The Rudolf Steiner Archive

Eighth Lecture

[ 1 ] From everything that has come up in the lectures—I might almost say over the years—you will have noticed that, for the development of humanity in both spiritual and social terms, it will become increasingly necessary for what we, in the context of our spiritual science, call the results of initiatory research to spread throughout humanity. As you know, the term “initiation”—to use an old term, an old expression—can be understood as looking into the spiritual world, into that world which is separated from our physical-sensory world by a kind of veil, a veil that can very easily lead to illusions. Human beings are initially given the physical-sensory world, and they engage with this physical-sensory world either for the purposes of ordinary life or for the purposes of what is today called science. They combine what they perceive in the sensory world with all manner of concepts, ideas, and so on. None of this takes them beyond this sensory world. One could say that the only thing through which a person in everyday life glimpses beyond this sensory world is the dream. But the dream, as it is experienced in everyday life today, is merely a faint reflection of what might be called an experience of the supersensible world. The supersensible world must not only be perceived with the same degree of consciousness that one has in ordinary life—and which one does not have in a dream—but it must even be perceived with a higher degree of consciousness. In a sense, in order to experience the supersensible world, one must heighten one’s consciousness, reaching a state in which ordinary life and ordinary consciousness stand in the same relationship to it as sleep does to ordinary consciousness—or at least as a dream does to ordinary consciousness. There must therefore be a kind of awakening from ordinary consciousness. Consequently, the dream is, of course, only a faint reflection of what is actually experienced there. But fundamentally, the dream differs much less from ordinary thinking than one might think.

[ 2 ] When you become aware of the imagery of an ordinary dream, its content is essentially the same as what is present in thought, except that in thinking, a person enters the external world through their senses; and therefore, what in a dream is organized according to mere analogies and very superficial connections is, when observing the external sensory world, organized according to what that sensory world tells us. You can, in a sense, see proof of what has just been stated in the fact that when you sit down and close your eyes for a moment—or are simply being lazy—and let your thoughts wander, and then reflect on how these thoughts have wandered, you will find in these thoughts, which you later recall to your mind, hardly any other connections than those that also occur in a dream. The ordinary, unguided imagination of human beings is, in a certain sense and according to its inner laws, a kind of dream after all. We are merely torn away from dreaming by our senses. And as soon as we silence the senses, we are actually dreaming. This dream activity must be intensified; it must be carried out in such a way that it is permeated by a higher consciousness than that which our senses provide us. Then imaginative consciousness arises, and gradually, inspired consciousness as well—which, as I mentioned yesterday in my public lecture here, is also recognized by Thomism as a legitimate source of knowledge.

[ 3 ] In the science of initiation, then, we have the results of such an elevated state of consciousness. What now poses a difficulty in the present development of humanity and in that of the near future is that humanity will absolutely need the science of initiation—that it will not be able to do without it— because, quite simply, if only materialistic knowledge—as it has developed over the course of the last three to four centuries—were to continue to permeate human development, nothing else could result but states—repeated over and over again and interrupted at most by brief intervals—such as we have in the current social chaos of the civilized world. What science has been able to offer humanity since the mid-15th century is certainly sufficient for making technical inventions and for covering the earth with a network of transportation and commerce, but it is not sufficient to create a true social order corresponding to the current states of human consciousness. This is something that will gradually have to be recognized. As long as what is recognized as university science and what is recognized as public education are rejected, as long as the science of initiation is rejected, and as long as only the external, materialistic science—which is recognized today—is accepted, humanity will always have to be prepared for such chaotic social conditions as we have now.

[ 4 ] Only the science of initiation will save the humanity of the future from such chaotic social conditions. This science of initiation will—as I have often mentioned—above all give those people it can reach an awareness that this life here on Earth, which we begin at birth, is the continuation of a spiritual life we experienced in the supersensible world between our last death and this birth. You know that none of the current religious traditions of the civilized world speak at all of this spiritual life that precedes our birth—or, let us say, our conception. It is not spoken of for a very specific reason. Why is there no mention of a life before birth? It is not spoken of because, at a certain point in time—coinciding with the Greek intellectual development between Plato and Aristotle—humanity lost awareness of this pre-birth spiritual life. Plato, of course, speaks clearly of this. Aristotle, however, vigorously defended the theory that every time a human being is born, a completely new soul is united with their physical body. In a sense, a new soul comes into being for every human being to be physically born; that is the Aristotelian teaching. Thus, according to Aristotle, the true spiritual life—including the highest spiritual life—begins with a person’s birth.

