{ } = word or expression can't be understood
{word} = hard to understand, might be this

[Opening remarks missing]

... to leave enough time for our descent from Olympus. What we have done, gentlemen, is to climb up gradually from the sphere of -- in which you are only interested -- of gadgets, and metals, and oil and nature -- what you call "nature" -- and have tried to enter gradually the sphere of more life. And you remember, this was matter. And the whole endeavor of man with regard to matter is that it should not matter. This is not a pun. But it is really an attempt to annihilate space and the material world. You conquer it. You always forget that when you speak of matter, you mean "I must have the matter," to exploit it, to use it, to forget about it. All material things then, gentlemen, are treated rightly when you forget about them. The only way. And the arrangement of society tries to give you so much security that you can forget about them. They just function. You put on -- if you turn off -- on the faucet in this hall, you get water. Do you think what this means? Matter has become negligible. Instead of putting in your way the tremendous obstacle that you are thirsty, and you may die from thirst and may have to mobilize a whole bodyguard for getting water from the Connecticut River up here -- this hill, you see -- we have this -- this system of canalization, which means that we have made arrangements that matter does not matter. But you think it does matter, and you put all your energy only in inventing more gadgets, and -- you think that's the fulfillment of life. Gentlemen, it is the condition of life, but not its content. It's the outer shell inside of which life must be led. So the water in the faucet is the right way of treating water. Put it into a canal. Channelize it, you see. Then it becomes less important. And as long as you don't have the water, it is terrible, you see. As soon as you have it, you can forget about it. You just don't give it a thought. Can you see this?

Well, you can't say this of your wife. If once you have a wife, you don't give her -- thought, she will run away. Just the opposite. Because she's alive. And you all make this mis-- this is the disease of the American gadgeteer -- that he thinks that he treats his wife or his children or politics naturally. Gentlemen, nature is that which has to be treated in the opposite way from all living things -- beings.

Well, I've tried to show you -- there's no time now to prove it to you if you haven't already begin to understand it. Then we came to organic life, and said organic life must be lived rhythmically. It must get its fulfillment by being treated in the way life must be treated, and life must be treated organically. And that's what is the main -- the main problem of metabolism is rhythm: when to sleep, when to breathe, when to eat. Once you do -- give this to the organism, he is satis-- it is satisfied. Can you see this? Rhythm, gentlemen, is the treatment for

the first stage of your own individual existence. If you treat your own body rhythmically, he will -- get accustomed to everything. A man can live by four hours of sleep. But he has to get the four hours of sleep regularly. Then you can train your body to be satisfied with four hours of sleep, you see. You can eat very little. As you know, the hermits or the ascetics -- they can live on next to nothing, if it is given rhythmically, you see. Then you can even train your body through such a thing. But you can't forget a body. There is even the hermit in the desert -- the Egyptian desert; he had -- he would go seven miles or eight miles for one cup of water. But he had to stagger along every morning to get this cup of water. That's the law of his life. He cannot forget this cup of water, even if you reduce all you take in to one cup of water. Because rhythm in our organic existence, gentlemen, is the law. What you put into this rhythm -- five meals a day or three meals a day, or one meal a day -- that's up to your training. There you can stretch very much one way or the other.

And you see it with Winston Churchill. I mean, he had to have his cigars. As long as he had his cigars rhythmically, he lives up to 80. It makes no difference -- all the stuff with the cigarette and lung cancer. Don't believe a word of it, I mean.

You know the story of the Scotchman who was famous because he was 95 and still so -- going so strong. So a prohibitionist went to see him and inquire what he -- what made him live so long. Of course, it had to be Prohibition. He'd never touched whiskey, you see, a drop of firewater. So the prohibitionist took down notes and said, "No, I never drank -- milk and goat milk, specially, and I feel very good."

"Well, how about your family? Are there other people who live so long in your family?"

"Oh," he said, "Oh, oh yes. I have a brother who's 97."

"Oh, I must see him."

"You can't. He's drunk all the time."

Don't believe for one moment gentlemen, that it makes the slightest difference how you live in all these respects, if you live rhythmically. You can be abstemious. And you can be voracious. And you can -- I don't believe in any of these stuffs. Once you have seen the freedom of man to move into these five spheres -- an organism is mistreated once it is treated mechanically. For example, { }. Then you get cancer. And when you get a shock each time you cross the red light in New York as a jaywalker. There are too many shocks in modern life. That's why all these people get cancer. Your whole system is, of course, completely

disorganized. Cancer has nothing to do with Mr. Pasteur, and with bacteria, and what all these cancer doctors say and spend money on, gentlemen, is -- you know very well why a person gets cancer: because we live a constantly mechanized life. You think how many times a person today is -- has a slight shock to its physical, very delicate structure. Then you can see that these cells are -- after all -- get out of control. Of course they do. Because they are -- there are demands made on a person in the modern world which weren't made on a farmer in the back hills a hundred years ago, you see. There was no constant telephone call and no constant car crossing the road, and no truck pulling up right in front of your own car while you were going at 60, and such things. I don't see why doctors never consider the difference in the way we live today. We know -- we have embraced as worshipers of the Devil, of the iron calf, the steel machine. And the steel machine -- as all gods whom we worship, all idols -- make their believers suffer. You can take that down, gentlemen. Any god makes his believers pay very highly for his worship. And you, of course -- since you do not know that you have this god, you pay even more heavily. All the people who don't know whom -- which god they have, they have Mammon as their god, and their belly. And they die from it. Why shouldn't they? God is a very exacting magnitude in your life. And you either serve the right god or the wrong god.

So there is -- we came then to the fact that by work, man is able to win out over matter; and by love he is able to win out over what?

(Death.)

Yes, and -- the death is always the death of the individual organism. Organ -- you may say, gentlemen, death is the corpse-producing process. That is, death is the elimination of one organism out of the organic world. It's very important that you should see that death is inside the pattern of life, the elimination of one focus, of one fold, of one point, pinpoint, so to speak, you see. Because you think of your own life as independent. Of course, nonsense. You are only alive within a living universe. And when your bulb is extinguished -- exactly what happens to an electric bulb -- the cable doesn't burn down when the electric bulb ceases to function, we screw in another bulb. But the electric power plant goes on. If you would consider, gentlemen, your own life as nothing but a little excrescence on the tremendous power field, or ocean of life, you would begin to see yourself in the right light. But you actually think that your life begins at your foot -- soles of your feet and goes up to your skull. This idiocy really prevails in you. You really believe that while you stand on your feet there's where your life begins and here's where it ends. That's by and large the ordinary American idea of an individual.

