All that is unjust,” they say ; “ no one forces the people 
 to work for the landowners and manufacturers. That is an 
 affair of free contract. Great properties and fortunes are 
 necessary, because they provide and organize work for the 
 working classes. And labor in the factories and workshops 
 is not at all the terrible thing you make it out to be. Even 
 if there are some abuses in factories, the government and 
 the public are taking steps to obviate them and to make 
 the labor of the factory workers much easier, and even 
 agreeable. The working classes are accustomed to physical 
 
348 
 
 “ THE KINGDOM OF GOD 
 
 labor, and are, so far, fit for nothing else. The poverty of 
 the people is not the result of private property in land, nor 
 of capitalistic oppression, but of other causes : it is the 
 result of the ignorance, brutality, and intemperance of 
 the people. And we men in authority who are striving 
 against this impoverishment of the people by wise legisla- 
 tion, we capitalists who are combating it by the extension 
 of useful inventions, we clergymen by religious instruc- 
 tion, and we liberals by the formation of trades unions, 
 and the diffusion of education, are in this way increasing 
 the prosperity of the people without changing our own 
 positions. We do not want all to be as poor as the poor ; 
 we want all to be as rich as the rich. As for the assertion 
 that men are ill treated and murdered to force them to 
 work for the profit of the rich, that is a sophism. The 
 army is only called out against the mob, when the people, in 
 ignorance of their own interests, make disturbances and 
 destroy the tranquillity necessary for the public welfare. 
 In the same way, too, it is necessary to keep in restraint 
 the malefactors for whom the prisons and gallows are 
 established. We ourselves wish to suppress these forms of 
 punishment and are working in that direction.” 
 
 ' Hypocrisy in our day is supported on two sides : by 
 false religion and by false science. And it has reached 
 such proportions that if we wei'e not living in its midst, we 
 could not believe that men could attain such a pitch of 
 
 Lself-deception. Men of the present day have come into 
 such an extraordinary condition, their hearts are so 
 hardened, that seeing they see not, hearing they do not 
 hear, and understand not. 
 
 Men have long been living in antagonism to their con- 
 science. If it were not for hypocrisy they could not go on 
 living such a life. This social organization in opposition 
 to their conscience only continues to exist because it is dis- 
 guised by hypocris}'. 
 
IS WITHIN YOU. 
 
 349 
 
 And the greater the divergence between actual life and 
 men’s conscience, the greater the extension of hypocrisy. 
 But even hypocrisy has its limits. And it seems to me 
 that we have reached those limits in the present da3\ 
 
 Every man of the present day with the Christian princi- 
 ples assimilated involuntarily in his conscience, finds him- 
 self in precisely the position of a man asleep who dreams 
 that he is obliged to do something which even in his dream 
 he knows he ought not to do. He knows this in the depths 
 of his conscience, and all the same he seems unable to 
 change his position ; he cannot stop and cease doing what 
 he ought not to do. And just as in a dream, his position 
 becoming more and more painful, at last reaches such a 
 pitch of intensity that he begins sometimes to doubt the 
 reality of what is passing and makes a moral effort to shake 
 off the nightmare which is oppressing him. 
 
 This is just the condition of the average man of our 
 Christian society. He feels that all that he does himself 
 and that is done around him is something absurd, hideous, 
 impossible, and opposed to his conscience ; he feels that his 
 position is becoming more and more unendurable and 
 reaching a crisis of intensity. 
 
 It is not possible that we modern men, with the Christian 
 sense of human dignity and equality permeating us soul 
 and body, with our need for peaceful association and unity 
 between nations, should really go on living in such a way 
 that every joy, every gratification we have is bought by 
 the sufferings, by the lives of our brother men, and more- 
 over, that we should be every instant within a hair’s-breadth 
 of falling on one another, nation against nation, like wild 
 beasts, mercilessly destroying men’s lives and labor, only 
 because some benighted diplomatist or ruler says or writes 
 some stupidity to another equally benighted diplomatist or 
 ruler. 
 
 It is impossible. Yet every man of our day sees that 
 
35 ° 
 
 “ THE KINGDOM OF GOD 
 
 this is so and awaits the calamity. And the situation 
 becomes more and more insupportable. 
 
 And as the man who is dreaming does not believe that 
 what appears to him can be truly the reality and tries to 
 wake up to the actual real world again, so the average man 
 of modern days cannot in the bottom of his heart believe 
 that the awful position in which he is placed and which is 
 growing worse and worse can be the reality, and tries to 
 wake up to a true, real life, as it exists in his conscience. 
 
 And just as the dreamer need only make a moral effort 
 and ask himself, “ Isn’t it a dream?” and the situation 
 which seemed to him so hopeless will instantly disappear, 
 and he will wake up to peaceful and happy reality, so the 
 man of the modern world need only make a moral effort to 
 doubt the reality presented to him by his own hypocrisy 
 and the general hypocrisy around him, and to ask himself, 
 ‘‘Isn’t it all a delusion ?” and he will at once, like the 
 dreamer awakened, feel himself transported from an imag- 
 inary and dreadful world to the true, calm, and happy 
 reality. 
 
 And to do this a man need accomplish no great feats or 
 exploits. He need only make a moral effort. 
 
 But can a man make this effort ? 
 
 . According to the existing theory so essential to support 
 hypocrisy, man is not free and cannot change his life. 
 
 “ Man cannot change his life, because he is not free. He 
 is not free, because all his actions are conditioned by pre- 
 viously existing causes. And whatever the man may do 
 there are always some causes or other through which he 
 does these or those acts, and therefore man cannot be free 
 and change his life,” say the champions of the metaphysics 
 of hypocrisy. And they would be perfectly right if man 
 were a creature without conscience and incapable of mov- 
 ing toward the truth ; that is to say, if after recognizing 
 a new truth, man always remained at the same stage of 
 
/5 WITHIN YOU. 
 