[ 5 ] If one holds such a view, one cannot help but state as a matter of course that the life which begins with death—the life that a person begins by shedding their physical body, and of which Aristotle also speaks—continues, and that this life does not descend once again into an earthly existence. For if one does not speak of a pre-birth life, there is of course no justification for believing that a human being does not have to remain eternally in a spiritual world after death. This, however, already led Aristotle to draw extremely serious conclusions from such ideas. For example, he concluded that if someone here on earth, between birth and death, has led a life that has burdened their soul with evil, they will then be able—and indeed compelled—to look back for all eternity upon this evil, which cannot be erased or overcome. Thus, according to Aristotle’s perspective, once a person has died, they must look back eternally on this one earthly life that they had to live through. This teaching of Aristotle was fully adopted by the Catholic Church. And during the Middle Ages, when the Catholic Church was seeking a philosophy capable of underpinning its theology, it adopted this Aristotelian doctrine of the soul for the life of the soul; and even today, one can still recognize the echoes of Aristotelian teaching in the eternity of hellish punishment.

[ 6 ] Now, how can one imagine that human beings, after millennia of being influenced by this doctrine of the soul’s origin in the body, could once again move beyond this conception and arrive at the truth? Only by humanity receiving a new spiritual science. Without this renewal of spiritual science, humanity will not be able to regain an awareness of the validity of the assumption of a life before birth—or, let us say, before conception. One need only consider what it means for the entire development of humanity not to speak of a pre-birth life. If the mainstream denominations preach and teach only about life after death, they merely awaken people’s instincts related to the selfish desire not to cease to exist with death.

[ 7 ] To begin with, it is necessary to conduct a fairly detailed study entitled: “On the Cultivation of Human Egoism by Existing Denominations.” — This study should examine which motives are actually put forward in the sermons and teachings of all common denominations. One would find everywhere that everything possible is built upon egoistic instincts, particularly the instinct for immortality after death. And this study could be expanded to include an observation that has held true for millennia, revealing that the denominations—by eliminating life before birth under Aristotelian influence—have fostered egoism to the highest degree. The denominations as cultivators of the innermost egoistic instinct—that is what is worth studying.

[ 8 ] The vast majority of religious belief in today’s civilized world actually relies on human selfishness. One senses this human selfishness particularly clearly in statements—of which I could show you dozens. Time and again, especially from pastoral circles, one receives letters stating that spiritual science deals with all manner of insights into the supersensible world. But that is not needed at all. All one wants is the childlike awareness of one’s connection to Christ Jesus. This is always found among pastors and believers. This childlike communion with Christ Jesus is always emphasized. It is played up with immense arrogance against what is, admittedly, less easily attained—namely, entering into the concrete realities of the spiritual world. And it is preached again and again; people are repeatedly led in this way to believe that, fundamentally speaking, they could be at their most Christian if they exerted their soul powers as little as possible, if they made the least effort to think more clearly about what they call their Christ-consciousness. Christ-consciousness must be something that a person can attain only through the utmost childlikeness, say the complacent; and they are most pleased when they are told: It is Christ who has taken upon himself the sins of humanity, who has redeemed humanity through his sacrificial death, without their having to do anything about it. — All of this then tends to secure immortality after death through Christ’s sacrificial death and to foster the utmost selfishness in people.

[ 9 ] By fostering this selfishness on the part of the religious denominations, we have finally brought about the state of affairs that is now dawning over the entire civilized world. Because this selfishness has been fostered to the greatest extent, humanity has become what it is today. Consider this: When a person grasps the truth—not merely in theory through certain ideas and concepts, but with their entire inner life—that their earthly life, as they enter it through birth, imposes upon them the obligation to fulfill a mission they bring with them from their life before birth, consider—if this fills our entire soul, if this earthly life is viewed as a task that must be fulfilled because it follows on from a supernatural life we previously led—consider how selfishness must then fade away! This selfishness is counteracted by the feelings aroused within us when we view earthly life as a continuation of a life beyond the physical world, just as it is fostered by those religious denominations that speak only of life after death. This is something that is important to bring into present and future humanity for social healing. It is important to reawaken people’s awareness of pre-existence. Of course, the concept of repeated earthly lives is inseparable from that of pre-existence.