So obviously, gentlemen, what you are -- it has been sunk into you --

drummed into you by your -- from your -- I told you already about your mother's heart. And by speech, it has been blown into you. We have given you a name. We have called you. We have made you move and here you sit now. Have taken -- inscribed yourselves as students. This is all a loan from the universal life of the spirit into yourself. You are nothing. You're just clay. And you have come to life and you will go out of life when your part is done. But as long as you think of yourself, of course, as single, as having life per se, it's idiotic. We are immersed here in a universe that must at every moment be willing to give -- shed light on -- around you, give air to you, warmth to you, garments to you, food to you, and you say that you have life and the rest of the universe is no concern of yours. You look at the world, and you say you are independent. And I am just a stranger to you. Gentlemen, if you do not see that long before you and I were a separate -- we were one life, you can never understand the brotherhood of man. That's the reason. We are only brothers because we -- once we were one life. That's what one calls brothers. There's no other reason why we should be brothers.

So your philosophy, of course -- as I said, philosophy blocks any understanding of religion. Since you all want to have a philosophy, you can't have religion. Like my friend the businessman who thinks then that everybody is out for his economic, material reason -- why --when he isn't. He himself wasn't.

Now we came to the last phase, gentlemen, when all these -- for work, we said work wins out over matter. Love wins out over the individual elimination of the one organism, and enriches life by giving the possibility of using this organism to enhance -- increase life. Then we said there is a life of catastrophe.

Now the word "catastrophe" perhaps needs some elucidation. In our language, as it is today, it is used like "cataclysm," as just wrong, just undoing, just destructive. Gentlemen, the word "catastrophe" means "turning point." Katastrophein in Greek only means "to turn wholesale." It means the same as revolution. I want to -- struck -- to the word "catastrophe" because it includes cosmic events -- earthquakes and famines and fires -- as much as political events. And of course, this whole sphere of turning point makes no distinction, you see, between the physical, the cosmic events and political events, in which men behave like -- this wild nature, too. So therefore I recommend to you to keep this word "catastrophe" and only to be careful about its meaning. It means that the arrangement of life hitherto in existence is no longer feasible. As I said, every war incorporates new units of people -- or separates new units. That would be a catastrophe, because the group no longer is found after the war -- you see, in identity with the group before.

And we have individualized these. And now I want to show you that if you

look down -- from the top down, you see that the whole world is created in large catastrophes. You only have to think of the Tertiary and the diluvium and the glacier and you will see that it is just as reasonable to begin with Sphere 5 and to say the first knowledge that we have of change is of a catastrophical nature. Ja?

(Is this catastrophe Tillich's concept of the kairos?)

Pardon me -- it's a very good question, it seems to me. What is this -- ?

(The -- the catastrophe the same as Tillich's concept of the kairos?)

Well, not quite. I just read the Revelation yesterday for this purpose, to find out when they said the term "kairos." And I had -- how could you know this -- jotted down a number of cases where the word "kairos" is used in Revelation with Isaac, you see, -- a --book on catastrophe. Have you ever read Revelation, gentlemen? Well, it's difficult to read. I can't advise you even to read it unprepared. But it's the book on catastrophe. And it says there that "kairos," that is, Tillich's kairos, opportunity, you see, or moment -- decisive moment -- and the -- the moment and decisive moment and one half of the decisive moment -- very strange expression -- will cease to be. Very apocalyptic vision. At this moment, we cannot enter into interpretation. And I only want to show you that Tillich of course had his expression kairos from the Apocalypse. But the word "catastrophe" is more the engulfing process, the flood that will -- enough -- it is not said catastrophe as regards to the moment in time which is Tillich's concern.

So I would say, if you say kairos, you concentrate on one element of the catastrophe, the when, you see, the when-ness of the event. When you speak of catastrophe without this addition into the -- in this moment of time, when it happens, you see, it's catastrophe. Then it's the content of the event. What it's about. So there are two aspects of the same thing. Kairos literally in Greek means the -- has to do with shaving, with the razor blade. And kairos is that moment, you see -- the razorblade-moment in which something becomes the past, and you have to decide whether you belong to the past, or you enter the next {period}, you see, by taking time by the { }, and saying, "This is my kairos. This is the moment in which I am made, in which I am called into being." The "today" of the Bible testament. But the catastrophe, as you see, is the -- I have spared you this at this moment -- because the -- first I wanted to show you the elementary process. Any such full kairos unites the elements of creation in a new manner. If you would have the -- when the war broke out, Mr. Lindbergh said, "Why not annex the British Commonwealth? Why to go to war for the British? It'd be much simpler to take them over." Well, if he had had his way, he would have -- he thought he could have a catastrophical change without a catastrophe. Big nations cannot give up their existence except in war, you see, under great suffering and travail.

They cannot write a contract, "They have ceased to exist. Good-bye," you see, "Mr. Pierpont Morgan, will you kindly come and become receiver of the British Empire?" That's what the idea of Mr. Lindbergh -- childish. As most Americans think a foreign policy can all be done in a lawyer's office just by signing a contract, or by giving a vote in an assembly {gentlemen}. The fates of nations are more serious, after all, than the birth of a child. Now in a child you still haven't abolished childbirth and travail. And so obviously nations are born under the same travail. It takes years and decades before they are born and when they go to die, it takes also years of withering. And you don't want to have it this way. You just think you go to a lawyer's office and say, "Let's sign it off," or "Let's sign it up," a new lease on life. It's like a lease on an apartment. It isn't. The only way in which you can dissolve mighty empires is by war. There is no other way. Because it is not an act of the will, but of catastrophe. A catastrophe. You cannot dissolve the United States of America by an act of the will. The Confederacy tried it. You have never -- you are quite unable to explain by mere philosophy why the North fought the Secessionists. It was much cheaper not to fight them. Would have been not so much murder, killing, destruction -- why should they? They were independent states. I mean, you are all in your heart of hearts convinced that South Carolina was right. Nullification, I mean, {compact of states}? Dissolve it. That's not true. They found out that their great -- to their great religious disappointment, that once men have entered such a colossal association like the United States, they're in for good. Only a war can have -- could have then settled it, if the South had won. If France and England had intervened in favor of the South, as they hoped they would, then the secessionists might have won, you see. Then they would be states by now. But they couldn't do it by declaration. And they were such children that they thought they could. They sent a message to Mr. Lincoln: "Take away -- let your troops march out of Fort Sumter. Good-bye. Was a pleasant experience."

