Love, the Law of Life

In the ages when society had not evolved to the complexity of today, social affinity depended solely upon physical affinity. Hence, the earliest authority was that of patriarch or matriarch. As mankind increased in numbers and humanity gradually developed, in addition to the physical, there was evolved a psychical affinity. Economic affinity is of the nature of a mediation between physical and psychical affinity, but it possesses more of the elements of the psychical than of the physical.

The society of psychical affinity, like that of physical affinity, possesses but few restraints. It is a society which can freely make covenants. Even the law has the form of a covenant, and the idea of law as a covenant is a development of this period. Of course, without psychical affinity social contracts cannot be executed; but it is a grave error to suppose that therefore society is established solely by contract.

During the period of psychical affinity violence also evolved psychically. That is, from the time of simple physical force, it developed into an intellectual force of arms. Hereupon, specialists in the social struggle for existence appeared, namely, soldiers. In other words, in psychical society fighting degenerated to a kind of trade. In periods of peace and in situations where the struggle for existence is slight, and psychical affinity flourishes, the military and the constabulary become the most unpopular occupations and are filled by men of the lowest class. This was true of the soldiers of England and of America before the World War.

As the result of social affinity evolving on beyond psychical elements, moral affinity makes its appearance. Moral affinity transcends race, family, sciences and arts, tastes, relative social position, and personal appearance, and awakens all men to their humanity. Genuine society is created, and the saying that “Law is the morality of the people’ comes to be well understood.

In the world of moral affinity each individual loves others as one’s expanded self. Whence law takes on a different form. In an age of psychical affinity men having interests in conflict with the group are excluded. The white race excludes those who are colored. But in the new ethical society love, which is affinity of conscience and superior to psychical affinity, unites all individualities. As a result a new feeling toward both enemies and. criminals comes into play.

Shall the men active in labor movements regard capi- — talists as unforgivable? Or if they are to forgive, to what degree shall they forgive? Furthermore, entering into the general problem of punishment, wherein are the fundamental principles of criminal law? What are its essential elements? Some regard confinement in prison as punishment; but does punishment signify revenge or education? Are we to leave men’s offenses unforgiven and put them in shackles or segregate them by some other method, or are we to adopt still another method of leading and educating them? These are truly serious problems.

Many people take the view that since God punishes mankind, it is right and proper for men as representatives of God to mete out punishment to criminals. The punishment of criminals by men as representatives of the Perfect One is practiced today, in Japan as in other countries. Does the Minister of Justice punish with this thought in mind, or does he merely adopt the usage and inflict punishment without any such idea? I do not know; but he does at any rate inflict punishment without hesitation according to the criminallaw. However, what does Jesus say in regard to this practice? According to the most advanced thought among the ’ Jews of Christ’s time, one guilty of an offense should be forgiven up to seven times; but Jesus commanded them to forgive “‘seventy times seven.” The meaning is not literal but signifies “forgive absolutely” or “forgive boundlessly.”’ We do not understand this to mean that men are simply to forgive each other indefinitely. Rather, we must expand this principle in its social implication and consider to what degree we are to forgive.

Tolstoy, who did not admit the need of prisons, said, “Absolutely do not judge; do not judge men.” Of course, all Christians must determine their standpoint with this spirit as the basis. Jesus teaches this, taking a parable from the retainer who was forgiven by his lord but did not forgive the man who owed him money. Herein exists a dual relation: if we do not forgive ‘others, neither will God forgive us. If we with the consciousness of having advanced to a certain stage condemn those who are unable to advance as we do, as ‘being on a lower plane, then God who is infinitely above ‘us must as a matter of course condemn us who are far ‘below Him. The parable as given in Matthew 18:21-35 is extremely interesting:

Then Peter came up and said to him, “‘Lord, how often is my brother to sin against me and be forgiven? Up to seven times?’”’ Jesus said to him, “‘Seven times? I say, seventy times seven!’”’ That is why the Realm of heaven may be compared to a king who resolved to settle accounts with his servants. When he began the settlement, a debtor was brought in who owed him three million pounds; as he was unable to pay, his master ordered him to be sold, along with his wife and children and all that he had, in payment of the sum. So the servant fell down and prayed him, ‘‘Have patience with me, and I will pay you it all.”’ And out of pity for that servant his master released him and discharged his debt. But as that servant went away, he met one of his fellow-servants who owed him twenty pounds, and seizing him by the throat he said, ‘‘Pay your debt!’”’ So his fellowservant fell down and implored him, saying, ‘‘Have patience with me and I will pay you.”’ But he refused; he went and had him thrown into prison, till he should pay the debt. Now when his fellow-servants saw what had happened they were greatly distressed, and they went and explained to their master all that had happened. Then his master summoned him and said, ‘‘You scoundrel of a servant! I discharged all that debt for you, because you implored me. Ought you not to have had mercy on your fellow-servant, as I had on you?” And in hot anger his master handed him over to the torturers, till he should pay him all the debt. My heavenly Father will do the same to you unless you each forgive your brother from the heart.”