[ 10 ] Thus, one can say, for example, that the Catholic Church in particular adopted an Aristotelian doctrine and made it its dogma, and that this dogma must be replaced by the higher understanding of repeated earthly lives, of pre-existence, of this doctrine of the pre-existence of the human soul—a doctrine that Aristotle himself initially disregarded. If you consider the significance for humanity of incorporating certain elements into the innermost life of the soul, then you will be able to grasp what this means for human emotional life in the broadest sense, for human beings gain an entirely different awareness of themselves. Let us add to what has just been said the Pauline statement that this human consciousness must always be permeated by the following: “ Not I, but Christ in me.” If one regards oneself as something else, then Christ within one will also be something else. If one regards oneself merely as that which came into being spiritually and soulfully at birth, then Christ will, of course, be able to be only in that which came into being at this birth, and his task will be only to carry our soul through death and then carry us onward through all eternity. If we know that we have a pre-birth life, then we can also know that it is precisely Christ who assigns us a mission for this earthly life—that we must develop our powers, that we must find him within our powers, and that we must seek him as the best that we possess spiritually and soulfully within ourselves.

[ 11 ] The Catholic Church has ensured that the people subject to it may never reflect on the true spiritual and soulful nature of human beings by abolishing the Spirit at the Eighth Ecumenical Council in Constantinople in the year 869—that is, by declaring that human beings consist only of body and soul, that the soul possesses certain spiritual qualities, but that it is heretical to regard human beings as consisting of body, soul, and spirit. And when the Jesuit Zimmermann criticized various aspects of anthroposophically oriented spiritual science, he listed as its gravest sin the fact that this spiritual science seeks to restore the trichotomy by once again asserting that human beings consist of body, soul, and spirit. — Spiritual science must absolutely reveal what the true nature of the human being is, and what the human being’s relationship to Christ actually is. But what the Church has been increasingly concerned with is precisely preventing human beings from gaining insight into their true nature and their relationship to Christ. One could say that the development of the Western denominations actually consisted in drawing an ever-thicker veil over the true mystery of Christ.

[ 12 ] This is essentially true of all institutions based on external abstraction. When a state is young, it has few laws, and people are still relatively unconstrained by them. The longer the state exists—and especially the longer the state’s political parties engage in their rational deliberations—the more laws are enacted. And in the end, these laws become so complex that people can no longer make sense of them, for there is not just one law governing everything, but everything is caught in a web of intertwining laws from which it is extremely difficult to extricate oneself. But this is also how it goes in the churches. When a church begins its journey through the world, it still has relatively few dogmas. But people must have something to do, and just as statesmen are always making laws, so churchmen are always creating more and more dogmas, and thus everything eventually becomes dogma. Dogma ultimately becomes consolidated. This consolidation of the dogmatic system can be observed particularly strongly within modern civilized humanity only after High Scholasticism, which I characterized here at Pentecost. For anyone who truly studies High Scholasticism—Albertism and Thomism—in its proper context will find that there, everything regarding dogma is still fluid and subject to debate, and that discussion is still regarded as something entirely natural.

[ 13 ] During the High Scholastic period, there was already a certain contrast within the Western Church: the contrast between the Dominican Order and the Franciscan Order. The Dominican Order, which reached its peak during the High Scholastic period, develops knowledge through ideas in the highest logical sense. The Franciscan Order rejects this. The Franciscan Order seeks to attain everything solely through childlike feeling. I do not wish to go into the substantive differences between the teachings of the Franciscan Order and the Dominican Order at this time, but I simply want to draw your attention to what it would be like today, for example, if Dominicans and Franciscans were still fighting each other as intensely over the content of doctrine as they did in the Middle Ages, when they debated dogmas freely. Certainly, the Bishop of Rome did declare people heretics back then as well. He could have continued to do so for a long time had it not been for the secular governments placing themselves at his disposal and burning the very people he merely intended to condemn. It must be said: the greater blame always falls on the secular governments. But none of that prevented free discussion from taking place back then. This free discussion has gradually been completely excluded from the Catholic Church. Over time, the Catholic Church could no longer tolerate this free discussion. And why could it not? It could not do so because a completely new consciousness of humanity was emerging.

[ 14 ] Just consider that this is what the transformation of human consciousness is, as I have often told you regarding that turning point in the middle of the 15th century. This is what is happening to modern humanity: people increasingly want to arrive at their own judgments from the depths of their souls. This is something that did not exist in the Middle Ages. In the Middle Ages, people had a kind of collective consciousness, and the only ones who could stand out were the most educated individuals—the actual scholastics—those who had developed beyond the generally uniform popular consciousness by receiving their education within the framework of scholastic education—or, to a very limited extent, within rabbinical education or the like. But otherwise, what constituted human consciousness was uniform: a collective consciousness, a generic consciousness. Individual consciousness emerged more and more.

