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

[Opening remarks missing]

"It is his death which is important to us, rather than His life. Christ Himself considered His life as unimportant, and was not as beautiful as was popularly believed. Christianity is the picture of one man's loneliness in His own generation. One point in our background, there took place a conversion which was the turning point in the history of the Church. This date, 999, was the year of the conversion of the Icelanders, a horde of barbarian degenerates" -- now I haven't said that -- "to Christianity." He didn't believe it. "A horde," I see { }. "A horde of barbarians. It's called the `Ultima -- Ultima Thule' of the Church marked a time when Christianity had caught up with the Western world. But this was only the beginning of the {story}.

"It has taken 950 years more to dissolve the pagan message and way of life. Even today, we must combat -- -bat abortive attempts to prove that man doesn't need to believe in anything. Therefore, we may divide the story of Christianity into two periods: the first millennium would represent the Mother Church; the second is the story of her daughter-nations. The history of the world -- Western world might be called the dialogue of the daughters of the response to the message. The first millennium then is the chronicle of events in the life of the Church, such as her council meeting and dogmatic quarrels. The second is the story of national wars and revolutions. We live in an era which has shifted its interest away from Church history. An educated man should know the story of the first and second millenniums without merely abstracting Church and state as concepts.

"The Church had earlier beginnings of this country than did the state as the essential reasons for the immigration to this country were religious, rather than political. They are four basic elements essential to any Church. They are: mission; a feeling of inner" -- not a feeling of inner brotherhood -- "the realization of the inner brotherhood by Communion; remembrance of the founder; and the renunciation, denying some part of our daily environment as unimportant. We have been given three watchwords for the second millennium. They are: crusade, reformation, and progress."

Who knows { }? Nobody? They unknown? Who? Mr. J. M. Deaver. Does he exist?

[unintelligible]

We have this one week without the seniors. { } is a senior here? We have a senior here? Nice. Very much. And how does it happen that you are here?

(I just thought I would come.)

Wonderful. Gives me back my belief in mankind. That is already beyond progress. You'll see that he already belongs to the third millennium.

As a matter of fact, I have been asked this simple question: What now lies beyond our own time? And since I believe that we only know of the past, because we believe in the future, obviously, gentlemen, the picture I have drawn up for you in all this course and last time, especially, makes only sense, because I firmly believe that with my thought I have tried to take you beyond this dialogue between the Church and the nations. Obviously the story of nationalism is at an end. The story of progress is at an end. Once you have jet planes and the atom bomb, we may invent still a better refrigerator and more television, but it's not very important. It's a principle. We know that we can invent. As a matter of fact, gentlemen, the second millennium of progress ends in a century which we call the last century, the 19th century, in which we have invented inventions. Formerly people invented things. But today we have invented how to invent. So that is the -- the non-plus-ultra of inventing, you see. We have invented a system by which daily inventions are made. That's something quite different from the accidental invention of the wheel in antiquity. We invent inventions.

I was told of a dean of a faculty, who told a professor of chemistry -- of physics, who had been 30 years in that college, that if he came now, he wouldn't be appointed. The physicist was rather taken aback, and said, "Why not?"

"Well, today we need nuclear physicists. And you are a classical physicist."

And so this dean had caught up with the spirit of the times, you see, of eternal progress. And he thought that if he only would be on the -- on the last, extreme branch of the tree of physics, he would serve his college better than if he grafted anybody on the main stem. I think the dean was quite mistaken, but it only shows you how people think only in terms of eternal technological progress, so this -- the nuclear physicist seems to him the -- the only physicist who still counts. Even the older physicists are already superseded in -- inside physics.

Let me now do two things this week. Today I would like to give you the vision in terms of what has to be done of the third thousand years of our era. How long they may last, we do not know. Thousand years, it stands here for future. It doesn't matter whether you give it 500 years, or a thousand years, or 5,000 years. But you should give it more time than you usually think about. You only think

about the next generation. Now in terms of man's place on this earth, the next generation is too little. That's too short. If I could only talk to you about your future, gentlemen, your career, and what you have to expect up to the year 2000, I would not fulfill my promise that all the history of the past we know is only understandable as long as we believe in the future. Belief in the future mi- -- means always believe in a time which neither you nor I can see. The future must lie beyond the limitations of your own timespan, or it would just be present. Your life, as it -- you stand -- sit here today, is already in the main planned, endowed, directed. Very few of you will be to jump and to take a new direction. By going to Dartmouth, you already have sold your birthright for {soup of nettles}. Certain features of your life are no longer possible, because you are educated. And education means pre-determination, filling you with certain concepts, you see, which -- which you can never forget. Like the -- your sep- -- your belief in nature, your belief in science, your belief in the -- division of mind and body. You have learned so many false doctrines already in your life that you will -- at best, you can get rid of them at your 30 -- at your 70th birthday and be declared healthy at that time. But you are already rather -- rather -- very much of a mortgage to history, because you believe na‹vely in the second millennium, and tho- -- tho- -- are great di- -- make great trouble for me and others to get it -- the whole of mankind into the third millennium.