That's how you try to live, gentlemen. That's why it is so hard for you to understand anything that really happens. But you know the American public is the best-informed, and the most surprised public in the world. You know everything, and you are always surprised with what happens to the -- next. The American government certainly was the best-informed government in the world; everybody knew that Mendez-France was an -- a coming man. But poor MendezFrance had to come to the United States to convince the people in the State Department that he existed. Now, that's why he had to come. Because everybody else in the world knew that he was a coming man -- here, before he became Prime Minister -- only our ambassador didn't know it and Mr. Dulles didn't know it and all the counselors didn't know it because they read the newspapers. And the newspapers are always stale because they only give the news.

But gentlemen, a baby can only be born after nine months being hidden in

the womb of time and nobody {sees her}. If the mother is clever, she even puts on a gown so that you don't even know that she is expecting a baby. And anything really born, gentlemen, cannot be known by the people who are just curious, and not sympathetic. Anybody who loves France -- loved France knew that this man was up and coming. But anybody who was only interviewing people or curious, or visiting Montmartre, he couldn't know that. Because you think actually that the surface of things, this mechanical thing, matters.

Very -- the strange -- of -- the story of Mr. Mendez-France and our -- this country here is a very interesting example, gentlemen, of the ineptitude of the information service of this country. Never is the -- are the Americans aligned up with the coming. They only can see what's there. The statistics, you see.

Now, before the child is born, it doesn't count in statistics. And yet it's much more important that the child will be born, you see, than all these statistics. You remember in 1935, all the Gallup polls done in this country agreed that we were overaged country, and that we would die from old-age consumption and that by 1955, the majority of the people of this country would be older than 45 years of age, you see. And you know what happened? All the time the children were growing in the loins of young Americans, and now they are there, {very disturbing}, 4 million people born in a year. You see. And the whole statistics are {out} -- {old} -- near the end. You can see that either the Americans dissolved in the world war, and proved their complete anarchical disintegration, or they rallied and would have a wonderful rebirth and then they would have children today. And in both cases, you see, the pollsters would have -- had not right because either there would be no United States of America, or there would be a very different one from what they predicted.

No, the modern mind, gentlemen, was only concerned as you know, with these three spheres: the material, the organic, and the work. Love is made just an interruption on erotic experience inside the purpose of play and work. It is not a different state of affairs. And the elementary forces, they are not -- it cannot even be mentioned in this country. Love is made into a divorce -- purpose plan-thing. I marry or I don't marry. I make love or I don't make love -- the very words, "make love," is an insult to love. You can't make love. Love makes you. And it undoes you. "To make love." Terrible. How do you do that? Just the -- only in an obscene way. You can only make love if you tear down love into a lower sphere of intensity.

Now the catastrophe, gentlemen, the elementary rightening of wrong orders, or wrong frameworks -- that's what catastrophes do. The change of the framework within which we live. In this sense the American Revolution War is a change of framework, it's a catastrophe. And again, the best man of the period --

or at least the most intelligent man, the first -- second President of the United States, John Adams -- you may have read his famous statement that he knew that the Revolution would be his family's undoing and not -- and his fortune's undoing, and nothing much better has happened -- has occurred. He wrote to Lafayette, as President of the United States, and yet he felt -- as he wrote in 1816, that the Revolution was a catastrophe. Now why do -- don't -- is it impossible in this country to understand catastrophes, to foresee them, and to do justice to them? Why must people deprive the youth of this country of the right understanding by saying -- speaking of "Mr. Truman's War"? War is a catastrophe, gentlemen. If you say, "Mr. Truman's War," you make it into a third-sphere event. That's infamous. And it is stupid. And is sterilizing. And life is sterilized in this country all the time in public life, because what is an elementary event?

An elementary event is terrible and indispensable. You have made in your mind the division that terrible events shouldn't happen, and that indispensable events should be nice. But the reality of life is, gentlemen, that the important events are terrible and unavoidable. The French Revolution, or the American Revolution, or the Russian Revolution are horrid. They are catastrophes. And yet you and I have to say "yes" to them. The end of the Jewish prophets and of the existence of a pure religion in the midst of the Roman Empire, under Herod, was something terrible. And yet it was absolutely inevitable that the Temple of Jerusalem would -- was to be destroyed.

Now all great events in history, gentlemen, are that which you cannot understand. Something terrible which is necessary. This is the content of a catastrophe, gentlemen. Indispensable, and yet catastrophical. This, you say, cannot be. If you -- since you live, you say, "Death can be avoided." Gentlemen, in your own life, you would also say, if you had your way, "I don't want to die." Now I say, death -- your own death is pretty terrible for you. And it can't be avoided. It's indispensable. This you can, after all, admit. You are going to die. And if you have been loved much, and if you perhaps die in the middle of life, or in Korea on the battlefield at 30, it's pretty terrible. There's nothing to be excused about it. It's not nice. And it is yet inevitable. This is your whole problem with pacifism. You say -- think it is too terrible that a young man should be killed. Therefore, it must not be. This is no logic, gentlemen, for the man who knows that the earth has been created in catastrophes, that every stone is -- that lies here at the bottom of Hanover field, is the result of a tremendous catastrophe. It has never been pleasant. Life is not pleasant. In the sphere of 3-A, of play, the only criterion which you have for -- that something is right is that it is pleasant. The only criterion you have for a human person, for a teacher, is that he has to be pleasant. If he isn't pleasant, you won't take his course. So you can't learn anything serious, because pleasant people are poor teachers.

Pleasant people lie to you. They are hypocrites. They are hypocrites in their {own right}. They can't see the reality. The reality is not pleasant. But you, of course, want to be treated like children and look at everything through rosy glasses. Gentlemen, the world consists of catastrophes. And a catastrophe is something that for you and me, who are frail human beings, is something to tremble. It makes us tremble.