This is a new way of viewing the matter. At present, — from the standpoint of evolutionary theory crime is) regarded as degeneracy. An anti-social life, 2. ¢., a degenerated social life, is regarded as criminal. Opposition to the age, or lagging behind the age, is a crime. The murderer commits a crime because the relation between himself and others is anti-social. The adulterer deranges the maintenance of a pure strain, obstructs the purpose of selection, and contracts an unrighteous, superficial relation—his is an anti-social crime. Moreover, lying, hypocrisy, greed—in short, everything which fails to advance in a purely social direction is a crime. However, simply punishing these for the mere reason that they are cases of retardation will never cure them. We must, instead, put forth a greater effort to lift them to a higher plane. Here must emerge the effort toward redemption.

Society will not be ameliorated except by sacrificial effort. Punishing is in the end a power which only God possesses. Since punishing implies exclusion, the one who obstructs the life of society has his life taken. Killing by inflicting the death penalty is the present mode of punishment; but such freedom is God’s alone, and for man to stand as God’s representative and assume His prerogative is insolence. When men realize their duty to save, then begins the true life of endurance of pain. In other words, in a society of quickened conscience there must be the effort to go forth to save. Jesus himself chose the life of conscience which takes redemption as its sole standard. In this life which can never forget the duty of saving men, punishing is in itself inconsistent. Socialistic penology of the present day is advancing in this direction with astonishing momentum.

We who cannot punish will do enough if we segregate criminals. Wedo not approve of removing them by the death penalty. We confine them until they are able to share with us our common responsibilities. The criminal becomes a patient in hospital. It is a fact that today all prison authorities have awakened to the realization that the prison is a kind of hospital. A criminal, from the social standpoint, is either insane, weak- minded, or anidiot. Therefore he is not to be punished but relieved. This principle is not merely individual in its application: things which are socially abnormal, é. g., capitalism, need to be newly reconstructed by our energy.

In the world today there is in truth much that must be salvaged and reconstructed, both individually and socially. Since from the standpoint of eugenics the majority of criminals are either idiots or feeble-minded, it is strongly urged that they be either castrated or forbidden to marry. It is interesting that this accords with the practice adopted in very ancient times. In the Ten Commandments it is stated that those who do not worship God will be punished to the fourth generation, but beyond this no punishment extends. Possibly it was thought that however evil or inhuman a man might be, by the fourth generation the evil of his nature would be so reduced that it would not be necessary to destroy all in order to remove the small remaining portion of evil. From this consideration also the death ~* penalty should be abolished. Movements to abolish the death penalty are arising throughout the world. In certain states of the United States of America the death penalty has already been abolished by constitutional amendment, and certain of the smaller states of Europe also have taken the same step. In France too the new principle was for a time in practice.

In any event, it is impossible that we should ourselves assume God’s power, and punish our brethren. It is sufficient if we by some system segregate them without punishing them. We must reject the evil and create the good. The criminal by being confined in a prison for three or four years is at least somewhat educated, and is urged to serious reflection; and he must always be segregated sufficiently to prevent his having an injurious effect upon social life. The treatment must be one marked by abounding sympathy with the spiritual life of each individual. With such ideas in mind there have been developed special institutions, such as the Juvenile Courts of Japan and the Women’s Courts in America. Crimes themselves cannot be judged by summing up minute distinctions. In contrast to the practices of ancient times, we have in this matter awakened both individually and socially. The spirit of Jesus, who said, “‘Make your seven seventy times seven,” is gradually being realized; and the new education and the new hospitals for criminals are attempting the way of perfect forgiveness, and are genuinely protecting the social life of all people.

However, though new hospitals for criminals are built, laws do not therefore disappear. Laws remain as long as society exists. Laws inflicting penalties will vanish, while more and more laws will be developed, as records of the social principles best adapted for increasing social efficiency. Wherefore, governments also will exist in perpetuity.

We must note, however, that the governments which will endure will not be of the forms which now obtain.

Of those existing at present the majority are of the military form, which was, as I have stated, imposed upon them by the struggle for existence. These forms will persist as long as wars continue. The power which organizes the military system may be called king, or president, or dictatorship of the proletariat, but in that all assume the military form there are no great differences between them. Hence there always remain certain injustices. When Lenin called the Russian Communism of 1918 “‘War-time Communism,”’ he called it thus simply in order to explain the occurrence of such injustices; and communism or socialism, when organized after the military type, is accompanied by extreme forms of injustice. While war is in progress these organizations possess an extraordinary affinity, and they readily take the form of war-time socialism. Yet when the war is ended, it is difficult for them in this form to continue to unify societies which ever tend to divide. But in times of peace also, where preparation for war is wont to be made, various paradoxes arise.