You don't believe this. You think automatically, by your just living longer than I, you will be ahead of me. You are quite mistaken. You will finish the second millennium to the bitter end, probably. Some of you perhaps may understand that this isn't all you have to do. You have to believe in a time beyond your own life. And let me s- -- tell you what I foresee as the task which is given us, because we are now doomed to technological progress; doomed to live in the wide world of the whole planet, and even of the stratosphere; doomed by nationalism, that the Frenchmen really tells you, "But I'm a Frenchman, therefore I cannot do such-and-such. I cannot use my reason, except for French nationalism," and all this -- types of -- stuff you hear every day in politics. If I were Mr. Dulles, I would go crazy now in Geneva, because he hears all these prejudices -- prejudices, these foregone judgments that Mr. Bidault tells him, or Mr. Eden tells him: "Because I'm an Englishman, I cannot think freely, but I have to depend on these and these chains in my makeup."

Think of this whole problem for us Americans that we now have to stand in with the French against the free nations of Asia. It's tragic. Why should we? Because the French cannot do anything but be -- think of themselves in- -- as inside their nation.

A friend of mine talked the other day in Paris with the French, and they said, "Well, it doesn't matter. The Russians can march in and take France. Paris will

always be the center of the intellectual life of the world." Now that's this kind of dead superstition, you see, which is much worse than the belief in witches, or the belief in the -- in the wrong piece of wood from the Cross of Christ, worshiped in some Spanish church. These -- French are much more superstitious at this moment than the worst early believer in witchcraft. They believe that these stones on the Seine River will always harbor the spirit. That's blasphemy. But they believe it. And they act upon it. And if a -- a man isn't in Paris, or his book isn't in Paris, or his play isn't in Paris, or the fashion doesn't come from Paris, they won't look at it. They say it doesn't exist.

So what I -- put on your -- this blackboard, gentlemen, you remember, was that all men who live in the second millennium have said, "We come out of Christendom ..." or "Christianity," let's put it "Christendom," "... and we are in a nation, inside a nation, and we are facing the world with our discoveries, and we take in the North Pole, and the Antarctic, and {little} America, and what-not, wherever we go, or the stratosphere or the jet planes, and the whole thing leads to eternal progress." That's by and large the American idea, too. In France, it is only so bad because this isn't as wicked with us as it is with the French. Nobody believes that reason is -- is seated in Washington. But the -- the French actually believe that it has its seat in Paris.

So we already -- and I come to this -- we'll come to this, I hope, on Thursday once more, the American situation is not quite as this European situation because America is not a nation, fortunately. It's a little better. It's a world. So the average European however, and even the aver- -- average Iraqian, or Pakistani, or Hindu at this moment, you see, or Indochinese certainly thinks that he is a part of a nation, and that he -- when he says "we," he always means the Indochinese, or the Cambodians, or whoever else these Viet Minh or Viet Nam people, you see, consider to be their nation. This womb of a man, this inner space of a man today is not the Communion supper, but is the nation. Even the Churches, as you know, in all these countries are nationalized. It's such a form that when the Christians in a nation get together sing the national anthem.

I told you my experience here of a { }, didn't I? Where they did just that, and thereby nullified their Christian belonging in preference to their national belonging.

Now you go back to the second -- the other Cross of Reality, in the first thousand years, where the remembrance of the founder was the admission ticket. Without admitting that Christ came first, no Christianity. Then we said mission as the -- the goal that leads to the Church as a whole, all over the globe. Then omission, some sacrifice, some asceticism, some renunciation, and inside what the Catholics call Mass and what the Protestants would call Communion, inside.

Now compare these two crosses. And you can see one thing at one glance, that what leads from the admission that Christ is the beginner of our faith, leads to the Church in the first thousand years all over the globe until the Icelanders become also, you see, admitted, and admit and omit, and are united in the Mass and receive -- send out their own missionaries now. You know, Nordic people send their missionaries to -- to Russia. { }. The whole Western world has gone on missions in -- the rest of the world. Compare this, and you will see that the Church is inherited by those Christian nations as something that's there. The Church is a part of nature of Western man today. You find that Christianity is what has been, long ago. And what has surrounded you: these Puritans, or take Christmas. That's there. And when -- when it is there, we have to be -- have a reason to change Church, which still means "membership" or "action" into Christendom, as a state of fact, as a state of climate or civilization. And in addition to having all become -- belonging to the Christendom, or the -- as we even call it today, the civilized nations, which is a secular terminology for the same thing, we say, "But in addition, we must become better people."

So we can say, gentlemen, the -- the world of the first millennium goes from one to all, so that all may become one. That's the -- that's the slogan of the Church, thousand years, "that all may become one." The way of your life is that all become -- may become better. You always speak of a better world, which is only meaningful, you see, if not every one of us makes his own better world, but we all make together -- can make the world better. Therefore you first must be one in spirit.

So the world of the second millennium leads from "all men are already one, all are one," and now "all can become better." Therefore, gentlemen, if we now go to the third millennium, obviously the condition of any third millennium will be that we again shall have the cross of the second millennium in back of us. That must be stabilized as some background from which we all emerge for the next 16, 20, 32 generations, so that everyone born in the third millennium will -- may be able to look back to the second millenium as achievement, as something we have. Otherwise, we would have all lost -- lose it again and have lived in vain. Just as every American thinks that he is beyond Europe, beyond the religious wars, beyond the squabbles of the denominations, and is therefore the heir of Christendom, so I would suggest, gentlemen, that your grandchildren should be brought up with the conviction that they're the heirs of progress. Their background must be civilization. This whole talk today about civilizations that come and go, gentlemen, have this very reason: that we try to ci- -- look back on civilization as something we had, as something we can be sure of, to go onto something -- to better things. And we'll see that civilization can just as well be an aim as a beg- -- as a basis. And the problem of the third millennium then is, gentlemen, to make the goal of the second millennium the starting point of the third

millennium.