And here we enter then in catastrophe the real field of the religious experience. Religion, gentlemen, is the power to bow, although we shudder. This is the content of a very famous book that appeared 30 years ago which has been accepted even in this country as a great discovery. It is called -- the author is a man called Rudolf Otto. Was a professor at Marburg. He died 10 years ago. And his book is called The Holy. The Holy. In German, Das Heilige. And his thesis was that the fifth sphere, which I 've tried to build up -- he has no concern with the four other spheres -- is an -- the sphere of experiences which cannot be reduced to the experiences of matter; of life, of work or purpose; of mind or intelligence; or of love. There is a fifth element in your and my experience. And he has used very learned words. You may have heard of this. Mr. -- I am sure Mr. -- now -- Mr. Berthold uses these terms. I have tried to spare you these terms as long as I could. They aren't very important. It is {fascin--} -- it has fascination, and it makes us tremble. "Tremendous" in the original sense of making you tremble. "Tremendous" today is -- any girls that can say that you are tremendous, although she doesn't tremble. But in the word "tremendous" there is a word, "tremor," you see, involved -- that what makes us tremble. And the fascination is, we are attracted by it as -- like the basilisk tames the cat. You see, the -- the outer -- the hypno- -- the hypnotic power of the catastrophical invader, or the catastrophical monster that first tames its victim, you see, and then devours it.

I wanted to wait until I put this upon you, before you could see this impact, gentlemen. He is outside the religious sphere who denies this unity of the necessary and the terrible. All philosophy tries -- has been a fight to put on one side of reality, gentlemen, the pleasant, the agreeable, the understandable, the intelligible, the lovable, you see, and say, "This is what should happen" -- and then put all the awkward things, the crimes and the murders, and the catastrophes, the elementary -- the earthquakes and the fire in Tokyo and put it on the other side and should say, "This is what not -- should not happen. Therefore I look to the side that -- where things are that -- that should happen, from my point of view and the others I think are bad." Just bad. Now, there you have the homunculus, the little human being, looking up and prescribing to the elementary forces of life, how they should behave. And that is the funny -- that's why all Americans look so funny as they look on this Orozco fresco, where the young lady is teaching the babies to behave good, and in the meantime, the banker behind the general is murdering some natives in America. You know the fresco of Mr. --?

That's why we are contemptible in the world, you see, because dollar democracy means that the Americans only speak of goodness and only -- and act wickedness. Because we cannot stand the wickedness, we cannot face it, the elementary life. Gentlemen, the elementary life is that which gives life to the existence of empires, and kingdoms, and cities, and families, and institutions. And they come about -- bang! bang! -- with a tremendous catastrophe, against man's human will. Their only criterion is that they are now -- have become indispensable to save life from complete corruption and construct-- destruction. The honor of the American Revolution was that it was mature, or ripe.

So we get this criterion -- now I come to your kairos problem, sir, you see. The catastrophe is more touchy to the moment at which it is permissible to think of it and to enter upon it than all the other events in the other spheres. The degree of timing, gentlemen, distinguishes the four spheres. The degree of timing. If you have a stone in the material world, it doesn't make much difference when you pick it up. You can pick it up in the morning or in the evening. You can let it lie for four weeks. That is, gentlemen, the material world is indifferent -- or more indifferent to timing, than your organism. We said it must sleep, it must breathe, you see. Timing. Then you come to purpose. If you plan a work, you have to put the bridge in at certain time in the year, because otherwise there might be a flood. So the timing becomes for any planned work more important, because you have to get together the times of different people. The money, the capital must be there. So when to put through work is already very important. When you get married, gentlemen, it makes quite a difference whether you get married at 20 or 27. And it {works} -- {quite} -- difference, you see, in your courtship when you find the final -- say the final words. You can say it too early. You can say it too late. You have to say it at the right time.

In politics, gentlemen, the same thing that is right at a certain moment, is disastrous when it is said too late or too early. The American entrance into the war would have been a blessing in 1938, because there was no { }. We couldn't do it. We had no army. It was a curse in 1942. And { } was {destroyed}. It was quite unnecessary, because it came too late. Gentlemen, the United States are always morally right, and always wrong in timing. And for politics, that just doesn't work. The same thing is, you see, useless when it is done too late. If you would go to college at the age of 36, you see, you couldn't join a fraternity. You couldn't enjoy it, could you? I mean, it's impossible. You would feel funny. Therefore { } now or never. {At} the right time. Now most people know a little bit about this, gentlemen. But if -- our philosophers of the last 400 years have been so poor about ever mentioning this problem of when-ness. That Mr. Tillich and myself -- we have cooperated for 30 years on this business. I was his collaborator in his first {yearbook} on kairos. That it came out in 1927. Or before, even, I { }. You can look it up. We have it in the library, you see. When we

discovered this, you see, and that -- the point of -- in time is for the larger the event, the more central for its interpretation. If the catastrophe is heeded in time, it can become a blessing. If nobody heeds the -- accepts the catastrophe as his kairos, you see, then the world goes to pieces.

This is the problem of Christianity, gentlemen. The whole honor of Christ is that He came when the times were fulfilled. And that is the new element of the Christian religion, compared to all other religions. That in Christianity, the criterion of righteousness is that by one man heeding the catastrophe in time, the catastrophe which is inevitable can be turned from a terrible thing into a blessing. The catastrophe, per se, gentlemen, is just terrible and inevitable. By human sacrifice, the catastrophe which is terrible and inevitable can be turned into a blessing. If you would -- can put it trivial -- if you want to put it trivially, our liabilities can be turned into assets. That even a businessman can understand.

This is the problem then, gentlemen, of the last religion, of the -- which came when all the other five spheres had been probed into and had been established. Christianity comes into the world to say, "You have forgotten one element, the element of timing." I -- you have explained the girdles, the belts of life that are around us. There is the material world. There is the organic world. There is the intellectual world. And there is the world of affection, you see. But now comes the calendar of God. Now comes His -- the -- all secrets in which He creates. And He creates one thing at a time. And you may -- human beings are meant to understand what He is creating {now}. And since His creations are so terrible, so catastrophical that they crush millions of people who have not lived up to the occasion, who miss the opportunity, you see, who are dead, who are deaf, or blind, as the Bible says, you see, to see what happens -- and who can't get out of their nationalism, for example, you see, or whatever -- their prejudices. You are the -- in a position to mitigate this { }, to turn this terror of the fascination of the catastrophe into a blessing, if you act five minutes early, voluntarily. The problem, gentlemen, I put here before you, is the same as we saw last time. We saw that Saturnus, the god of the Greeks -- of the Romans, in Greek it is Kronos -- and Jahweh, means the god of the catastrophe. And we saw that the Greeks said, "Deprecate Saturn, may he never happen." And the Jews said, "Welcome, change. We will not therefore settle. We will wait for the coming of the Messiah." The Christian problem is to recognize which catastrophe is indispensable, and then to go into it by voluntarily stripping yourself of the privileges of the old order, which make the break so much harder if the privileges are -- still stand up.

