Christ once said: "Judge not, that ye be not judged. For with what judgement ye judge, ye shall be judged, and with what measure ye mete, it shall be measured to you again" Many people may find that these words are but a dead postulate, or they are even perceived as a superstitious belief. All the same these words are, in truth, one of the most serious admonitions ever given to mankind. How serious this admonition is, has been expressed in a cosmic-chemical formula, as a result of the law of causation and effect. A cosmic-chemical formula, however, - what does that mean? It is a theorem or principle of the spiritual laws of the universe in the same way as one has formulas, theorems or principles concerning the physical laws worked out by mankind during its study and work with physical chemistry.

Cosmic chemistry is the spiritual science which deals with the way in which a living being creates its destiny. Christ knew this science perfectly, and He spoke from this knowledge when giving the aforementioned admonition to mankind. To ignore this admonition is to ignore the most ingenious way of creating one's own happiness in life. Why, then, did Christ not speak of cosmic chemistry? Because His authority was the thing needed at the time he lived here on earth, and it remained so even for a long time after. At that time people were not ripe for spiritual science, and still most of them are not ripe yet. Some, however, have begun to reach a more advanced stage, and their number will increase in time soon to come. The present is, therefore, the proper time for terrestrial humanity to receive the theoretical grounding in the science of destiny or cosmic chemistry, in order to enable the single human individual to use these theories practically in their own lives, according to their development into the necessary stage of mental ripeness. In the centuries to come this will change the destiny of all mankind.

From the fact that the State has a legal right to impose a penalty and to take revenge it should be quite clear to us that such a state has no rightful claim to name itself Christian, however long Christianity may have been established and recognised as the state religion. To the same extent that the State makes use of punishment and revenge, then it must be named heathen, and more if it is doing so in a brutal and violent way. In all places where capital punishment, concentration-camps and brutality, physical or mental, are found and where living beings are inflicted with physical or mental suffering, this very State by means of its authorized people in power, is violating universal laws. While the State may not be breaking the law which it has itself instituted it is never the less breaking the universal, cosmic law, and it will therefore have to take the consequences of such ways of acting. What are then the consequences if people are sentenced to death? It means the death of the State! For "with what judgement ye judge, ye shall be judged". Does not the history of mankind tell about the downfall and death of many nations and states in which capital punishment, torture, brutal imprisonment, enslavement and similar systems of punishment were prevalent? It is no wonder that up till now no culture has been able to endure. They have, all of them, been undermining themselves, because of the inconsistency between their legal laws and the laws of life itself. They - and this applies also to many modern states - have been "created in the likeness of a criminal". This may sound strange, and it is not meant to be a criticism of any of the states in question. None of these are at present able to be different from what they are, and neither are their inhabitants. However, when states as well as their single inhabitants are killing, taking revenge, punishing and resorting to violence in other ways, they are to the advanced investigator hereby revealed as primitive and immature. And is it not a fact, experienced inside all universities and other institutes of education, that those topics on which you are very concentrated and with which you are working hard will develop, grow and multiply? Therefore, if it is really desirable for the State to free itself from the killing principle, of what avail is it then for this very State to murder a man as a punishment, because he has himself murdered another person? Does this not mean that the State simply is rivalling with murderers and criminals for killing? The State thereby reveals itself as being in the image of a criminal - and how can it then possibly be considered a civilized state?

Now, having arrived at this point, many persons are likely to raise the objection that there is a great difference between the State's motive in execution and punishment, and the criminal's motive in his crime. However, - what is the difference really? In both cases the instinct of self-preservation is the real motive. When a man is wanting to revenge himself and does so by murder, this is because the avenger has the idea that he is carrying out an act of justice. Indeed, even when a criminal is committing larceny or even murder with intent to rob,, he has the idea that his deed is justified by the fact that the material advantages of the society, in which he is living, are divided so very unequally and unfairly. In the same way it is considered an act of justice for the State to execute the criminal who is regarded as being a menace to its existence. In both cases the basic principle is the same as that ruling in the animal kingdom: the instinct of self-preservation.