What does this mean, gentlemen? We must transform the end into the beginning. The final goal into the basis. And since this has happened before, that the Church for progressive secular nations became that which they had, and on which they could build the discovery of America, and the invention of the automobile, so in the same sense, we today -- I suggest -- take it for granted that we can invent. Progress is there, not going to stay, but to go on. But what of it?

If you allow me to make the same change as I did when I said, instead of "Church" as a goal, we say "Christendom" as a background. Can you understand what I'm driving at? In the same sense, I would suggest that you say progress as a goal has to become civilization as a basis. We assume that we are civilized. It may be wrong, but let's assume this for the moment. Then we would have two heritages. We would have the heritage of some -- some form of Christendom, in the -- great mass, and we would have the other background, which belonged to the civilized people. And the civilized people would have the three criteria: that they had discovered the world, that they could invent, and that they consisted of national groups. This would be the story of the third -- the second millennium in concentrated form. It would ins- -- include the power to reform. It would include the power to progress. It would include the power to go on a crusade against the barbarians, who threaten to forget the two first millennia. The crusader would be the one who re-establishes the acquisition of the first millennium. The reformer would be he who would look at the Church for its degeneration, you see, and take it to task to bring it back to its original purity. And the progressive man would be the -- he who can make things better and, you see, work for a better world to come.

But gentlemen, you and I live then by daily inventions, by { } national groups, and by the crusading spirit, and that -- that is, we would have to live as we live today, gentlemen. And we can't live the way we live today, because once you invent invention, gentlemen -- you must take this now down dogmatically, because in this course I cannot deal with it at greater length: the law of the end -- of the era in inven- -- of invention -- in inventing inventions, of technological progress, as you know it, entails that man loses his home, his allegiances, his loyalties every day, because the law of invention runs as follows, gentlemen: every technological invention -- I don't know if I mentioned it here -- accelerates -- yes, did we? Wie? -- accelerates the time. You can drive in a car quicker than you can in a horse and buggy. So there is some speed, the advantage of any invention. You turn on the electric light instead of drilling fire out of a stick and a stone. And therefore you save time. All our technological devices are timesaving devices in some form or other, otherwise they wouldn't be made. Then gentlemen, you make space larger on which you depend. Any invention con-

nects you with the oil in Arabia now, or with the uranium in Saxony, or with electric power at the Boulder Dam. That is, any invention lengthens the space, or widens the space on which you depend. Can't be helped. Any invention makes you more dependent on manufacturing, on raw materials, on energies that are found some other place in the world. You can eat oranges now, fresh from California; but therefore, California is nearer to you now than the next town in Vermont. The farmer, as you know, even today eats his but- -- gets his butter from Boston here in New Hampshire, back, because he doesn't make the butter. He has no time for this. He just sends away the milk. And he buys his apples on a truck that comes from the next big city, because he has no time to spray his own apple trees anymore, and all the apple trees in -- in Vermont and New Hampshire go to seed as you know, and have their tent caterpillars.

In other words, gentlemen, the law of invention means for human beings that they live in a wider area in geographical sense, that they save time, and that therefore the group in which they could live before the invention was made is destroyed. Where you had neighbors in your neighborhood, before with whom you worked together and whose fruit and whose produces you bought, like the eggs from your neighbor, today you buy your store eggs from the -- which come from a wide area whose -- whose extent perhaps you don't even know. And you have nothing to do with your neighbor. You get your electricity from the Green Mountain Power pl- -- or the New England Power. And therefore you don't get it from the woodlot of your neighbor, where he cuts his wood, so that you can fire your -- your oven, because now you have an electric range, and you don't depend on his wood, anymore.

So will you take down this law, gentlemen? The end of the second millennium leaves man under the law that every invention speeds up his life, widens the space and destroys the group -- any group, all the time. So poor Dartmouth at one time had its students from New Hampshire and Vermont. Now it has its -- then it had its students from New England. And now we have a nationwide college registration. So the consequence is that yesterday a gentlemen of -- who is your colleague came over to my house and stated that after three years in Dartmouth, it was the first time that he had crossed the Connecticut River into Norwich, which is to say that the group was destroyed on which Dartmouth College was founded, because it was founded, as you must remember, on the unity of Vermont and New Hampshire. And they were always treated equally, so to speak, in the membership of this college. Now if you have two students from New Hampshire, and two students from Vermont and vice versa, it's much. Who is from New Hampshire, in this class? Who is from Vermont? Interesting. Not one. So the group is destroyed.

This is -- you live in a vacuum, in a total vacuum in Dartmouth College. It's a

suburb of New York, and the other 47 states. That's what Hanover is at -- for you. It's a suburb. And suburb is nowhere. It's groupless. Any suburb -- what is a suburb? A suburb is a community which has no center of gravity inside itself. And a community is a place which has a center of gravity inside itself. So you live in a -- in no community when you come here to Da- -- to Hanover. You live in a suburb. And it is accidental that this is 7 hours from -- from -- sub- -- from -- from New York. It could be half an hour; it could be 20 hours from New York. It would still have the same indefinite character of a destroyed community.