You know that in the French Revolution, the nobility tried to stem the tide on August 4, 1789 by giving up their privileges voluntarily and saying that there should be no nobility anymore in France. That was a very great act of self-denying. I think it came too late. That was all. If you -- it's a very interesting story to

trace that it came too late by a very short time. That if it had been done four weeks earlier, before the Bastille was stormed, it would have been voluntar-- . Because only the completely free sacrifice, gentlemen, influences the catastrophe. But unfortunately the Bastille had been stormed, the mob had got away with murder, the king's royal troops had been withdrawn. Therefore, on August 4th, three weeks even after the storming of the Bastille, it no longer was a completely free act on the part of nobility, because already the powers, you see, the new powers had shown how strong they were, and they were acting under pressure. That doesn't work. Nothing, gentlemen, is a sacrifice that's done under pressure. Nothing is a sacrifice that's done under pressure. In politics, gentlemen, if you act under pressure of a lobby, or whatnot, of public opinion, that is not, you see, sacrifice. You must be very clear about this. The only man I know of who has sacrificed in a grand manner, voluntarily, before the world wars, was Friedrich Nietzsche. And therefore, he is a great man. And that is why you still remember him -- not for what he has said. It's perfectly indifferent for what Mr. Nietzsche has taught. But -- who has read Nietzsche? Ja. He was a free man, in the sense that he embraced the coming catastrophe voluntarily, and devoted his life to live out of the catastrophe backward, and to tell his contemporaries what kind of catastrophe he was part of. And that makes him a memorable, historical figure, gentlemen. And that's how we go to Heaven. And that's why Christ is remembered. For no other reason. { } what He has done. If you look at Him with your own reasonable eyes, He was just a political rebel -- made his life unpleasant for the Roman authorities. They thought He was a traitor -- a king, so He's executed. Isn't this interesting? Of no interest whatsoever. There have been thousands of pseudo-Messiahs, you see. And if you talk to the Jews today, they say, "Oh, what -- He's just one of the pseudo-Messiahs." But that's not the story. The story is His complete freedom in offering the sacrifice. No illusions. That has made such an impression, that He is still not -- unforgotten, and never will be forgotten.

And the same of Nietzsche, gentlemen. If you want to become immortal, gentlemen, don't yield to pressure. Yielding to pressure makes you into -- a member of the matter -- material group, of matter. And matter is something to be forgotten. All human beings, gentlemen, who yield to pressure are forgotten. And rightly so. It's just clay. Just -- who cares? Matter is there to be not a matter. And you don't matter if you yield to pressure. And the funniest philosophy in this country is that it is clever to yield to pressure. Well, if you want to be powderized, and pulverized, and annihilated, yield to pressure. But I -- it's a very unpleasant fate expecting you. You become absolutely superfluous. The man who yields to pressure is superfluous because lower life than man does this much better. Rubber yields to pressure much better than you. You can never excel, you see, in the same direction as rubber, or any plastic. So if you want to be a man, gentlemen, don't look in directions which is -- are not made for you and

me. We are meant to sense catastrophes. We are, so to speak, the geiger counter. If you want to have a modern way. And if we count the catastrophe, we have to do something about it.

Most human beings I know, gentlemen, actually all try to move into one of the spheres below their own best self, when they are -- should be organic, they just run and are mechanized, as they say themselves, when they should be planning work, they just sit in their offices and read the newspapers, leading a -- living in suspended animation. I mean, in most businesses I know, the people have to appear at a certain hour. The rhythm of the business is terribly strict. Oh, you have to go through 10 subways and so on, and get all the kicks into your shins in order to be at 9 o'clock in the Wall Street. But when you enter Wall -- the office, you slump down and you begin to read The New York Times. And that's called work. In fact, the work is reduced in most places to organic, you see, suspended animation, and be cheerful and wait for lunch hour, or { }. Incredible how people can waste their time in downtown New York. I'm not impressed with -- I think the American businessman is incredibly lazy, incredibly lazy, but he's organic, I mean, he's rhythmical. He believes in his working hours, and that's all he believes. Otherwise he believes in nothing.

So you see, gentlemen, most of you -- I too, when we have no higher purpose, we always slide down into one lower rubrum of our own being. If I'm only organic substance, I'm tempted by mechanism. I sit in a car, and I am driven 500 miles an hour in an airplane, because I want to be treated as -- in speeding in the material realm. When I am working, I slump down into the organic world. I'm just suspended animation. I wait from 9 o'clock to 4 o'clock in the afternoon until the train takes me back to my beloved wife, who has waited for me seven hours -- these seven hours or nine hours in vain. Nothing has happened in between, except that she has of course fallen in love with somebody else.

Then you get the confirmed bachelor -- or the man of intelligence, as they call themselves -- scientific knowledge -- who tells his girl all about sexual enlightenment when the girl is four, and they treat love as sex, and they treat love as work. Hard work, obviously, very hard work. And with artificial semination, they even have children. And every perversion, and every stupidity is allowed in the case of love today, because people say, "Let's be enlightened about love." Now gentlemen, love is dark. And if you want to have Jupiter instead of Venus, you will have your -- sleeping room illuminated with mirrors and electric light, and then you find yourself suddenly in a brothel. There they do that. In a brothel, these ladies there, they work. That's their profession. And they have degraded love into work. And most men in this country treat love the same way. They have a bad conscience, and the best they can do is -- as they drink also -- not for pleasure, but as work. They gulp it down in half an hour at a cocktail party, or in