[ 15 ] What the Catholic Church has always possessed—because it has always drawn highly educated people into its ranks—is historical foresight. The Catholic Church knows very well that what I am saying now is the principle of recent development: fostering individual consciousness in people. But it does not want to let this emerge. It wants to preserve the dull collective consciousness from which only those who have attained a scholastic education stand out. There is a good way to maintain this collective, dull consciousness—for it is always a dull consciousness—and this method consists in dampening down, properly dampening down, the ordinary consciousness that a person already possesses through the use of their senses. Just as a dream dampens ordinary consciousness, so does one dampen consciousness so that it becomes a dull collective consciousness.

[ 16 ] Now I ask you: Isn’t it true that there are many characteristics of dreams, but one characteristic of dreams is that one can say a dream is, in many respects, also a liar! Do you deny that a dream is also a liar, that it makes you believe things that aren’t true? But that is not part of the nature of dreams; it is part of the nature of subdued consciousness—that when one is dreaming, one cannot distinguish between truth and falsehood. Therefore, it is also a requirement of subdued consciousness to deprive people of the ability to distinguish between truth and lies. If one is well-versed in such matters, what does one do? If one is well-versed in such matters, then one tells people, with authority, things that are untrue. One does this systematically. In this way, one dampens their consciousness down to the dullness of dream consciousness. In this way, one succeeds in undermining that which, as individual consciousness, has been striving to rise up in human souls since the middle of the 15th century. And it is a boundlessly grandiose undertaking to act in this way under the guise of authority—to write for people—well, I’ll speak without using metaphors—articles such as those now appearing in the *Katholisches Sonntagsblatt*; for by doing so, one prevents people from reaching what they have been meant to develop toward since the mid-15th century. If one were to believe that what is happening in this direction—even if the individual is unaware of it, though the entire hierarchy is there and has organized the matter very well—if one were to believe that these things arise from mere simplicity or from mere ordinary rancor, one would be considerably mistaken. Of course, one must combat lies and falsehoods with every means at one’s disposal. But one should not believe that they stem from naivety, or even from the belief that what is being said is true. If one were to tell the truth, one would not achieve what one intends to achieve. The aim is to dull people’s consciousness by teaching them lies. It is a grandiose, diabolical undertaking.

[ 17 ] This must also be stated plainly: It is only on the other side that simplicity lies. Naivety today is not on the side of the Catholic Church; naivety is on the side of its opponents. They do not believe that the Catholic Church is great in the sense that I have characterized it; they do not believe that the Catholic Church foresaw long ago that the social condition now prevailing in Europe would come to pass, and that the Catholic Church took precautions long ago to be able to assert itself in this social condition. What the Catholic Church intends is to build a bridge between the most radical forms of socialism and communism and its own rule. This magnificent foresight must be recognized in everything that is based on a genuine spiritual foundation—a foundation rooted in actual spiritual life, not in mere abstraction. You see, with all that constitutes modern Enlightenment, one arrives at nothing that could have any far-reaching significance in the course of human development. Those ceremonies performed in the Catholic Mass have far greater significance than all the rhetoric of Protestant pulpit preaching. For these are acts that take place here in the sensory world and which, by taking place in the sensory world, are at the same time, in their form, that which the spiritual world conjures into the sensory world. The Catholic Church has therefore never wished to do without the magical means of influencing people. These are present. One must simply not believe that anything other than a re-entry into the spiritual worlds—from the standpoint of true, innermost honesty and sincerity—can readily arise in opposition to these things. And as, I might say, an outward sign that the connection with the spiritual world has always been present in the Catholic Church, one can cite, for example, what I have already shared with some of you.