Gentlemen, that's very serious, because it could, if you take it seriously, give you the clue to the third millennium. Only you have to realize it. All your sentimentality of Dart- -- about Dartmouth prevents you from understanding what you -- are missing compared to the boys who had to split their winter wood themselves 80 years ago, and who therefore depended on the fruitfulness of the -- of the -- the wealth of the woods, of the timber of this state. They had a natural relation to the wood that grew around them, because they made their own firewood. You get the oil. You have no relation to anything that goes on in this -- in this state.

But that's all over the globe, gentlemen. It's in Tokyo. It's in Yokohama, It's in Buenos Aires. There was a man, a Mr. {Kahn}, in Paris 50 years ago. He made his money because he foresaw that these big st- -- cities all over the world would have the same fate. And he bought the suburban land, the suburban real estate around Buenos Aires, around Rio de Janeiro, around Montevideo, around Yokohama, around Tokyo. And he became immensely rich. And in order to pay back for his wealth, he made an endowment. He created traveling fellowships for scholars in Europe, and they were allowed to travel two or three years all over the world and get acquainted, and make their studies. And one of these people I happen to know, who got this fellowship. He's a professor in Geneva, Switzerland, at this moment. And he said to me, "Well, I have taken this trip around the world. And I am very grateful to Mr. {Kahn}, but to tell you frankly, what I saw was very depressing, because it was -- what I found was ..." he's an economist, "... that it was everywhere exactly the same life which the people are going to lead in the future. There is no distinction between Tokyo and Buenos Aires. No distinction between New York and Montevideo. They are equally stupid. They are equally hang -- hung up and it's the same human vacuum. They are all without a center of gravity within the community in which they allegedly live, they are all suburbs, of suburbs, of suburbs. Everything seems to be just a big real estate development." That was the impression this man had, when I met him. And that must have been in 1929, or '28. It's even worse, now.

So gentlemen, the world offers the same conditions, as you have it here, everywhere now, because of technological progress. Because this law prevails.

And you must take this law as the sum of the wisdom of the last thousand years. The world has become one. Space is conquered. That's perhaps the dogma which you have to accept for the second millennium. Space is conquered. Anybody who takes space seriously today is a fool. You cannot base your politics on national differences or local differences. You have to think as though space is already one, because you can telephone around the globe, you can fly around the globe within one day, practically -- I mean, theoretically not only, but nearly practically. You know, this nurse went around in 96 hours, which is not much less than -- than one day. It means -- it makes no difference, really. It was 96? What was it? Do you remember? She had the record -- holds the record for the last year -- in the last year she -- she went around. Of course, she never left the airport, you see. She just had to stay. And that was the condition. She got it as a premium, you see; but the poor girl, she had to stay and eat sandwiches all the time.

Now, this is then man's situation. He lives on the whole globe. He has no partitions between the cold one world and himself. Therefore, gentlemen, to this man who comes out of civilization, who has civilization as his background, who says, "Well that's behind me. Civili- -- I'm civilized. I'm progressive," or you can say it passively, "I'm progressed." Because technology progresses for you and me. We don't progress ourselves. But with television, you have progressed without doing anything. Can you understand? We are made to progress very much against our will. There is a centrifugal movement going on in human society. Man is centrifugally thrown off his native groups. His family, his friends, his neighbors, he has to change, because he is shifting his work to another place. He goes to a factory somewhere out West, and he has to co -- move this man to wake up, yes. What can we do for you? I have no coffee.

(I'm sorry.)

I thought I could -- wie?

And therefore, gentlemen, this -- the third millennium has to combat the centrifugal tendencies of life. Centrifugal, that you have no center of gravity, and therefore we'll pay anything to be re-integrated. The centrifugal power then we'll put here. And we'll say, "Man is threatened by disintegration." The world has become so strong, we have discovered it so totally, that where you have the world as -- to be discovered -- you remember here, in this cross, we had the world as the world to be discovered, the world to be discovered. We have now the world to get out, because this world is swallowing it up, totally. We become so -- pieces of the world, pieces of statistics, pieces of science, pieces of some observed psychology, objects, guinea pigs, whatever you think of yourself, but centrifugally. Marx has said of capitalism that it estranges men from himself --

themselves. So this estrangement you find in all ways of life. Invention estranges you from yourself, because as soon as you serve an automat, as soon as you use an electric power plant, as soon as you drive a car, you have to follow abstract rules of driving this car. You cannot tame the car as you could tame your own horse to do a trick. This car is the same for everybody, therefore you have to become objective to yourself. You can no longer be subjective and follow your own tastes. You buy a Ford car, you have to comply with the rules of the Ford car. And so with all the -- other machinery, gentlemen, take it down: the bigger the machinery, the less you can be at variance with any of the rules of the game. Is this clear? The bigger the machinery, the less deviation is possible in a personal way. If you -- if you move a -- a dog-cart, you can go in zig-zag on the road. If you could do this with a Ford at 90 miles, or with a Cadillac, you see, the police would take away your license.

The larger the world in which we move and the bigger the machinery, the less can we deviate from the objective rules of the world, from the natural laws, the technological laws. Therefore, more and more do we become cogs on the wheel, as we say, or numbers that are exchangeable. Or we become expendables in a large army. And all -- all these modern expressions go to prove that man is less and less able to assert his differences, because the bigger the natural powers which you try to master, the more inexorable are their demands on your objective {handling). You see, you can abuse your cat, but you cannot abuse the Boulder Dam. You see that?