a -- behind a whiskey counter, because they have such a bad conscience about drink. So they treat it as work. Hard work. Of course, the stomach resents this, you see. The stomach of an individual only reacts to organic treatment or affectionate treatment. If you have friends at a dinner party, you can drink immensely much, without any harm, because you love each other. And the bodies are all in tune, and harmonize, and any individual at a good meal can drink twice as much as he can drink individually. But in this country, I have looked -- go to the movies occasionally, I see always these lonely drinkers, who -- they're exhausted or so, they pump each other up and -- whoop! whoop! This is sin. This is sin, because it's done without affection. It's done on a purpose. You cannot drink with a purpose, because it's a physical experience. You can either drink organically, as you drink water, you see, because you are thirsty, or you can drink exaltedly because you are in love, with {common} friends, or a girl with whom you meet {in peace}. Drink a glass of champagne. But you cannot possibly drink alone. Anybody here who is hit by Alcoholics Anonymous is a man who is so ruined that he has taken to drinking by himself. And such a man cannot be helped, really. You see, he has abused his stay in the universe. He has taken to will what he is not meant to will, the spirits transfigure your organic life in easing the tension of the individual in -- by expressing the exultation of being together. There has been no group in the universe, except in America, that hasn't moved by spirits. That is, the Germans had beer, and the French and the Italians had wine, and the Hindus had {sova}, and any group had invented a special kind of liquor, really, of drink to -- or Mead, the Swedes have -- the Scandinavians -- for -- express this good feeling that this whole group cared, you see. And the drink, gentlemen, is only the imparting to the individual of the exultation that is created by love, by the experience of affection, by this, what I call "breathing together." Because inspiration, gentlemen, or spirit, or love is nothing but breathing together. And thereby taking it easy yourself. Because if you -- three people, you see, do the same thing together, they take away from the founding, so to speak, in the individual body, a lot away. It is easier to sit together here, you see. You must see this. I make it easy for you. If you hear me, you really re-- speak the same thing at the moment while I am speaking, but you say it, you see, in quotes.

So I try to make you drunk. That's exactly what I try to do. But it is forbidden to say such a thing in this country. If I would -- if the people would come out with the truth and say that any teacher tries to make his students drunk, they would immediately dismiss the poor teacher, because they've never heard of such a thing. They want to stay sober and stupid.

Because it's all on this level of work, of planned work. Gentlemen, work is only possible in the -- for -- on material. I am not working with any material, gentlemen. Do you think that the religion of mankind is material? It's perfectly

immaterial, but it is very material to the future of the human race that you should not be a stumbling block in the way of true religion. I try to de-materialize you in this course, so that you should not become the hangover and the dead weight on the shirt -- or how would you say -- coattails of religion. And defend -- to forbid -- make it impossible for us to fly and to soar into the -- where we should be. You are the material which I have to fight in this course. There is no material. But if you go my colleagues' courses, they cheat, because they say that they treat Goethe, or Shakespeare, and Dante, as the materials you should work on. As though anybody could treat a poem as work! If you don't enjoy it -- and you aren't delighted by the work, nothing can help you. Everything stems from something terrible in this country, because the highest goods -- Dante, the Bible -- is called material, {calling} for your stomach, for your bowel movement. Gentlemen, it's something to look up to, if they are not stars -- shining stars of your life, why should you read them?

I think I told you the story of Mr. Hutchins, and the Declaration of Independence, didn't I? Wie?

(Not sure.)

Here -- this -- big group reading, you see, of important books, the hundred biggest -- best books, Great Book issue, and so they had such a session in Chicago, and a friend of ours went there. And what they did, they took it apart and said the Declaration of Independence was just materially interested philosophy of landowning -- the landowning class of this country. It was all just -- because George Washington had so much real estate, around Washington. And so she went to see Mr. Hutchins, the instigator of the whole plan and said, "Now, Mr. Hutchins, you call this the Great Book issue, and all I've heard in this group is that the Declaration of Independence has been debunked. So it has ceased to be a Great Book, has it not, by -- in the process. So why should I read it?"

He had no answer, because it had been treated as material.

Gentlemen, as long as you cannot turn around and see that you are sometimes -- or mostly below the highest possible grade of receptivity and understanding, the whole story of religion makes no sense. You must always expect in a classroom like this that we here are not up to understanding the great events of life. Because we are here after all in a very artificial situation. We are not at our best at this moment. You would be much better on a battlefield. You would be much better at a wedding. You would be better in an electoral campaign, where you were the candidate for the Senate. And imagine, if you were running for president, you had to -- you see, all the electricity, all the inspiration, you see, you would ever have in your life. But you don't have them at this moment, sitting on

your buttocks. Now how can a man who is -- here, sitting in a classroom, expect to be able to come up to the highest moments of his own life, if he doesn't admit that there are higher moments? The condition, gentlemen, of our meeting here any issue, head-on, is that we admit that we are here second-best from our own life. Otherwise I can't talk to you. If you do not assume that at occasions I have been more exposed to danger, shown greater nobility of spirit, greater presence of mind than here, and that this is only a reflection of my experience in other fields, my teaching makes no sense. And the same with your love, gentlemen. If you do not expect that at the moment when you propose to your girl that you are better man than you are at this moment, I cannot talk to you about fourth sphere, because here we are at this moment {involved} -- Sphere 3, you see. Working.

Therefore, gentlemen, I come now to the important conclusion which I have tried to build up, gentlemen. Catastrophes, affection, must be looked up to, and the other life must be looked down. That is, gentlemen, the experience of up and down is the queerest, most inexplicable, and yet I think unavoidable acceptance of the human mind. As soon as you say that the human mind looks down on everything, or faces everything, or makes everything into an object of your subjective study -- into your material -- you have excluded one-half of reality. The one half up to -- for which you are not up at this moment, which you have still to await, to expect, to open up to you. And this is the -- {center, of course} of our terrible situation in a modern arts college, that this is not acceptable. That people say, "We are secular, therefore there is nothing higher than we." Gentlemen, if there is nothing higher than you and I, there are no humanities, and there are no social sciences, and there is no government, and there's certainly no religion. The condition for you and me to talk about these things is: you can criticize any one religion; you can criticize any one government. But you have to decide at this moment, before you leave this classroom, is there something to which you look up? And is there something to which you look down? If you say there are only things to which you look down, everything I have said -- tried to say here -- makes absolutely not sense. Because we are at this moment not in the -- in a catastrophe, here in this classroom. It's well heated. We are not making love to each other. We are trying to find our place in the material and in the spiritual world. That's what this course tries to do, to place us. With regard to the changes which are coming upon us and are happening around us. This placement is a reasonable undertaking, a purposive undertaking, but it has not the high potency, and the high voltage of falling in love, or going to war, or founding a new state, or going on a crusade, or sacrificing your whole life on a mission. Can you see this?

So gentlemen, this is therefore the greatest impact -- that whenever people talk intellectually on religion, they must make up their minds to whom they look up and to what they look down; and the division is between what and who.