[ 18 ] In the first decade of the 20th century, there was a papal encyclical that declared various things to be heretical. Papal encyclicals, after all, are worded in such a way that they always cite the doctrine in question and then say: “Whoever believes this is damned.” — So, you cite, don’t you, some doctrine that Haeckel or someone else has propagated, copy it from one of Haeckel’s books, and say: “Whoever believes this is damned.” — They don’t state the truth, but rather say: “Whoever believes this is damned.” — Initiatic science always offers the opportunity to investigate such matters, and I set myself the task of conducting certain research on this encyclical. Here I must say, as with so many other things: What was proclaimed ex cathedra by the Pope at that time was a genuine result from the spiritual world; that is to say, what found its way into that encyclical came down from the spiritual world, only—strangely enough—it was reversed. Everywhere, what should have been designated as “yes” was designated as “no,” and vice versa: This is something that, in a certain respect—and I could cite many other examples—shows that on that side there really is a connection with the spiritual world today, but one that is extraordinarily pernicious for humanity. It is therefore no surprise that the Catholic Church, in particular, sees in the emergence of modern spiritual science something it wants to eliminate at all costs. For what does this newer spiritual science bring about? It brings about that humanity is to gain an awareness of pre-birth life, of pre-existence. That must not be. That must not happen under any circumstances. Therefore, spiritual science must be condemned. Through spiritual science, human beings become aware of their own nature—how they consist of body, soul, and spirit. This must not be allowed under any circumstances. Therefore, this spiritual science must be condemned. Through this spiritual science, the true nature and essence of Christ Jesus are revealed to humanity. This must not happen under any circumstances; therefore, this spiritual science must be condemned.

[ 19 ] One would, for example, recognize that the dogma of eternal punishment in hell and of the creation of the soul at physical birth is an Aristotelian conclusion. Now imagine that a Catholic theologian today were to study the connection between Aristotle and High Scholasticism and realize how the High Scholastics arrived at their argument regarding the origin of the soul with physical life based on Aristotle’s philosophy. One would, so to speak, get a behind-the-scenes look at how dogma came into being. What is done to prevent this? The theologian is made to take the anti-modernist oath. He is made to swear that his creed is that he could never arrive at a historical conclusion that contradicts the dogmas issued by Rome. And the very fact that he has sworn this oath—the very fact that he has taken an oath—is meant to have such a powerful effect on his mind that he becomes confused in his objective research, so that he cannot discern the connection between dogma and the historical development of humanity. None of this can remain as it is when the science of initiation emerges. Therefore, this science of initiation must be condemned under all circumstances.

[ 20 ] Why am I telling you all this? I am telling you this so that you do not take the matters at hand too lightly. For our anthroposophically oriented spiritual science is truly not concerned with the same kinds of things as, for example, the Theosophical Society. The fact that the Theosophical Society was not a serious endeavor is evident to you from the fact that, one day, the majority of its members came to go along with the whole farce of Krishnamurti as the reincarnated Jesus Christ of Nazareth. Whatever can become part of such a farce is, of course, based from the outset solely on hypocrisy—even if this hypocrisy was taken seriously by many. Whatever is to grow on the soil of anthroposophically oriented spiritual science must be, in every fiber, an honest search for truth. This is therefore precisely what the well-informed Catholic Church knows full well will come to light behind the scenes—that which must not be revealed if the Catholic Church wishes to maintain the dominion and power it claims in the world. I am saying what I am about to say for the reason that you should realize from this that these matters truly must not be taken lightly. For this must be said: On that side, they work with great foresight, even if the individual follows like a sheep and merely carries out the orders assigned to him, even if he does not know what significance the systematic lies—which are, however, believed by a large number of people—have for the entire development of humanity. Even if the individual does not know this and imitates it unknowingly, it is well-founded within the system as a whole.

[ 21 ] On the other hand, there is that naivety which believes that this entire external web of natural laws—which today forms the subject of our university studies—could be something of significance for the further development of humanity; that all this talk of the conservation of matter and energy could be something beneficial to the further development of humanity. People living in temperate zones no longer view the snow that spreads out before them every winter without prejudice. For as the forces of growth are covered by the crust of snow, a part of the Earth’s surface undergoes a complete transformation. The collective consciousness, which speaks of the purity of snow, knows far more than modern science, which speaks of the conservation of matter and energy. Of course, I can only say what I am about to say now after having shown you over many weeks how unfounded this newer law of the conservation of matter and energy is, how, in fact, matter and energy are consumed within every human being as the process works upward toward the head, and how new matter and new energy arise within the human being. All these things must, of course, be fought tooth and nail from a certain perspective. And the only thing that can help against this is for as many people as possible to become aware of what the task of present-day humanity actually is: that individual consciousness must absolutely take hold of the world.