So gentlemen, the danger from the outer world is that this world impinges on us, encroaches on us. Before, we said in the Church you have to renounce a part of the world, voluntarily. You have to omit certain things. In the -- century of progress, you went out into this wonderful unknown world and discovered the dark continent like Stanley, who died 50 years ago, as you may have seen in the papers, and in whose memory the English and the Belgians had a great celebration. I wonder why the -- Americans didn't have. He's a -- was a great man, this man Stanley, who crossed the -- Africa from -- from east to west.

Well, that's far away. There is nothing much to be discovered anymore, in Africa. They have the Mau Mau instead. Now the Mau Mau are an effort to integration. They're quite serious, gentlemen. You have -- everywhere in the world you have these fascist movements who promise people warmth and integration, with different means. But don't be betrayed, gentlemen. The Mau Mau are highly { } -- modern. We have here the same thing in several forms in this country. I won't give any names. It means that there is a tremendous zest for integration. You hear this word. Instead of converting people, or -- which nobody believes anymore, people promise you integration, participation. Even the modern psychologist has to promise you some kind of participation, as they

call it, which is integration, membership.

Gentlemen, the best way -- word, however, which we have to use according to the laws of our wider historical understanding is "initiation," "entr‚e." Put the word "entrance" and put then for this the Latin word, "initiation." Man begins today with not belonging, and therefore he wants to end up with belonging. That's so very strange. When you are conscious at 20, you do not belong; but you feel rather cold and you want to be- -- begin to belong. Therefore, gentlemen, we find ourselves in a very strange, topsy-turvy world. And therefore we have to revive the old tribes, because the tribes understood one thing: initiation. That's what they -- were they founded for. They were, as you remember, founded for initiating people into families. Therefore, today initiation, or if you prefer the simple word, entrance, entr‚e -- give you -- give a man an entr‚e, an entrance, you see, somewhere is the -- in demand. Many forms this takes today. But you have to look through all the var- -- var- -- varieties of this experience. The great experience a man wants to make today is to be made a member of something, where he really belongs, because there is so very little things to which he can belong. The family is a bundle of people who don't belong to each other, under the modern psychoanalytical system. They are just getting -- they cramp each other's style. There was a very nice article the other day in the paper, "My Family Cramps My Style." It's true, it does. And as I said, the family can be defined as a group of people who don't belong to each other. And certainly families are not there for -- to stay. They are not eternal. And if you try to sentimentalize the family and say it's something eternal, you are dead wrong. The family is there to be dissolved. You have to grow up. If you do not cut the strings of your mother's apron, you will make her miserable, and yourself, and your wife and the rest of it. And you'll get a divorce. In order to stay married, you have to cut the -- your mother's apron strings very radically, which you do not like to do. That's why you get the divorce. You see, coward first, doesn't help. You then have to be the coward later. The -- insolent later and get the divorce where you shouldn't, because you hadn't had the courage to emancipate yourself from your mother first. And vice versa. The daughter has to emancipate herself from her father in order to get married to her husband, which she also doesn't like to do.

So gentlemen, families are not eternal. That's why we today cannot simply be initiated into families. We have to be -- however acquire the power of being initiated at all. The group, which group, how many groups, that's a later question. But the first thing is that out of your -- the cold world of Buenos Aires, New York, Cincinnati, and even Chicago and Detroit, people must learn to initiate others and themselves into warm groups, where people belong. We are lost if we can't do this. Nobody can live as a human being on the whole of the planet without going crazy.

I advise you to read this early -- early experience of an American, in Henry James' book, The American. Has anybody read it? You remember Mr. Newman? You see? Mr. Newman is such a man who desperately looks for an entr‚e, you see, and he misses it. He understands. He is -- he is absolutely alone, so he hovers then in -- in Paris, because no entr‚e, no entrance, you see, no initiation. And that is -- stands written over all of your lives -- my life, too, gentlemen -- this problem of -- of having an entr‚e. I advise you all to read this book. It's so old, gentlemen, that it is most modern. Never read a modern book if you can help it. The only books at your age you should read are the very old books. And this isn't even old enough, quite. But it has discovered the problem of the future man. The American was written after the Civil War, and it is the most modern American book you can read. It's much more modern than Hemingway, much more modern than -- than Thornton Wilder, because it's great art. And a whole life has been absorbed in it. It is not a bestseller. But it's a -- it's real literature, gentlemen. And literature is prophetic. And the literature of this -- of Henry James, although he was certainly not a very great poet, has this very noble quality of still being prophetic. By the way, his -- his -- there came out his book on America, his journeys in this country when he returned here from England. I advise you to read this, too, it's a very fine book on the American scene. Has anybody read that? Who has read Henry James, anyway? What did -- what have you read?

(The Ambassadors.)

Wie?

(The Ambassadors.)

Well. I don't know that. So that's still before me. What have you read?

(The Ambassadors.)

Why does one read that?

(I -- well, I don't know. I just happened to -- I was coming back from Europe, and I wanted a book to read. And the -- I went into the bookstore and the only book I could find in English was The Ambassadors by Henry James, you know.)

Now, you promise me to read The American, will you?

(Yes, Sir. I will.)