There is a complete confusion today in your mind. You think you can ask, "What is man?" You can ask "What is God?" No answer possible. Man is not what. And God is not what. Man is he or she. He's never it. God is either a living being, "he and she" probably in -- together, or He is not. To discuss God as an object means to say there is no God. So the thing today is always begging the question. All the people who have bull sessions on the existence of God have already answered the question beforehand that there is no God. Because if God can be made the object of your and my discussion, we don't need the category of God. He belongs then to the sphere of the its, of the material world, of the organ-- organisms, which we can purposively, you see, try to incorporate into our lives, or try to prolong by our mating, and by our friendships and by our associations. Gentlemen, the condition of your understanding the up and down is that wherever we put the word "up," we have to personify. And wherever we use the -- look down, we have to de-personalize, we have to neutralize, as we say. We have to objectify. An object is a thing. Where we look up to, we see no things. We see persons. You look up to your -- perhaps you don't look up to your father -- but ask yourself if you have any person in life to whom you can look up. If you can't look up to anybody, gentlemen, you are the poorest of the poor. You have lost one-half of your existence.

This is even biologically very simple, gentlemen. There is -- I will wish to round out this by the newest biological tenet. In a famous book written in Europe -- of course, it hasn't been translated in America yet, because in America {as they think only after} 30 years later in science. This was published in 1944 by a Swiss. And it's called Fragments on the Biology of Man. And he makes a very simple point. He says that human beings are -- enter the world -- we, I think we talked about this -- leave the womb of their mother after nine months, whereas biologically speaking, strictly speaking, they should live in the womb of their mother 22 months, by and large, or 24, or 27, according to the relations of an elephant, its cub, you see, to his mother. Therefore, he says, the miracle of man is that he enters the world and looks up to some guiding star outside his mother's womb, while the cubs in the animal kingdom still are inside the womb and look up there only to the matrix in which they develop. So that man is taken out and put under the guidance and leadership of authority at a time when this would cause one to purely physical growth within a -- in a womb of a mother. And he says the matrix of men therefore is speech, because even eating, even shitting, everything is done under the impact of the word spoken to this animal by somebody else to whom he looks up as authority. So the very first experience, the division -- dividing line between animal and man, this man explains, is that his life is organized, not led, but first instituted under the impact of speaking authority.

[tape interruption]

But we are very provincial, gentlemen, intellectually. Very provincial. You don't know this. You think because we have the news service, we are not provincial. You are incredible -- we are incredibly provincial, with regard to the great issues of -- changes of temperature in the intellectual life of the world. People here still talk of revolution. Nobody in Europe has even heard that word for the last 20 years. That's just one example of how these things -- how we are -- still live on the '70s, when this country was mentally established. Very strange.

But this problem, gentlemen, has to do with our relation to the -- or our representation of God. The first representation of the divinity -- and probably the last -- is the spirit of a dead. We worship -- not the dead today, but they have been worshiped, as you know; and the form of the immortality of the soul is always wrapped up with the existence of a god. Now perhaps you can understand why this is so, gentlemen. The -- our power to look up, our power then to sense catastrophe, our power to make meaningful our own life within the whole life of the created universe obviously depends on one little item, which suddenly ties the dead and the gods together. I have spared you this, so far, but you will just have to look around our cemeteries. We are always close to churches. You have to think of the pyramids of the pharaohs, who are -- which are big tombs, to understand that religion always has something to do with death. Why is that so? Human beings have not only had to live 13 years as embryos under the impact of authoritarian speech. But man begins his existence as men, with a mind, and with the power to incorporate, of work, and of making love consciously, by speech, under one condition: that he's still so plastic that he can accept orders from somebody else. The dead are the first people who enabled man to remain childlike through the rest of his life. You remember that the Gospel says that you have to become like little children.

Now you all accept the fact that you can still improve you mind now, at this age. No animal can, at that age, at a mature age. When sex is, you see, sexual maturity is -- has come into an animal its mental growth is over. We stay childlike under one condition, gentlemen: that there is still somebody who can tell us something. Now, if you ask yourself, what strange world you and I have created, compared to the {forest}-world or lion-world or wolf-world { } {there is} -- a {created} Constitution of the United States, written in 1776, which directs you to the end of your days. That is, you cannot run outside these channels of life, you see, which we have marked out. Wherever you see -- you go, gentlemen, you are allowed to learn to invent, to discover, to be free, to be independent, because somebody else has taken it upon you, before you were born and while you are changing, to remain stable and to {tell you}, in general, what actions should be taken while you are feeling out our your next action. Gentlemen, this -- what Mr. Portmann, this professor Adolf Portmann in Basel, has said for the embryo, is equally true of your last minute in -- on this earth. And man is only a man if he

listens in some respect to the dead. The whole cult of the dead, or the whole importance of the dead for the living comes from this fact that if your parents, your grandparents, hadn't looked out for you, you could not have any leeway, equilibrium, any reserves to change, to fight for yourself. A very mysterious thing, gentlemen, that a biologist discovers at what end of the scale this freedom of a man to be like plasma, plastic, under the impact of his mother's and his father's commands, and do something that these parents just tell him to do. Man is absolutely flexible, you see. You can train into a child anything. Murder, love, and obedience, and loyalty, as you know everything -- a child is just plastic. And this is true at the end of life. Gentlemen, people have heeded the fact that somebody has lived before them as a means of their own deliverance, and of their own emancipation. If somebody before us has done something that matters, that stands out, I gain freedom. Because, for example, this father has said to my brothers, "Don't kill him." Therefore I don't have to arm against my brothers, because they are under his orders, you see, not to kill me. So I can use my time a little better.

Well, you accept this all so na‹vely, and it strikes you as something so big, the Constitution of the United States. Gentlemen, just think very primitively. It is enough for you and me that one man has lived before you effectively in order to give you a certain amount of freedom. Once you can understand this, you see that the worship of the dead is simply a way of remaining childlike, yourself. The more somebody before me has already laid the groundwork, or the pattern of life, the more I can remain childlike. If he hasn't been there, I must take over his mammoth responsibility of being armed to the teeth, and fighting for my life, you see, and giving no -- no parole -- no -- how do you say it? -- no pardon, giving no quarter, and asking no quarter. It's then, you see, everybody against everybody. As soon as someone has formed this womb, which the child, the baby receives in the cradle over himself, for the -- all of my life -- just as you here are made in this womb of education which protects you -- the more you -- we gain then in plasticity, the more we become this strange animal that has not yet any definite shape, the more we become changed ourselves. And you see now the connection with the religious problem. The religious problem is the problem of change, you see. We must change our mind, we change our body, we change everything. We change our character, you see, we change our elementary framework in which we move; one day George the Third, next day President Washington -- it's a change in loyalty, it's quite a big order.

