In our civilised society we are probably all familiar with the expressions "natural cordiality" or "gentility of the heart".* But because of that one cannot necessarily take it for granted that all of us also know what lies behind these expressions. There is also another kind of cordiality or gentility that describes a particular way of living adopted by so-called high society. In the old days high society consisted of princes and noblemen, but as absolutism was gradually replaced by democratic thinking and government by the people, refined, noble society became a rather unclear concept. Nowadays a worker, craftsperson or anyone else from the so-called proletariat is able to take up the highest positions in government and become a minister, president or head of state. This would have been unthinkable during the times of royal or aristocratic absolutism. At that time people were divided strictly into two contrasting classes: a ruling class and its slaves. The latter consisted more or less of enslaved townspeople and farm workers all of whom were subject to the will and pleasure of the princes and noblemen. It was an accepted fact that children born into the ruling classes would be brought up to behave with dignity and to possess qualities that would affirm their noble birth, so that one would immediately be able to see that they were not proletarian children. It was regarded as of supreme importance for them to be able to conduct themselves in a way that befitted their station in relation to their peers and that was condescending towards the proletariat or riffraff. The fact that the people with the fine manners and the relaxed and engaging ways of behaving in noble circles at the same time exploited to the extreme the serfs who worked for them, perhaps even whipping them or exposing them to other forms of torture, was not something they just turned a blind eye to, it was in fact in many instances a part of "gentility". People were expected to show respect and veneration to their masters, princes and noblemen, and if they did not do so voluntarily they were forced to. The gulf separating the nobility and the proletariat was meant to be as sharply defined as possible, and the more the common people were held in a lowly, primitive state, the more distinguished and grand the nobility or gentility of that time would appear. Vanity and lust for power were flourishing and "gentility" was merely a sort of human "coating" covering the jungle mentality.

Members of the noble upper classes competed in displaying a certain refined decorum, elegance and chivalry towards each other, and they attached equally great importance to seeking to outdo one another in the elegance of their clothing and outer appearance. But behind this aristocratic mask of gentility and culture, there lurked the lust for power of the animal kingdom, an insatiable ambition and a desire to gain the admiration and worship of others. I am mentioning all this not, as some of you may perhaps think, in order to criticise or talk in a derogatory way about those who wielded power in the past, it is solely an analysis of the conditions that were necessary at that time, but that will no longer be relevant to the mankind that is on its way towards much higher forms of gentility and cordiality. The vanity and lust for power of the upper classes was in fact the means or the driving force that caused the first forms of a higher physical civilisation to come about. The fruits of this higher civilisation we know as the stately castles and mansions, with their beautifully furnished, high-ceilinged rooms, parks, gardens, countless works of art and many other cultural treasures. They were created in order to impress the owner's peers and to inspire awe and respect in the common people – many varieties of admiration. And they have been admired! The castles and luxurious lifestyle of the aristocracy became an example, a kind of model, for the proletariat's dreams of the future. The uneducated servant or slave in moments of deep despair has a deep-seated hope of one day achieving his or her master's state of freedom and superiority. The more the upper classes made their underdogs into slaves while they themselves lived in splendour and ease, the more they were bound to awaken in the minds of their servants or slaves longings to be able to live in a splendour that equalled that of their oppressors. The freedom and power of their oppressors, their enjoyment of the glitter and splendour of life's riches, was inevitably the very thing that constituted the proletariat's hopes and dreams of the future. And this led inevitably to the downfall of the oppressors. Oppression can never ever exist without undermining itself. It ever increasingly feeds the fire of revolt that grows in the oppressed like an inner drive to shake off the yoke and gain freedom, power and a position in society. One day this drive will, like every pressure that is born out of counterpressure, become so strong that revolution breaks out in full force and the upper classes are killed or enslaved by the lower classes who now want to let loose their lust for power and take their places at the lavishly laden table of power and wealth.

This kind of changing of roles has happened many times in the course of history, and the new masters have shown themselves to be just as tyrannical as their predecessors, if not even more so. It is worth bearing this in mind nowadays when dictatorial lust for power has spread to large areas of the world, and a great many people out of naivety or political blindness are gleefully running to serve the dictator's interests, fuelling his fire, a fire that is destroying civilisation. It is true that on Earth something has begun to grow that we call democracy and representative government – as I mentioned before it is possible today for a labourer, craftsman or farm worker to become prime minister or president – and the people themselves vote for their government, but there nevertheless exist two fronts that are at war with each other: an aristocracy and a proletariat. All slavery has officially been abolished, and only a few of the estates and castles are still in the hands of the old nobility. But an economic aristocracy ruled by commercialism has arisen that will do everything it can to avoid giving up advantages and rights of ownership in order to thereby serve its neighbour or remove war from the world. They are now the ones with the castles or the fine modern palaces, limousines, yachts and a staff of servants and everything else that belongs to present-day high society, as well as all the "gentility" or "manners" that are fashionable nowadays. Many of these people are the slaves and serfs of the past who are now able to see what it is like to have the power, the high status and the luxury. But as long as they do what their predecessors did and they exploit and abuse other people and live in luxury at their expense, even though it is in a slightly different form than previously, they will thereby undermine themselves and sooner or later "end up in the gutter". The same applies to those people who at the present moment do not possess power but who dream of one day shining, and who therefore to a large extent are attracted to ends and means that pay no regard to their fellow beings' wellbeing and fate, as long as they can use these means to reach the top. They also will experience the sweetness of being in power just as much as the humiliation of losing everything, regardless of whether the true followers of these dictatorships have leanings towards dictatorships based on capitalism or dictatorships based on totalitarian rule.