Good. Because I think that in a -- in this poignant way in which literature can condense a worldwide problem into one person, one soul, you see, and one little

life -- that is the grandeur of literature, that you can see in the chalice of one flower, in the life of one man the whole destiny of mankind. You can see in this American, if you read it with elucidated and illuminated eyes, you can see your own fate, your own problem, your own destiny. It's very strange that the book, you see, when I read it first, didn't have this impact on me. Now I more and more -- s- -- can see, you see, the clear- -- clarity of the perception. That the American, you see, is uprooted and begins where the European ends, so to speak. The European is uprooted now, but he always thought he had roots, you see. The American always knew that he was a pioneer and had -- was -- had been uprooted, and always knew that his problem was to get -- put roots down.

It has been said that all Europeans, gentlemen, have a fatherland or a motherland, patrie, you see, or "motherland," that all Americans treat the -- this country, America, as their daughter. They endow it. That's the word from "dowry," you see, as you treat your daughter. That's very beautiful. Stick to that, gentlemen, and you will find an explanation of the distinction of America from the rest of the world. This country begins with man alone and allows him to found a country and to endow it, so that the country is younger than the man. My -- your country is your daughter-land. It is much better to call America "the daughter of the Americans" in the same sense as the French call their -- France their "fatherland," you see, than to try to call America the fatherland, which it isn't. It's just funny, if you try to make it into that.

That's very important because it shows you already that America belongs to the third millennium by this one change, you see, legerdemain, by this one transformation. Here already civilization is so much the beginning of your and my existence and technological progress that we already are faced with this problem of integration, and it is a slogan here much more than any other part of the world. And I only offer you this word "initiation" as a step forward, because nobody knows what integration means, really. It could be something mechanical. But initiation is quite clear, because it means to be the member of a group of equals. You are not integrated into buildings. You can be integrated into an environment which is dead, but initiated you can only be into a living group, you see, in which you make a beginning and speak to living people. I warn you against the term "integration." Use "disintegration" as freely as you can, because we disintegrate, because we are surrounded by dead -- dead forms and dead matter. But this whole slogan today of being integrated I do not believe in at all, because, gentlemen, initiated we are only where we can speak to each other. And integration is too mechanical, too naturalistic, too technological -- a concept. Integration is -- can be mute and can be deaf. And that is now no good.

Mr. McCarthy wants to integrate you, but that isn't good enough. You have to be initiated. And for this you have to use your own word,and your own judg-

ment, and your own initiative. The word "initiative" and "initiation" fortunately goes together. But you cannot -- integrated you could be by the baking process. The raisins in the -- in the pie, they are all integrated in the -- into the pie. But these unfortunate raisins, you see, have nothing to say in the matter.

Now, gentlemen, what is the general direction then of the third millennium? A man who begins to be initiated again, to enter upon his own path of life, under his own steam, is on the way of becoming complete again. The re-integration, or the re-completing, the re-fulfillment of the man means that from now on you and I are striving for being the total. Totality is the great category of the third millennium. It isn't enough that you are a cog on the wheel. That's where we begin. Every one of us has a job. Every one of us is only a little fraction of the whole process of -- on the technological process of the world. But you and I must be striving all the time of becoming more complete. You begin with one job, but you must write poetry, and you must be in politics, and you must compose music, and you must dance with your children, and you must run the race in your athletics. That is, you must become more and more complete. Totality or completeness is the -- for the individual member of this new world the great problem. It isn't enough to be initiated into a -- for your own group of clerks, or junior executives of the Chamber of Commerce. You must be initiated into the Marine corps. You must be initiated into friendship, into politics, into church life, and the more you do this, the more complete you become, the more you represent mankind. And it is this representation that one man must be able to stand for the whole which today is the demand.

Otherwise the individual becomes worthless, thin, anemic, nervous, neurotic. All the modern neuroses are schizophrenia. Now what is schizophrenia, gentlemen? That part of you isn't taken up by society. They only know a little part of you, and you can only show to the world, you see, one part of yourself. And you become schizoid, because the part you believe in as important of yours, can never be shown to the rest of the world. That's schizophrenia. Very simple. The more -- division of labor, the more uprootedness you get, the more schizophrenia you get, because nine-tenths of your real being is never spoken to by the community. And they only talk to you as though you were somebody you are not interested in, yourself, you see. They think you are Mr. Smith. In fact, you are the greatest poet of the century, but you have no occasion to use it.

Schizophrenia, gentlemen, is not a physical disease, and it is not an individual disease. It's a social disease. And that's why America today is -- has more mental diseases than any other country of the world. This is mentally the most diseased country, because it is socially more disintegrated. All your mental illnesses, gentlemen, all the cases that go to Mr. McKenna that are not individual cases, that's American society.

And therefore, I think you go to the wrong man, when you go to the psychiatrist. The poor man cannot alter the social conditions under -- you have to live, and to love, and to marry, and to bring up your children.

Well, that is one of the chapters that will have to be re-written. This con- -- total, you see today you -- we apply to the social diseases of disintegration the little means of the second millennium of natural science. And the people take -- you -- you -- talk to you when you are mentally sick and go down to Brattleboro with your nervous breakdown, as though your machinery was out of order; whereas in reality, society has not been able to make you enter it, which is something totally different. It's a living process of a whole living body of mankind, and they try to pin you down with your cardiogram, and your blood test, and waste $1500 on all the tests of your liver and your bladder and they find nothing. Absolutely nothing, except that you are schizoid. But the doctor is schizoid, too. Why should he not? It's the fashion today.