Now we see -- enter the problem that man himself is that element of life that is the most changeable. That, so to speak, ties all the five spheres together. You discover that while -- as other animals, beings obstruct change, man is this animal which can volunteer for change. We come here now to the problem of -- the deepest problem of sacrifices {like} Christianity. Man fulfills his destiny, less

when he stays as he is, you see, but more when he introduces, you see, change. This is very different from any other being we know, that we are preserving our changeability by the incredible feat that today we still speak of Jesus Christ, of Adam and Eve. Gentlemen, you don't know that your freedom depends on this looking back on 6,000 years. If you could not have inherited from them some guarantees, you would have no freedom yourself, if you would be the first men. And this is another heresy of Rousseau and Mr. Franklin, you see, that they try to persuade you it would be better if you would start the universe. Gentlemen, if you would have to start the human life on earth, you would be the slave of every wind, and every rain-gush, obviously. You would have no roof and no shelter. You would not have any provision for your development of your own decision to change anything, you see. Because it would be completely used up in the process of adjusting yourself to circumstances. Isn't that true? Can you see this? You would just be a {wick} or a -- in the atmosphere.

So the incredible feature which Mr. Portmann discovered from the physiological end is also true historically. Man begins to be man when he makes arrangements for remaining more plastic, more changeable. The whole problem of the history of religion is the hit-and-miss experiments, how to keep every man born from a mother as though he still was in some mother's womb during the rest of his life. Who has lost his parents already? Well, I'm -- you are fortunate, gentlemen. That's as it should be. I lost my parents when I was -- my father died when I was 40; my mother died when I was 50; and yet I can tell you that although I was already in this country when my mother died, I was at the funeral of my father when he died -- and I had even to give the funeral oration myself -- that the feeling is very strict and very simply this: that the death of your parents takes you into the front-line of life. That as long as they live, you have some people who are bearing the brunt of life more directly. This has nothing -- I was very economically independent, long ago, long before. I had my own family. I had my own profession. My father was retired. Lived in a very pleasant environment, but without any responsibilities himself. And yet so strongly -- normally, I think, -- is this tie between parents and children that when your parents die, you feel that you are moved up in -- what I of course from my own war experience is perhaps it is derived -- you would use another simile -- that you are taken out of a degree of protection and there's nobody who stands between you and fate. Can you understand this? I think that is such a simple experience that you should also know why a death of such a father or mother must make you tremble, even if you won't wish to cry. Because you are uprooted. You are uprooted out of the protective trench -- the second trench or the third trench in warfare -- give me another simile, give me a peacetime simile. Is there anything from baseball which you can use? But I have not heard one minister -- they have no religion. They have just sentimental talk. They have no experience it seems of real -- what is meant by religion. Religion is the power to face death, to face change. Now the

first experience anybody who is deprived of his elders has that he is thrown forward, prejected, projected, from a position where he wasn't immediately challenged, where -- even if your father is very critical of your behavior, gentlemen, you will later -- 10 years later -- be saying, "Oh how happy was I because I had somebody to be critical of me. Because now I have nobody who is critical of me." You see. And a man of 80 is dying, because there's nobody who scolds him, you see.

And the greatest feature -- yesterday you saw it. Did anybody read the Winston Churchill 80th birthday? Who has read it, the description? Only you? You haven't? That's very -- you all must read it. Wie? What? Ja. Did you read it? Well, gentlemen, what was the high point of his birthday? Wonderful. Of course he's the most imaginative fellow there is in the world.

(Well, he looks forward to his own death very humbly, didn't he?)

Well, we all do, I hope.

(No, I mean, but -- )

That's not the high point. This you do not only do on the 80th birthday. No. He had dinner with his wife all by themselves. This great national hero with the queen and the Parliament and all the people celebrating from the whole Commonwealth, and then he went home at 8 o'clock in the evening. He put on his still -- long-tail coat and his white tie for his wife. Because she's the only person who is allowed to scold Winston Churchill. And there he remains young. And that is rejuvenation. Gentlemen, you -- that is very simple. But it's very -- have you ever heard of a great man, on his greatest day of honor just has dinner with his wife and nobody else? Not his children, nobody. That is his gift of love to the feet of his greatest homage. She is the one. If you look at her picture, it's a very wonderful person. She has kept him going. And why has she kept him going? Because she is the only person who is not overawed by him, who laughs at him and says, "Winston, you are an ass." Because gentlemen, if you -- leave your parents, you have to find somebody who laughs at you, and treats you as a child. Because that keeps you as a human being, you see. That keeps you in this strange situation of -- that it doesn't finally matter who you already are, that tomorrow you must be different.

It is incredible the -- what we -- {this is} acquired quality, gentlemen. Take this down, gentlemen. The central quality which man acquires by religion is plasticity, changeability itself. I've tried to put before you today, gentlemen, the unity of the five spheres. They can all be summed up in our being able to meet the change, as not external, but as given us as our special life commission, as our

commission. All other things in life resist change. Man can go in advance towards change, gentlemen. It's the whole problem of liberal education, the whole problem of any formation of life. And I think Winston Churchill yesterday gave, as I say, a wonderful example. In this dinner party to his wife, and with his wife, or by his wife to him -- they began life all over again -- was their honeymoon. Now at 80 to be on a honeymoon, gentlemen, that is some achievement. And this means a honeymoon. If the two are more important to each other, you see -- not -- they have children, you see.

You know what happened to poor Winston Churchill and his son-in-law. He just can't stand him, and so they tell the wonderful story that -- I won't give the name of the son-in-law; he has several -- and so this son-in-law, whom he doesn't like at all is very industrious and insidious and always wants to insinuate himself to his great father-in-law, and so is always very pleasant and so. And he one day asked him, when -- while Mussolini was still alive, "Who is -- " no, Mussolini was not alive -- "Who do you think is the greatest man of the last generation? And he thought that he would answer "Winston Churchill," the father-in-law.

But Winston Churchill just looked at him grimly and said, "Of course, Mussolini." Of course, that was very unexpected. Why should Winston Churchill say "Mussolini"?

And the son-in-law said very timidly said, "But why, Win--?" I don't know, they call "Father," probably, "Daddy?" I don't know that--

And so Winston Churchill looked him all over and said, "Mussolini had his own son-in-law shot."