 35 1 
 
 moral development. But man is a creature with a con- 
 science and capable of attaining a higher and higher 
 degree of truth. And therefore even if man is not free 
 as regards performing these or those acts because there 
 exists a previous cause for every act, the very causes of 
 his acts, consisting as they do for the man of conscience of 
 the recognition of this or that truth, are within his own 
 control. 
 
 So that though man may not be free as regards the 
 performance of his actions, he is free as regards the foun- 
 dation on which they are performed. Just as the mechan- 
 ician who is not free to modify the movement of his loco- 
 motive when it is in motion, is free to regulate the machine 
 beforehand so as to determine what the m.ovement is to be. 
 
 Whatever the conscious man does, he acts just as he 
 does, and not otherwise, only because he recognizes that to 
 act as he is acting is in accord with the truth, or because 
 he has recognized it at some previous time, and is now 
 only through inertia, through habit, acting in accordance 
 with his previous recognition of truth. 
 
 In any case, the cause of his action is not to be found in 
 any given previous fact, but in the consciousness of a given 
 relation to truth, and the consequent recognition of this or 
 that fact as a sufficient basis for action. 
 
 Whether a man eats or does not eat, works or rests, runs 
 risks or avoids them, if he has a conscience he acts thus 
 only because he considers it right and rational, because he 
 considers that to act thus is in harmony with truth, or else 
 because he has made this reflection in the past. 
 
 The recognition or non-recognition of a certain truth 
 depends not on external causes, but on certain other causes 
 within the man himself. So that at times under external 
 conditions apparently very favorable for the recognition of 
 truth, one man will not recognize it, and another, on the 
 contrary, under the most unfavorable conditions will, with- 
 
352 
 
 “ THE KINGDOM OF GOD 
 
 out apparent cause, recognize it. As it is said in the Gos- 
 pel, “ No man can come unto me, except the Father which 
 hath sent me draw him.” That is to say, the recognition of 
 truth, which is the cause of all the manifestations of human 
 life, does not depend on external phenomena, but on certain 
 inner spiritual characteristics of the man which escape our 
 observation. 
 
 And therefore man, though not free in his acts, always 
 feels himself free in what is the motive of his acts — the 
 recognition or non-recognition of truth. And he feels him- 
 self independent not only of facts external to his own per- 
 sonality, but even of his own actions. 
 
 Thus a man who under the influence of passion has 
 committed an act contrary to the truth he recognizes, 
 remains none the less free to recognize it or not to recog- 
 nize it ; that is, he can by refusing to recognize the truth 
 regard his action as necessary and justifiable, or he may 
 recognize the truth and regard his act as wrong and censure 
 himself for it. 
 
 Thus a gambler or a drunkard who does not resist temp- 
 tation and yields to his passion is still free to recognize 
 gambling and drunkenness as wrong or to regard them as a 
 harmless pastime. In the first case even if he does not at 
 once get over his passion, he gets the more free from it the 
 more sincerely he recognizes the truth about it ; in the 
 second case he will be strengthened in his vice and will 
 deprive himself of every possibility of shaking it off. 
 
 In the same way a man who has made his escape alone 
 from a house on fire, not having had the courage to save his 
 friend, remains free, recognizing the truth that a man ought 
 to save the life of another even at the risk of his own, to 
 regard his action as bad and to censure himself for it, or, 
 not recognizing this truth, to regard his action as natural 
 and necessauy and to justify it to himself. In the first 
 case, if he recognizes the truth in spite of his departure 
 
75 WITHIN YOU." 
 
 353 
 
 from it, he prepares for himself in the future a whole series 
 of acts of self-sacrifice necessarily flowing from this recog- 
 nition of the truth ; in the second case, a whole series of 
 egoistic acts. 
 
 Not that a man is always free to recognize or to refuse 
 to recognize every truth. There are truths which he has 
 recognized long before or which have been handed down to 
 him by education and tradition and accepted by him on 
 faith, and to follow these truths has become a habit, a second 
 nature with him ; and there are truths, only vaguely, as it 
 were distantly, apprehended by him. The man is not free 
 to refuse to recognize the first, nor to recognize the second 
 class of truths. But there are truths of a third kind, which 
 have not yet become an unconscious motive of action, but 
 yet have been revealed so clearly to him that he cannot 
 pass them by, and is inevitably obliged to do one thing or 
 the other, to recognize or not to recognize them. And it 
 is in regard to these truths that the man’s freedom mani- 
 fests itself. 
 
 Every man during his life finds himself in regard to 
 truth in the position of a man walking in the darkness with 
 light thrown before him by the lantern he carries. He 
 does not see what is not yet lighted up by the lantern ; he 
 does not see what he has passed which is hidden in the 
 darkness ; but at every stage of his journey he sees what 
 is lighted up by the lantern, and he can always choose one 
 side or the other of the road. 
 
 There are always unseen truths not yet revealed to the 
 man’s intellectual vision, and there are other truths out- 
 lived, forgotten, and assimilated by him, and there are also 
 certain truths that rise up before the light of his reason 
 and require his recognition. And it is in the recognition 
 or non-recognition of these truths that what w'e call his 
 freedom is manifested. 
 
 All the difficulty and seeming insolubility of the question 
 
354 
 
 “ THE KINGDOM OF GOD 
 
 of the freedom of man results from those who tried to 
 solve the question imagining man as stationary in his re- 
 lation to the truth, 
 
 Man is certainly not free if we imagine him stationary, 
 and if we forget that the life of a man and of humanity is 
 nothing but a continual movement from darkness into light, 
 from a lower stage of truth to a higher, from a truth more 
 alloyed with errors to a truth more purified from them. 
 
 Man would not be free if he knew no truth at all, and in 
 the same way he would not be free and would not even 
 have any idea of freedom if the whole truth which was to 
 guide him in life had been revealed once for all to him in 
 all its purity without any admixture of error. 
 