[ 22 ] This individual consciousness will take hold of the world, but it can either take hold of the world’s wisdom or of its blind instincts. If it takes hold of the blind instincts, the result will be a completely antisocial state, much like the one currently taking shape in Russia. This will gradually give rise to an antisocial state against which neither the British nor the North American government—not to mention the French or any other government—will be able to devise a remedy. No, it would be naive to believe that something like the British Parliament could cope with what will overtake humanity if individual consciousness acts solely through instincts. But one power can cope with it: the power of Rome. The question is simply how it can do so. Rome can establish its rule, for Rome possesses the necessary means of power to do so. That is the only question. The question is not whether Bolshevism or the Anglo-Saxon bourgeoisie will prevail, but whether it will be antisocial chaos, Roman rule—or humanity’s resolve to imbue itself with the spirit that was declared heretical by the Western Church in 869 at the Eighth Ecumenical Council in Constantinople, a spirit deemed unrecognizable and uninvestigable.

[ 23 ] There is no other way but for humanity to resolve to take things seriously, rather than merely drifting through life as is naturally the case under materialistic worldviews. How does humanity live under such conditions? It judges everything by the barometer of monetary value, for there is no other barometer for social order; and then one might still have a certain luxury—a worldview—but only as a luxury. And those who are particularly “deep” in disposition then say: One must rise into the spiritual worlds; one must leave behind the sensuous, material, evil world; a truly deep person does not concern himself with that. One need not understand anything about the entire material world. One must become a mystic, live in the higher worlds.” — But even these “deep” and “less deep” people—they all have children and believe that their children, too, must acquire material things; that it would be very bad indeed if the children were not sent to those schools where one is trained for present-day material acquisition. And with that, they have already come to terms with the way things are now, and with that, they have also bequeathed materialism to the next generation.

[ 24 ] Yes, once someone says that, they become a nuisance, and the best thing to do is to slander them. For most people, hearing what has just been said is actually just as bad as if some bugs or lice were constantly bothering them. But people do not like to be plagued by spiritual bedbugs and lice. Therefore, they develop a thick skin, which consists of turning a blind eye and a deaf ear to what spiritual science must reveal as characteristic of our present era. On this side, then, lies simplicity. When the Catholic Church saw that people were becoming so one-sided, it ensured that there would be specially trained individuals—but it did so indirectly through spiritual impulses. After all, one of the most significant events in meta-history is how, through Ignatius of Loyola, the Jesuit Order was founded out of profound influences from the spiritual world—and here we are indeed dealing with a powerful spiritual force.

[ 25 ] Now, of course, we must discuss honestly within our community what the situation is, and that is why I was compelled, even in that Karlsruhe cycle—which, as I now realize, some soul here has handed over to some nonsense-spewing, trash-slinging scoundrel—to speak of the magnificent but questionable training of the Jesuits. As is well known, the entire Jesuit training program is discussed from the ground up in the Karlsruhe cycle. I want to say the following: What significance does it even have within our circles to note on every cycle that it is printed as a manuscript intended only for members, when slanderers have these cycles in their hands, from which they can fabricate all sorts of lies? It goes without saying that this confirms in a very significant way what I have mentioned many times before: The time will come when one can no longer count on these cycles being intended only for a small circle, for humanity is not currently in a state where anything can be entrusted to it. Of course, everything written by these slanderers is nonsense and untrue, but it is not based on public writings; rather, it was written simply because these cycles were made public. And I have every reason to believe that one of the first cycles to fall into the hands of the Catholic clergy was that Karlsruhe cycle about the Jesuits. For there is a tendency on that side to ensure that the true training of the Jesuits is not made known in any way. The world is not to know how the Jesuits are trained; it is to know nothing of their magnificent training.

[ 26 ] In that order we are discussing here, there are countless people of such intellectual capacity that, if they were scattered throughout the outside world and did not concern themselves with what people there are concerned with, but rather with the external sciences, poetry, or painting, they would be revered there as individual human beings—as geniuses among humanity. They would be recognized there as the great minds of humanity. Within the Jesuit Order there are countless people who would be luminaries if they were to act as individuals and engage in something else—in all that constitutes, for example, materialistic science. These people erase their names, merge into their order, and, moreover, make it a condition of their strength that the world know nothing of all this—that the world not know how such a mind is formed, one that walks about in a black habit and a Jesuit cap.

[ 27 ] These things are, in fact, quite suitable for illustrating just how fundamentally different the entire configuration of consciousness is among various categories of people. But those simple-minded people who call themselves modern enlightened thinkers refuse to take such things seriously. And that is what must be emphasized again and again; that is what I had to speak to you about today.