Gentlemen, if you do not take this step into the third millennium, that is what happens to you, that the diseases produced by the second millennium will then be cured by the instruments of the second millennium. That is, the disease is used then as a cure. And that's why -- how we have to live at this moment, you, and your children, and your d- -- your sisters, that the remedies offered you are the poisons -- that have poisoned you, because you are disintegrated. So they say, "Analyze yourself," so they get you more disintegrated, for example, and so on and so forth.

Therefore, to take you over into the third millennium means to allow the remedies to grow where they must be plucked from, from trees -- from the tree of everlasting life, of reproduction, of the totality of man, and not from this tree of more machinery in investigating your little toe. Your little toe is all right, but your belonging is not all right. You belong nowhere, so you fall sick.

Now we have now nearly completed the Cross of Reality of the third millennium. We can call it negatively, or positively. It is more cautious in the beginning of any period to say what is -- does not exist. Then we do not mortgage the future with our own prejudices and illusions. Now, what does not exist is -- initiation. So the lack of initiation, the lack of initiative, the lack of en- -- entr‚e, and the lack of belonging is generally felt. You have here -- as I said, you have lost your own center of gravity. That is the best -- better definition, I think, than "disintegration," but I won't quarrel about the term. We have lost -- and we lose every day again our re-acquired group. As soon as you reproduce a new invention -- take television. Suddenly you will depend on Mount Washington. Mount Washington, except for skiing or summer trips did not exist for you. But at this moment, when you have television in Hanover, or will have, you see, the fact

that television must function on Mount Washington makes Mount Washington suddenly a part of the universe in which you live. And the little power station here, down in -- in your -- in the college plays a lesser part, because you no longer { } radio, but you want to have your power -- your television station for which you now depend on Manchester, New Hampshire, but then you will on -- on Mount Washington.

Now the financing of Mount Washington television station is a much bigger thing again than the financing of the Manchester station. It's much more expensive. Therefore it draws capital from larger parts of the world, and so the anonymous relations of that instrumentality on which you belong is vastly expanded and much more over your head and less under your control than when you had the house organ and played your morning chorale, you see, yourself. Or if you fiddled it -- when you have your own violin, you see, in your house; or better still, the days -- the good days when you sang and used your own voice and didn't depend on any instrument whatsoever for praising your creator.

The human voice is still our best equipment. And you will find that whenever people today over the world want to re-integrate and initiate something, they try to rebuild a capella singing. Just instinctively they try to get away from the big orchestra and from Mr. Stokowski and his fabulous "Fantasia," you see, this great nonsense of our time. Who has heard "Fantasia"? It's a scandal, you see. That's second millennium. Complete uprootedness. Complete disintegration for the listener. Ev- -- a cocktail -- of everything. That's what it is, a cocktail party. A complete waste of all the genius of all times. There was only one columnist who protested this in this country. I now hold it very much in her honor, because she risked her whole reputation. It was Dorothy Thompson who said, "That's the end of civilization." And it is. And we are through with civilization, because civilization is killing your and my taste. And therefore we have -- you have to begin with a capella singing. And even the Dartmouth Glee Club is good for something. They sing very well now. Remarkable, because a cap- -- the human voice is the first beginning again of belonging, of membership. We belong where we sing together. That's very simple, gentlemen. It's the law. We don't belong by tickets and -- and registrations and subscriptions, and so on. We belong where we can sing together.

Now what is the general direction? I said the direction is to the completeness of the single man. The "whole man," President Hopkins used to call it. The old Christians said that the end of time would be fulfilled if all of Christ would be seen dancing, instead of just on the Cross. That would be the total man. If you all could dance through life, and go through the Cross and suffer, this wide combination, that was the vision of the old fathers of the Church. Christ in His dance, the cosmic dance of great joy and great delight; and yet, the willingness to suffer

for His brothers. That's { } absurdity. But gentlemen, just think that the old tribes had this enchantment. The word "enchantment" is a very good word. "Enchantment" means to be chanted into the total life. Enchantment, you see. And you should sing yourself and dance yourself into enthusiasm, and if you -- if you don't, gentlemen, you remain cold. Nobody can be initiated by sending three dollars' -- subscription fee to a -- to a club or to an association. There has to be a little more fire in your initiation. You have to do something about it. At least have a square dance.

So don't mistake it. Initiation does not mean the usual, lukewarm participation of the modern psychology department. It means much more. It means that something gets hold of you, and shakes you up, so that you feel that you are more whole now than you were {made} before. Something must be added to your stature by initiation. You must be somebody who had not been before. You see, your whole ambition is now to sit back and never do -- be surprised by yourself and to do only what you want to do. You want to do what you please, gentlemen. So you never can change and be bigger than you have been before. Anybody who can only do what he wills, and plans, and wants to do, remains exactly the same idiotic bore he has been before. If you only do what you want to do, gentlemen, then you had better not do anything, because what you want to do, you see, what you already know that you can do isn't worth doing. That's dead. Anybody who only wants to do what he can do, gentlemen, has ceased living, because life means to be transformed into forms which -- of which you before you did not know that you could ever attain.