 But man is not stationary in regard to truth, but every 
 individual man as he passes through life, and humanity as 
 a whole in the same way, is continually learning to know 
 a greater and greater degree of truth, and growing more 
 and more free from error. 
 
 And therefore men are in a threefold relation to truth. 
 Some truths have been so assimilated by them that they 
 have become the unconscious basis of action, others are 
 only just on the point of being revealed to him, and a 
 third class, though not yet assimilated by him, have been 
 revealed to him with sufficient clearness to force him to 
 decide either to recognize them or to refuse to recognize 
 them. 
 
 These, then, are the truths which man is free to recog- 
 nize or to refuse to recognize. 
 
 The liberty of man does not consist in the power of act- 
 ing independently of the progress of life and the influences 
 arising from it, but in the capacity for recognizing and 
 acknowledging the truth revealed to him, and becoming 
 the free and joyful participator in the eternal and infinite 
 work of God, the life of the world ; or on the other hand 
 for refusing to recognize the truth, and so being a miser- 
 
/S WITHIN YOU." 355 
 
 able and reluctant slave dragged whither he has no desire 
 to go. 
 
 Truth not only points out the way along which human 
 life ought to move, but reveals also the only way along 
 which it can move. And therefore all men must willingly 
 or unwillingly move along the way of truth, some spon- 
 taneously accomplishing the task set them in life, others 
 submitting involuntarily to the law of life. Man’s freedom 
 lies in the power of this choice. 
 
 This freedom within these narrow limits seems so 
 insignificant to men that they do not notice it. Some — 
 the determinists — consider this amount of freedom so 
 trifling that they do not recognize it at all. Others — the 
 champions of complete free will — keep their eyes fixed on 
 their hypothetical free will and neglect this which seemed 
 to them such a trivial degree of freedom. 
 
 This freedom, confined between the limits of complete 
 ignorance of the truth and a recognition of a part of the 
 truth, seems hardly freedom at all, especially since, 
 whether a man is willing or unwilling to recognize the 
 truth revealed to him, he will be inevitably forced to carry 
 it out in life. 
 
 A horse harnessed with others to a cart is not free to 
 refrain from moving the cart. If he does not move for- 
 ward the cart will knock him down and go on dragging 
 him with it, whether he will or not. But the horse is free 
 to drag the cart himself or to be dragged with it. And so 
 it is with man. 
 
 Whether this is a great or small degree of freedom in com- 
 parison with the fantastic liberty we should like to have, it 
 is the only freedom that really exists, and in it consists the 
 only happiness attainable by man. 
 
 And more than that, this freedom is the sole means of 
 accomplishing the divine work of the life of the world. 
 
 According to Christ’s doctrine, the man who sees the sig- 
 
356 
 
 •' THE KINGDOM OF GOD 
 
 nificance of life in the domain in which it is not free, in the 
 domain of effects, that is, of acts, has not the true life. 
 According to the Christian doctrine, that man is living in 
 the truth who has transported his life to the domain in 
 which it is free — the domain of causes, that is, the knowl- 
 edge and recognition, the profession and realization in life 
 of revealed truth. 
 
 Devoting his life to works of the flesh, a man busies him- 
 self with actions depending on temporary causes outside 
 himself. He himself does nothing really, he merely seems 
 to be doing something. In reality all the acts v'hich seem 
 to be his are the work of a higher power, and he is not the 
 creator of his own life, but the slave of it. Devoting his 
 life to the recognition and fulfillment of the truth revealed 
 to him, he identifies himself with the source of universal life 
 and accomplishes acts not personal, and dependent on con- 
 ditions of space and time, but acts unconditioned by pre- 
 vious causes, acts which constitute the causes of everything 
 else, and have an infinite, unlimited significance. 
 
 “The kingdom of heaven sufferetli violence, and the vio- 
 lent take it by force.’’ (Matt. xi. 12.) 
 
 It is this violent effort to rise above external conditions 
 to the recognition and realization of truth by which the 
 kingdom of heaven is taken, and it is this effort of violence 
 which must and can be made in our times. 
 
 Men need only understand this, they need only cease to 
 trouble themselves about the general external conditions in 
 which they are not free, and devote one-hundredth part of 
 the energy they waste on those material things to that in 
 which they are free, to the recognition and realization of 
 the truth which is before them, and to the liberation of them- 
 selves and others from deception and hypocrisy, and, with- 
 out effort or conflict, there would be an end at once of the 
 false organization of life which makes men miserable, and 
 threatens them with worse calamities in the future. And 
 
75 WITHIN YOU." 
 
 357 
 
 then the kingdom of God would be realized, or at least that 
 first stage of it for which men are ready now by the degree 
 of development of their conscience. 
 
 Just as a single shock may be sufficient, when a liquid is 
 saturated with some salt, to precipitate it at once in crystals, 
 a slight effort may be perhaps all that is needed now that 
 the truth already revealed to men may gain a mastery over 
 hundreds, thousands, millions of men, that a public opinion 
 consistent with conscience may be established, and through 
 this change of public opinion the whole order of life may be 
 transformed. And it depends upon us to make this effort. 
 
 Let each of us only try to understand and accept the 
 Christian truth which in the most varied forms surrounds 
 us on all sides and forces itself upon us; let us only cease 
 from lying and pretending that Ave do not see this truth or 
 wish to realize it, at least in what it demands from us above 
 all else; only let us accept and boldly profess the truth to 
 which Ave are called, and Ave should find at once that hun- 
 dreds, thousands, millions of men are in the same position 
 as Ave, that they see the truth as Ave do, and dread as Ave do 
 to stand alone in recognizing it, and like us are only Avait- 
 ing for others to recognize it also. 
 
 Only let men cease to be hypocrites, and they Avould at 
 once see that this cruel social organization, Avhich holds 
 them in bondage, and is represented to them as something 
 stable, necessary, and ordained of God, is already tottering 
 and is only propped up by the falsehood of hypocrisy, Avith 
 which Ave, and others like us, support it. 
 