But will life on Earth really continue to be a struggle between two parties that take turns in exercising power at the other's expense? No, this is just a transitional state that will last as long as the animal in the human being has so much power that gentility is merely an outer camouflage and is at the same time based on vanity and the desire to shine. One can call this outer gentility "gentility of the flesh", a state of self-worship and egoism, in contrast to "gentility of the heart", which has begun to grow in many people's minds. Gentility of the heart or natural cordiality is totally without any camouflage or adornments; it is devoid of vanity and lust for power. People who possess this gentility feel just as much sympathy for their neighbour as for themselves. They would sooner themselves suffer than inflict any kind of suffering on their neighbour. To possess gentility of the heart is the same as to exalt one's neighbour and to humble oneself; it is to let go voluntarily of the master mentality and to take on the servant mentality. It is the same as to give one's life. But in Christ's words, he who offers his life will own it and he who does not offer his life will lose it. It was Christ's mission to show human beings that there was another gentility than that adopted by high society, whether that society was made up of Pharisees or Romans. Christ represented the truly royal mentality, without outer splendour and "gentility". The only crown he ever bore was the crown of thorns. Christ heralded the birth of a new culture on this globe, in which "gentility of the heart" will take the place of "gentility of the flesh".

There are people who believe that Christianity is a thing of the past, and that it has had its day as a factor in civilisation. But this is a great mistake. What we have called Christianity, and which is certainly in the process of degenerating, is the outer form, the camouflage of dogmatism, ceremonies, resplendent robes, sacraments etc., which down through the ages have certainly served their purpose, even though behind them there has thrived a totally different kind of mentality than the one Christ represented. Have we not seen that the church became a part of the princely dominion? Have not popes, cardinals, bishops and other so-called princes of the church blessed weapons and in certain situations even themselves drawn the sword? History shows that "gentility of the flesh" has until now been the dominating factor in the evolution of Christianity. But this is not said as a criticism either; it has had to take this course. "Gentility of the heart" does not develop all at once, but over many lives, during the course of which human beings learn to see through all the camouflage, learning through experiences of suffering what it is we reap when we sow the mentality of the upper class lord and master. As a result of acquiring these experiences, a "new nobility" will gradually emerge among the human beings on Earth. For just as "gentility of the flesh" has its "distinguished nobility", so does "gentility of the heart" also have its. But there is one great difference, namely, the latter form of gentility has absolutely no lower classes. Here all are equal. Gentility of the heart is not based on vanity or motivated by an insatiable craving to be admired and revered. Gentility of the heart is the cultivation and maintenance of the welfare of others. Since this is its orientation in all situations, it has nothing to hide and has no need to deceive or force its neighbour into doing anything. It blossoms in every situation in which neighbourly love is needed, and it is in itself nothing other than neighbourly love. It is not sentimentality or overwrought emotionalism. In order to truly find a form of expression that benefits the whole it must also be mixed with the intelligence that can demonstrate what in a given situation is the most loving thing to do. True Christianity and "gentility of the heart" or natural cordiality are one and the same thing; it is the Christ consciousness growing as an inner force in the individual human being. We can easily observe how representatives of "gentility of the heart" in many cases have none of the external appearances or civilised veneer that the representatives of "gentility of the flesh" can use to bluff their surroundings with. It is quite likely that there are outstanding representatives of this burgeoning new culture who are a bit awkward in the way they use their knife and fork and are as a result considered, according to the old standards, highly "uncivilised". It can also happen that the person in question has the appearance of a poor person, but it is better to be a representative of love and dressed in rags than to be a person of little substance in fine clothes.

All human beings will from one incarnation to another be given the opportunity to try out how it is to be at the top and at the bottom of society's social ladder, and through the experience that they gather, there will gradually arise the longing for a society in which there are no upper and lower classes, but freedom, equality and brotherhood. Such a society can never come about as a result of revolution; that would merely raise up those who had been underneath and put down those who had been on top, and the new ruling class would create a new form of dictatorship. For this reason true democracy has to grow as an inner force in human beings, and here spiritual science will be a source of inspiration, because through it those who are seeking will be able to understand the unfolding of the cosmic forces not only in the world around them but also in their own minds. "Gentility of the heart" will at some point form the foundation for the civilisation that will embrace the whole of mankind; it will constitute a truly global peace. But in our time we are experiencing "gentility of the flesh" and "gentility of the heart", and these are thought climates that we have in our minds. And only where "gentility of the heart", that is to say neighbourly love, has penetrated through the outer form can one talk about human culture.