Those states consistently adhering to and following the principle of "an eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth" should, according to that principle, be the most successful and efficient and capable of dominating the earth as world empires. But are they so doing at present? How did it go with Nazi-Germany? And with the colonial empires? Does not that give food for serious consideration? All those powers had expectations of becoming rulers of the world. They used punishment and capital sentences more than any other state, and they were judged with their own judgement. With no exceptions all states will have the same experience in relation to the degree of inhumanity, with which they have measured, and to the jungle-mentality of their judgements. But let us revert to the question: "How can the State possibly avoid punishing"? Naturally, no state or society can possibly let their most primitive members - the criminals - do as they like. It is the duty of the State to protect all other members of the society from the criminals. Such a task, however, cannot be accomplished by means of capital punishment or by any other kind of vengeful reaction on the part of the State. If the State is to be able to look forward to a future for itself, the nature and development of which is going to be of a human character, it must be protected - and how can such a thing be accomplished? Only by creating protection for all others. This is not merely equivalent to protecting the citizens from the criminal elements but also, and this is very essential, equivalent to protecting the so-called criminals from an interaction with their surroundings, which they are not yet ripe enough to experience.

In the future state the protection against criminals consequently will not be the physical disarmament of these by locking them up in prisons or concentration-camps, or by murdering them, but it will be done exclusively by mental disarmament. A really civilized state will in the future be directed by a government that is above the inquisitorial penal conceptions, which at that time will belong to the paganism, superstition and crudeness of the past. Such a government will endeavour to eradicate and neutralize these conceptions among people. Of course this will not be done by dictatorial means, as this would be like reverting to methods that have already sentenced themselves to death. No, it will be done in the way prescribed by nature itself: by means of experience and development. Therefore the State of the future will regard the protection and the development of its "junior-society" as an important foundation for its own continued existence.

In the State of the future one will be quite conversant with the fact that the so-called criminal underworld is made up of persons who are relatively "young souls" in human life. The mental faculties, being in full bloom in the mind of highly developed man, can by such young souls be only in their very first budding stage. Founded on this understanding and insight the junior society will be established. The most competent educational experts will be in the service of this society, and all conceivable humane principles will be used with ingenious, sympathetic insight. Terms like "crimes" and "criminals" will only be found as survivals from a crude and barbarous age, when superstition and lack of understanding were still dominating the world. The citizens of the junior society will not feel despised as "lower beings". They will be looked upon as the youngsters of the state, and as they know that they are also looked upon as eternal beings, they will know, too, that this reflection is not in any way depreciatory, because it cannot be discriminating for a being to enter the evolutionary spiral at a later moment than others have done. The citizens of the junior society will not have admittance to the senior society, and this is quite natural in the same way as it is natural that pupils from the first or second form cannot enter the senior high-school. Inside their own territory the youngsters are completely free to live their lives and eventually, when it is evident that their sense of responsibility is developing, they will themselves become able to register the effects hereof. The designation "junior society" has been used here only in order to distinguish this society from the senior society, and whether one is a member of one society or the other will have no importance at all.

These are some thoughts concerning the State of the future and its relations to the conceptions: judgement and protection. I should, however, like to conclude by emphasizing the fact that the foundation of this future State at present is developing in the consciousness of all human beings. The human beings, who are alive today, will also be the citizens of the State of the future, indeed, they will even take a share in its creation. And if the ideology of this state does not grow in your consciousness, then it will not grow at all. You may think, then, that the outlook is not encouraging. After all, however, it is not all too bad, even if development naturally takes its time. Nobody and nothing are born as adults. All the same - it is in your mind and consciousness that the judging and condemnation of others must come to an end. If you, when speaking to other people, set yourself in judgement of a third party and declare him to be a liar, a person unreliable or something even worse, and then say: "He ought to get a real dressing-down", or "It would only be just and fair if he had a serious lesson and got it back hot", it is very far from certain that it is a kind teaching of this person which is on your mind, more likely it will be a wish for punishment, and that is in reality the same as a wish for revenge. And by that you are judging yourself. "But will we not be bound to land in misconceived kindness and namby-pamby philanthropy?" you may ask. Well, perhaps somebody will - but they would have done so all the same. And I do not in any way appeal to such things. I am, quite on the contrary, appealing to a way of thinking and to an attitude towards the actual conditions, which is both clear and logical, and I do further appeal to you to follow the road that leads away from the intellectual jungle of slander and spreading of smear-stories, which in reality emanate from envy and intolerance. With what judgement you judge another human being, your own future destiny will be judged, and with what spiritual measure, you mete him or her, you will in the future be measured yourself by others.