 But if this is so, if it is true that it depends on us to break ' 
 doAAm the existing organization of life, have aa'c the right to ^ 
 destroy it, AAuthout knoAA-ing clearly Avhat Ave shall set up in 
 its place? What Avill become of human society Avhen the 
 existing order of things is at an end? 
 
 “What shall Ave find the other side of the Avails of the 
 world Ave are abandoning? 
 
358 
 
 “ THE KINGDOM OF GOD 
 
 “Fear will come upon us — a void, a vast emptiness, free- 
 dom — how are we to go forward not knowing whither, how 
 face loss, not seeing hope of gain? ... If Columbus had 
 reasoned thus he would never have weighed anchor. It was 
 madness to set off upon the ocean, not knowing the route, 
 on the ocean on which no one had sailed, to sail toward a 
 land whose existence was doubtful. By this madness he 
 discovered a new world. Doubtless if the peoples of the 
 world could simply transfer themselves from one furnished 
 mansion to another and better one — it would make it much 
 easier; but unluckily there is no one to get humanity’s new 
 dwelling ready for it. The future is even worse than the 
 ocean — there is nothing there — it will be what men and cir- 
 cumstances make it. 
 
 “If you are content with the old world, try to preserve it, 
 it is very sick and cannot hold out much longer. But if you 
 cannot bear to live in everlasting dissonance between your 
 beliefs and your life, thinking one thing and doing another, 
 get out of the mediaeval whited sepulchers, and face your 
 fears. I know very well it is not easy. 
 
 “It is not a little thing to cut one’s self off from all to 
 which a man has been accustomed from his birth, with 
 which he has grown up to maturity. Men are ready for 
 tremendous sacrifices,, but not for those which life demands 
 of them. Are they ready to sacrifice modern civilization, 
 their manner of life, their religion, the received conventional 
 morality? 
 
 “Are we ready to give up all the results we have attained 
 with such effort, results of which we have been boasting for 
 three centuries; to give up every convenience and charm of 
 our existence, to prefer savage youth to the senile decay of 
 civilization, to pull down the palace raised for us by our 
 ancestors only for the pleasure of having a hand in the 
 founding of a new house, which will doubtless be built long 
 after we are gone?’’ (Herzen, vol. v. p. 55.) 
 
75 WITHm YOU. 
 
 359 
 
 Thus wrote almost half a century ago the Russian writer, 
 who with prophetic insight saw clearly then, what even the 
 most unreflecting man sees to-day, the impossibility, that is, 
 of life continuing on its old basis, and the necessity of 
 establishing new forms of life. 
 
 It is clear now from the very simplest, most commonplace 
 point of view, that it is madness to remain under the roof of 
 a building which cannot support its weight, and that we 
 must leave it. And indeed it is difficult to imagine a posi- 
 tion more wretched than that of the Christian world to-day, 
 with its nations armed against one another, with its con- 
 stantly increasing taxation to maintain its armies, with the 
 hatred of the working class for the rich ever growing more 
 intense, with the Damocles sword of war forever hanging 
 over the heads of all, ready every instant to fall, certain to 
 fall sooner or later. 
 
 Hardly could any revolution be more disastrous for the 
 great mass of the population than the present order or rather 
 disorder of our life, with its daily sacrifices to exhausting 
 and unnatural toil, to poverty, drunkenness, and profligacy, 
 with all the horrors of the war that is at hand, which will 
 swallow up in one year more victims than all the revolutions 
 of the century. 
 
 What will become of humanity if each of us performs the 
 duty God demands of us through the conscience implanted 
 within us? Will not harm come if, being wholly in the 
 power of a master, I carry out, in the workshop erected and 
 directed by him, the orders he gives me, strange though 
 they may seem to me who do not know the Master’s final 
 aims? 
 
 But it is not even this question “What will happen?’’ 
 that agitates men when they hesitate to fulfill the Master’s 
 will. They are troubled by the question how to live with- 
 out those habitual conditions of life which we call civiliza- 
 tion, culture, art, and science. We feel ourselves all the 
 
“ THE KINGDOM OF GOD 
 
 360 
 
 burdensomeness of life as it is; we see also that this organi- 
 zation of life must inevitably be our ruin, if it continues. 
 At the same time we want the conditions of our life which 
 arise out of this organization — our civilization, culture, art, 
 and science — to remain intact. It is as though a man, liv- 
 ing in an old house and suffering from cold and all sorts of 
 inconvenience in it, knowing, too, that it is on the point of 
 falling to pieces, should consent to its being rebuilt, but only 
 on the condition that he should not be required to leave it: 
 a condition which is equivalent to refusing to have it rebuilt 
 at all. 
 
 “But what if I leave the house and give up every con- 
 venience for a time, and the new house is not built, or is 
 built on a different plan so that I do not find in it the com- 
 forts to which I am accustomed?’’ But seeing that the 
 materials and the builders are here, there is every likelihood 
 that the new house will on the contrary be better built than 
 the old one. And at the same time, there is not only the 
 likelihood but the certainty that the old house will fall down 
 and crush those who remain within it. Whether the old 
 habitual conditions of life are supported, or whether they 
 are abolished and altogether new and better conditions 
 arise; in any case, there is no doubt we shall be forced to 
 leave the old forms of life which have become impossible 
 and fatal, and must go forward to meet the future. 
 
 “Civilization, art, science, culture, will disappear!” 
 
 Yes, but all these we know are only various manifesta- 
 tions of truth, and the change that is before us is only to 
 be made for the sake of a closer attainment and realization 
 of truth. How then can the manifestations of truth disap- 
 pear through our realizing it? These manifestations will 
 be different, higher, better, but they will not cease to be. 
 Only what is false in them will be destroyed; all the truth 
 there was in them will only be stronger and more flour- 
 ishing. 
 
/S WITHIN YOU. 
 
 3*^ I 
 
 Take thought, oh, men, and have faith in the Gospel, in 
 whose teaching is your happiness. If you do not take 
 thought, you will perish just as the men perished, slain by 
 Pilate, or crushed by the tower of Siloam ; as millions of 
 men have perished, slayers and slain, executing and exe- 
 cuted, torturers and tortured alike, and as the man foolishly 
 perished, who filled his granaries full and made ready for a 
 long life and died the very night that he planned to begin 
 his life. Take thought and have faith in the Gospel, Christ 
 said eighteen hundred years ago, and he says it with even 
 greater force now that the calamities foretold by him have 
 come to pass, and the senselessness of our life has reached 
 the furthest point of suffering and madness. 
 
 Nowadays, after so many centuries of fruitless efforts to 
 make our life secure by the pagan organization of life, it 
 must be evident to everyone that all efforts in that direction 
 only introduce fresh dangers into personal and social life, 
 and do not render it more secure in any way. 
 
 Whatever names we dignify ourselves wdth, whatever uni- 
 forms we wear, whatever priests we anoint ourselves 
 before, however many millions we possess, however many 
 guards are stationed along our road, however many police- 
 men guard our wealth, however many so-called criminals, 
 revolutionists, and anarchists we punish, whatever exploits 
 we have performed, whatever states we may have founded, 
 fortresses and towers we may have erected — from Babel to 
 the Eiffel Tower — there are two inevitable conditions of 
 life, confronting all of us, w-hich destroy its whole meaning; 
 (i) death, which may at any moment pounce upon each of 
 us ; and (2) the transitoriness of all our works, which so soon 
 pass away and leave no trace. Whatever we may do — 
 found companies, build palaces and monuments, write songs 
 and poems — it is all not for long time. Soon it passes 
 away, leaving no trace. And therefore, however we may 
 conceal it from ourselves, we cannot help seeing that the 
 
362 
 
 THE KINGDOM OF GOD 
 
 significance of our life cannot lie in our personal fleshly 
 existence, the prey of incurable suffering and inevitable 
 death, nor in any social institution or organization. Who- 
 ever you may be who are reading these lines, think of your 
 position and of your duties — not of your position as land- 
 owner, merchant, judge, emperor, president, minister, 
 priest, soldier, which has been temporarily allotted you by 
 men, and not of the imaginary duties laid on you by those 
 positions, but of your real positions in eternity as a creature 
 who at the will of Someone has been called out of uncon- 
 sciousness after an eternity of non-existence to which you 
 may return at any moment at his will. Think of your 
 duties — not your supposed duties as a landowner to your 
 estate, as a merchant to your business, as emperor, minis- 
 ter, or official to the state, but of your real duties, the 
 duties that follow from your real position as a being called 
 into life and endowed with reason and love. 
 
 Are you doing what he demands of you who has sent you 
 into the world, and to whom you will soon return? Are 
 you doing what he wills? Are you doing his will, when as 
 landowner or manufacturer you rob the poor of the fruits of 
 their toil, basing your life on this plunder of the workers, 
 or when, as judge or governor, you ill treat men, sentence 
 them to execution, or when as soldiers you prepare for war, 
 kill and plunder? 
 
 You will say that the world is so made that this is inevi- 
 table, and that you do not do this of your own free will, but 
 because you are forced to do so. But can it be that you 
 have such a strong aversion to men’s sufferings, ill treat- 
 ment, and murder, that you have such an intense need of 
 love and co-operation with your fellows that you see clearly 
 that only by the recognition of the equality of all, and by 
 mutual services, can the greatest possible happiness be real- 
 ized,; that your head and your heart, the faith you profess, 
 and even science itself tell you the same thing, and yet that 
 
/S WITHIN you:' 
 
 363 
 
 in spite of it all you can be forced by some confused and 
 complicated reasoning to act in direct opposition to all this; 
 that as landowner or capitalist you are bound to base your 
 whole life on the oppression of the people ; that as emperor 
 or president you are to command armies, that is, to be the 
 head and commander of murderers ; or that as government 
 official you are forced to take from the poor their last pence 
 for rich men to profit and share them among themselves ; or 
 that as judge or juryman you could be forced to sentence 
 erring men to ill treatment and death because the truth was 
 not revealed to them, or above all, for that is the basis of 
 all the evil, that you could be forced to become a soldier, 
 and renouncing your free will and your human sentiments, 
 could undertake to kill anyone at the command of other 
 men? 
 
 It cannot be. 
 
 Even if you are told that all this is necessary for the 
 maintenance of the existing order of things, and that this 
 social order with its pauperism, famines, prisons, gallows, 
 armies, and wars is necessary to society; that still greater 
 disasters would ensue if this organization were destroyed ; 
 all that is said only by those who profit by this organiza- 
 tion, while those who suffer from it — and they are ten times 
 as numerous — think and say quite the contrary. And at 
 the bottom of your heart you know yourself that it is not 
 true, that the existing oragnization has outlived its time, 
 and must inevitably be reconstructed on new principles, 
 and that consequently there is no obligation upon you to 
 sacrifice your sentiments of humanity to support it. 
 
 Above all, even if you allow that this organization is 
 necessary, why do you believe it to be your duty to maintain 
 it at the cost of your best feelings? Who has made you the 
 nurse in charge of this sick and moribund organization? 
 Not society nor the state nor anyone; no one has asked 
 you to undertake this; you who fill your position of land- 
 
3*54 
 
 " THE KINGDOM OF GOD 
 
 owner, merchant, tzar, priest, or soldier know very well 
 that you occupy that position by no means with the unselfish 
 aim of maintaining the organization of life necessary to 
 men’s happiness, but simply in your own interests, to satisfy 
 your own covetousness or vanity or ambition or indolence 
 or cowardice. If you did not desire that position, you 
 would not be doing your utmost to retain it. Try the ex- 
 periment of ceasing to commit the cruel, treacherous, and 
 base actions that you are constantly committing in order to 
 retain your position, and you will lose it at once. Try the 
 simple experiment, as a government official, of giving up 
 lying, and refusing to take a part in executions and acts of 
 violence; as a priest, of giving up deception; as a soldier, 
 of giving up murder; as landowner or manufacturer, of giv- 
 ing up defending your property by fraud and force; and you 
 will at once lose the position which you pretend is forced 
 upon you, and which seems burdensome to you. 
 
 A man cannot be placed against his will in a situation 
 opposed to his conscience. 
 
 If you find yourself in such a position it is not because it 
 is necessary to anyone whatever, but simply because you 
 wish it. And therefore knowing that your position is re- 
 pugnant to your heart and your head, and to your faith, and 
 even to the science in which you believe, you cannot help 
 reflecting upon the question whether in retaining it, and 
 above all trying to justify it, you are doing what you ought 
 to do. 
 
 You might risk making a mistake if you had time to see 
 and retrieve your fault, and if you ran the risk for some- 
 thing of some value. But when you know beyond all doubt 
 that you may disappear any minute, without the least possi- 
 bility either for yourself or those you draw after you into 
 your error, of retrieving the mistake, when you know that 
 whatever you may do in the external organization of life it 
 v/ill all disappear as quickly and surely as you will yourself. 
 
rs WITHIN YOU. 
 
 365 
 
 and will leave no trace behind, it is clear that you have no 
 reasonable ground for running the risk of such a fearful 
 mistake. 
 
 It would be perfectly simple and clear if you did not by 
 your hypocrisy disguise the truth which has so unmistakably 
 been revealed to us. 
 
 Share all that you have with others, do not heap up 
 riches, do not steal, do not cause suffering, do not kill, dp 
 not unto others what you would not they should do unto 
 you, all that has been said not eighteen hundred, but five 
 thousand years ago, and there could be no doubt of the truth 
 of this law if it were not for hypocrisy. Except for hypoc- 
 risy men could not have failed, if not to put the law in prac- 
 tice, at least to recognize it, and admit that it is wrong not 
 to put it in practice. 
 
 But you will say that there is the public good to be con- 
 sidered, and that on that account one must not and ought 
 not to conform to these principles; for the public good one 
 may commit acts of violence and murder. It is better for 
 one man to die than that the whole people perish, you will 
 say like Caiaphas, and you sign the sentence of death of 
 one man, of a second, and a third; you load your gun 
 against this man who is to perish for the public good, you 
 imprison him, you take his possessions. You say that you 
 commit these acts of cruelty because you are a part of the 
 society and of the state; that it is your duty to serve them, 
 and as landowner, judge, emperor, or soldier to conform to 
 their laws. But besides belonging to the state and having 
 duties created by that position, you belong also to eternity 
 and to God, who also lays duties upon you. And just as 
 your duties to your family and to society are subordinate to 
 your superior duties to the state, in the same way the latter 
 must necessarily be subordinated to the duties dictated to 
 you by the eternal life and by God. And just as it would 
 be senseless to pull up the telegraph posts for fuel for a 
 
366 
 
 THE KINGDOM OF GOD 
 
 family or society and thus to increase its welfare at the 
 expense of public interests, in the same way it is senseless 
 to do violence, to execute, and to murder to increase the 
 welfare of the nation, because that is at the expense of the 
 interests of humanity. 
 
 Your duties as a citizen cannot but be subordinated to 
 the superior obligations of the eternal life of God, and can- 
 not be in opposition to them. As Christ’s disciples said 
 eighteen centuries ago; “Whether it be right in the sight of 
 God to hearken unto you more than unto God, judge ye’’ 
 (Acts iv. 19); and, “We ought to obey God rather than 
 men’’ (Acts v. 29). 
 
 It is asserted that, in order that the unstable order of 
 things, established in one corner of the world for a few men, 
 may not be destroyed, you ought to commit acts of violence 
 which destroy the eternal and immutable order established 
 by God and by reason. Can that possibly be? 
 
 And therefore you cannot but reflect on your position as 
 landowner, manufacturer, judge, emperor, president, minis- 
 ter, priest, and soldier, which is bound up with violence, 
 deception, and murder, and recognize its unlawfulness. 
 
 I do not say that if you are a landowner you are bound 
 to give up your lands immediately to the poor; if a capital- 
 ist or manufacturer, your money to your workpeople; or 
 that if you are Tzar, minister, official, judge, or general, 
 you are bound to renounce immediately the advantages of 
 your position ; or if a soldier, on whom all the system of 
 violence is based, to refuse immediately to obey in spite of 
 all the dangers of insubordination. 
 
 If you do so, you will be doing the best thing possible. 
 But it may happen, and it is most likely, that you will not 
 have the strength to do so. You have relations, a family, 
 subordinates and superiors; you are under an influence so 
 powerful that you cannot shake it off; but you can always 
 recognize the truth and refuse to tell a lie about it. You 
 
/S WITHIN- YOU" 
 
 3<^7 
 
 need not declare that you are remaining a landowner, manu- 
 facturer, merchant, artist, or writer because it is useful to 
 mankind; that you are governor, prosecutor, or tzar, not 
 because it is agreeable to you, because you are used to it, 
 but for the public good ; that you continue to be a soldier, 
 not from fear of punishment, but because you consider the 
 army necessary to society. You can always avoid lying in 
 this way to yourself and to others, and you ought to do so; 
 because the one aim of your life ought to be to purify your- 
 self from falsehood and to confess the truth. And you 
 need only do that and your situation will change directly of 
 itself. 
 
 There is one thing, and only one thing, in which it is 
 granted to you to be free in life, all else being beyond your 
 power: that is to recognize and profess the truth. 
 
 And yet simply from the fact that other men as misguided 
 and as pitiful creatures as yourself have made you soldier, 
 tzar, landowner, capitalist, priest, or general, you under- 
 take to commit acts of violence obviously opposed to your 
 reason and your heart, to base your existence on the misfor- 
 tunes of others, and above all, instead of filling the one 
 duty of your life, recognizing and professing the truth, you 
 feign not to recognize it and disguise it from yourself and 
 others. 
 
 And what are the conditions in which you are doing this? 
 You who may die any instant, you sign sentences of death, 
 you declare war, you take part in it, you judge, you punish, 
 you plunder the working people, you live luxuriously in the 
 midst of the poor, and teach weak men who have confidence 
 in you that this must be so, that the duty of men is to do 
 this, and yet it may happen at the moment when you are 
 acting thus that a bacterium or a bull may attack you and 
 you will fall and die, losing forever the chance of repairing 
 the harm you have done to others, and above all to yourself, 
 in uselessly wasting a life which has been given you only 
 
368 “ the kingdom of god is within you:* 
 
 once in eternity, without having accomplished the only 
 thing you ought to have done. 
 
 However commonplace and out of date it may seem to 
 us, however confused we may be by hypocrisy and by the 
 hypnotic suggestion which results from it, nothing can 
 destroy the certainty of this simple and clearly defined truth. 
 No external conditions can guarantee our life, which is 
 attended with inevitable sufferings and infallibly terminated 
 by death, and which consequently can have no significance 
 except in the constant accomplishment of what is demanded 
 by the Power which has placed us in life with a sole certain 
 guide — the rational conscience. 
 
 That is why that Power cannot require of us what is irra- 
 tional and impossible: the organization of our temporary 
 external life, the life of society or of the state. That Power 
 demands of us only what is reasonable, certain, and possi- 
 ble: to serve the kingdom of God, that is, to contribute to 
 the establishment of the greatest possible union between all 
 living beings — a union possible only in the truth; and to 
 recognize and to profess the revealed truth, which is always 
 in our power. 
 
 “But seek ye first the kindgom of God, and his righteous- 
 ness, and all these things shall be added unto you.” (Matt. 
 
 vi- 33 ) 
 
 The sole meaning of life is to serve humanity by con- 
 tributing to the establishment of the kingdom of God, which 
 can only be done by the recognition and profession of the 
 truth by every man. 
 
 “The kingdom of God cometh not with outward show; 
 neither shall they say, Lo here! or, Lo there! for behold, the 
 kingdom of God is within you.” (Luke xvii. 20, 21.) 
 
 THE END. 
 
“A DANGEROUS AND DIFFICULT SUBJECT FOR A NOVEL.” 
 
 — The Avt^rican Woma^t's Jllustrated World. 
 
 THE HEAVENLY TWINS. 
 
 By SARAH GRAND. 
 
 In one large i2mo volume of nearly 700 pages. Extra cloth, 
 laid paper. Price $1.00. 
 
 “ There is much powerful and beautiful writing in this remarkable 
 and not-to-be-forgotten book.” — The World. 
 
 “ The adventures of Diavolo and Angelica — the ‘ Heavenly Twins’ 
 — are delightfully funny. No more original children were ever put 
 in a book.” — The Academy. 
 
 “ The moral which the author undertakes to enforce is that the 
 sacrifice of pure women in marriage to men of vicious lives is not 
 only a crime against the individual, but against society itself.” — 
 Boston Beacon. 
 
 “ The work swarms with wise sayings and noble counsels.” — 
 M ethodist 2 im :s. 
 
 “ This book is one full of talent, and not of talent misapplied, for 
 ‘ The Heavenly Twins’ is strong enough to assert itself and to point 
 amoral.” — 2V. Y. Times. 
 
 “ Whether or not a pure woman marrying has a right to equal 
 purity in the man she marries — this is the problem attempted by 
 Sarah Grand in her heroine’s behalf in ‘ The Heavenly Twins.’ It 
 is an earnest book, showing its author’s cultured mind on every 
 page.” — Table Talk. 
 
 “ A very curious and interesting novel. . . The burden of the 
 author’s song is the emancipation of woman and the establishment 
 of a stricter moral standard for man. From one end to the other 
 it is interesting, in spots intensely and absorbingly so.” — Kate Field's 
 Washington. 
 
 THE CASSELL PUBLISHING CO., 
 
 31 East 17TH St. (Union Square), New York. 
 
THE EMIGRANT SHIP. 
 
 By W. CLARK RUSSELL, 
 
 Author of'‘'‘Lisiy ye Landsmen / ” **'The Romance of a. Transport'^ 
 '''‘The Wreck of the Grosvenor^'' etc.,, etc. 
 
 One Volume. 12mo. Cloth. 51 *00. 
 
 “ The story is told with excellent directness, and the atmosphere of life aboard 
 an emigrant ship is admirably conveyed to the reader. There is no sea technicality 
 to speak of, the whole interest of the story being concentrated in the hero’s plan 
 to develop a crew among his women passengers. On the whole, ‘ The Emigrant 
 Ship’ is one of the most readable of Mr. Russell’s charming tales.” — New York 
 Times. 
 
 “ For a very fine tonic in the way of fiction commend us always to Mr. Clark 
 Russell. The sea never fails to lash itself in a most beautiful manner when he is 
 about. He has, perhaps, as vigorous a vocabulary as anybody now going. He 
 can talk in strong and splendid phrase too of more things than the sea.”— 
 
 York Sun. 
 
 “ On the whole, the best which Mr. Russell has produced. It is beautifully 
 bound and makes a marine library without it seem poverty-stricken.” — Boston 
 Daily Traveller. 
 
 ” Is readable from beginning to end. No better sea story has been written.” — 
 Philadelphia Bulletin. 
 
 The keen salt breath of the sea flows through all his descriptions, and he 
 makes his readers feel its inspiration as he feels it himself. No one knows better 
 the methods of ocean life, and no one handles its fascination more subtly or skill- 
 fully, while for the reader who loves a story for the story’s sake this tale is worth 
 half a dozen of modern * society ’ novels.” — New York Commercial Advertiser. 
 
 “Will appeal to all such as love the sea and the free and breezy stories of it 
 which are characteristic of this keen student and ardent lover of its moods and 
 vagaries.” — New York Mail a7id Express. 
 
 “ There is a genuine sea flavor to Clark Russell’s stories, a sally taste, a smell of 
 ropes and rigging, and the bracing freshness of the ocean air. There is also the 
 freedom of the broad seas, but with all this there is neither the vulgarity nor the 
 devilishness which so many nautical writers seem to think it necessary to affect. 
 His sea tales are original to a striking degree, they are never dull, and withal they 
 are clean’ and wholesome. They make good reading for old boys as well as 
 young. ’ ’ — Balti more Telegra m . 
 
 “ The sea stories of W. Clark Russell have delighted readers for a goodly num- 
 ber of years, and a new story by the author of ‘ The Wreck of the Grosvenor’ is 
 always hailed with delight. . . That the story is of thrilling interest and novelty 
 goes without saying.” — Boston Journal. 
 
 “ It is bright, interesting, strong. . . There is more of human nature in it than 
 in any of his previous books.” — New York World. 
 
 “ Where is the boy, old or young, with a heart in him who doesn't know how 
 incomparably well he writes his amazing adventures on the high seas? Here we 
 have a story which could only by any possible chance proceed from the pen of 
 Mr. Russell.” — Philadelphia Press. 
 
 “ W. Clark Russell stands without a peer as a master in telling marine stories. 
 He is thoroughly at home at sea, and his new novel, * The Emigrant Ship,’ is one 
 of his best. The plot is fresh and the development is most skillful.” — Boston 
 Daily Advertiser. 
 
 THE CASSELL PUBLISHING CO., 
 
 31 East 17TH St. (Union Square), New York. 
 
 104 
 
“ Racy and brilliant .” — London Athenmmn 
 
 “I FORBID THE BANNS!” 
 
 TEE STORY OF A COMEDY WHICH WAS PLAYED SEEIODSIY. 
 
 BY 
 
 FRANK FRANKFORT MOORb. 
 
 I Vol., i2mo, Cloth, $1.00. 
 
 “ Needs no recommendation to make it popular." — Manchester Chron- 
 icle. 
 
 “ Crisp and epigrammatic.” — San Francisco Argonaut. 
 
 “A book which abounds in good things.” — London Daily Chronicle. 
 
 “ Keen satire, genuine humor, literary ability.” — Philadelphia Item. 
 
 “ There can be but one verdict, and that is distinct success.” — London 
 Daily Telegraph. 
 
 “ A capital and thoroughly original story.” — Boston Titnes. 
 
 “ No novel more original, suggestive, and entrancing is likely to 
 ‘appear for a long time.” — Liverpool Mercury. 
 
 “ There isn’t a dull page in the book.” — New York Recorder. 
 
 “ The subject is treated in a masterly manner.” — London Literary 
 World. 
 
 ” Exceedingly attractive.” — Boston Daily Advertiser. 
 
 FOR SALE BY ALL BOOKSELLERS. 
 
 NEW YORK 
 
 THE CASSELL PUBLISHING CO. 
 
 31 East 17TH St. (Union Square) 
 
 98 
 
Mrs. Alexander’s Latest Novel. 
 
 The Snare of the Fowler. 
 
 BY MRS. ALEXANDER. 
 
 Author of “The Wooing O’t," “Which Shall it Be?" 
 
 ETC., ETC. 
 
 X Vol., I2m0, Extra Cloth, $i.oo ; Paper, Cassell’s Sunshine Series, 
 50 cents. 
 
 “ Few novelists of this century have shown themselves possessors 
 of a more prolific pen than has Mrs. Alexander, nor have any became 
 more popular in our homes. . . Her latest, ‘ The Snare of the 
 Fowler,’ is written with her usual vivacity and is admirably sus* 
 tained . ” — Baltimore A merican. 
 
 “ Full of dramatic interest.’’ — Lowell Times. 
 
 “Well written, extremely well written.’’ — Chicago Times. 
 
 “The different characters are outlined with that art of brilliant con- 
 trasts which the author employs with unfailing felicity.” — Boston 
 Beacon. 
 
 “Will meet with warm welcome.” — Cedar Rapids Gazette. 
 
 “ Certainly one of her best; and perhaps nothing that she has pub- 
 lished, since ‘ The Wooing O’t ’ gave her so wide fame when brought 
 out twenty years ago, has so much merit.” — Boston Daily Traveller. 
 
 “ Healthfully pure and moral . . . and of unflagging interest.” — 
 Philadelphia Evenuig Bulletin. 
 
 “ Mrs. Alexander is a dexterous handler of plots.” — Boston Courier. 
 
 “ Those who have read her previous works will not be disappointed 
 in the present one.” — Philadelphia Item. 
 
 “ Pleasing from beginning to end.” — Boston Times. 
 
 Ask your Bookseller to show you a copy. 
 
 NEW YORK 
 
 THE CASSELL PUBLISHING CO. 
 
 31 East lyxH St. (Union Square) 
 
 8J 
 
1 
 
 Date Due 
 
 i 
 
 0 25 ’48 
 
 
 
 
 OC 1 9 ’4 
 
 
 
 
 j 
 
 
 9086 1 
 
 
 WlRl 
 
 
 
 
 aJ}'\3’51 
 
 
 
 
 m7l^'32 
 
 
 »!*• 
 
 
 DE 3 52^ 
 
 
 
 
 MR 1 b ’53 
 
 i9<-. t^m 
 
 
 
 faculty 
 
 _'K.- 
 
 
 
 MY 2 8 ’54 
 
 
 
 
 
 r - '■ 
 
 
 . 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 P' 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 \ 
 
 
 
 
 A - -‘J 
 
 a 
 
 3Rd 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
JX1959 .T65 
 
 “The kingdom of God is within you," 
 
 Princeton Theological Seminary-Speer Library 
 
 1 
 
 1 1012 ( 
 
 00025 
 
 9921