Do you think I ever knew in my -- the beginning of my life that I would be able to deliver this lecture? Of course not. I'm very much surprised that I can. Everybody must do better than he knew he could. That's initiation. Initiation, gentlemen, is entering upon that form of yourself of which you alone were not capable. You can -- must be initiated into this form which only friends, only love, only another group, a new country, a new party, a new religion can -- how do you say? can -- impart to you. To be initiated means to be -- how do you say? to -- yes -- to be imparted? No, we couldn't say this, to have imparted to oneself qualities, you see, which we by our own will can not produce. Is that possible English? Yes. To have imparted to yourself that which your own nature cannot give you. That is the formula of baptism in the -- in the Church. That this, what nature cannot give you, be imparted to you by this blessing in the name of the Trinity. That's a very profound thing. Most people don't understand christening. They think it's a ceremony. Gentlemen, it is not. It is a fundamental rule for all initiations, that is only condensed and expressed there in the first initiation. A child is christened so that it may from now own know how to be initiated. That is, christening, baptism is that universal formula under which you know what it means ever to be initiated into your marriage, into your friendship, into your

fraternity. It always means that you will see what nature cannot give, your { }, you see, what has not yet been inside of your before you became a member, participating in a -- in a metabolism, in a bloodstream, in a circulation of thought, without which you could never learn who you were, because you were before this so much poorer, so much the narrower, so much ...

[tape interruption]

... you're not sitting here in this class except by initiation. You couldn't understand one word of mine, if you hadn't been slowly and -- initiated into all this, by which you are more than you were born when you came out of your mother's womb. To that self, I couldn't say anything.

So gentlemen, this is then the -- the new Cross of Reality: the whole man, by constant acts of initiation, constantly saved from disintegration, and constantly pushed forward by technological progress. The technological progress precipitates my time, because it is -- speeds up. I have more time, and therefore more reason to commit crimes since -- and foolishnesses. Having too much time is a -- is a curse. And it is a curse for most people today.

To live today a hundred years, gentlemen, with your life insurance expectation, you see, is more difficult than to die at 30. What do you do with the other 70 years? You really don't know. You are bored stiff. Don't think that the prolong- -- elongation, the extension of the life expectation of modern man is not a terrible thing. Think of all the old people who now live on the old-age insurance plan. They'll become the slaves of the young. One day the young, they who have waited on us will say, "That's too much for us." And they'll cancel old-age insurance. We have no savings. We have no fund. It's a great swindle in this country as you know, what it goes on. We have an old-age insurance which is just drawn on -- on the annual budget. All the money I pay in for old-age insurance, or my -- the employer does, is just spent by Uncle Sam in the -- in the current year. We live under such a bubble, that the South Sea Bubble of 1721, and the -- Law of -- you know, of John Law in Scotland, this great bubble there of the finance -- the financiers of the 18th century, it's just small fry against what we are committing at this moment in this country. There is no reserves for paying the people who now have to live 40 years longer than before. And it is an incredible swindle. And that's called democracy. It's the greatest demogoguery I know. It's a shame.

And it's against the law, because the idea was, of course, originally that this would be built up to a fund. And there would be some reserves somewhere. It's very difficult, I know, to build up these reserves outside of the daily -- the daily business cycle. But what we have done in this country, is simply cheating ourselves. We have said, "Oh, we don't put anything aside." We -- you see, we take

every cent, that by the -- a whole generation is now paid in annually, you see, from their savings, and use it up every day. Do you think that's such a -- that is progress? That is the -- that is the -- the misunderstanding of the acceleration of {the} invention to the liv- -- life -- sphere of life. I mean, the government spends every year at a terrific speed, which should really serve 30 or 40 years. There you see what the application of this misunderstanding of the law of technology means.

If you do not understand that when life is accelerated, time-saving devices are {invented}, and when space is widened and the group is destroyed, you have immediately to re-build small groups, at slow pace, and intimate homeliness, coziness -- you mistake life. Gentlemen, you and I need homes. We need intimacy. We need small groups. We need slow pace. We need patience. And the two things are today -- absolutely -- how would I say -- poked fun at, just poked fun at. The government does this by treating -- our savings, not as something sacred and belonging to you and me, but by putting it in the big pot and using it up as it goes. Will there be a government of the United States in 30 years? Very doubtful. The Russians { }. There is then no right, no claim, of any one of us to his private property. And yet, it's my own money, and later it will be your own money which you have paid in for this { }. It's all -- and then this -- we are against Communism. Gentlemen, this country is much more communistic than Russia. What do you think? Our economy is absolutely living from day to day on a mad basis. That is, with the idea that there will be an Uncle Sam in the center of the world in Washington for the next 70 years, and he'll take care of you when you are 70. Isn't this dependent on a plan? Isn't this Communism? Don't be betrayed by all these slogans. Mr. Priestley, the author of the beautiful book, So Green Is My Valley -- who knows it? So Green Is My Valley. It's {already been -- it's just five years old}, so you didn't see it. Have you seen the movie, So Green Is My Valley? Well, he wrote a wonderful article and said he couldn't discover the distinction between America and Russia, for the life of him. Both were so big, that man was lost in them. And I -- he didn't see why we should choose between Communism and capitalism -- it meant Russia and America. Because for an Englishmen, they both {were the Devil}. And they were equally believers in technology. And technology meant that man had, you see, no prospects of initiation, no prospects of re-integration, no prospects of re-inspiration. Certainly nobody would dance, either in Russia or in America, in the streets -- or the sidewalks of New York.

Gentlemen, be very serious. Don't be betrayed by these slogans of the day. America and Russia are at this moment both trying to uproot the individual, to steal his intimacy. They are driven to this, by their large size of their country, by the bigness of our inventions. It's a good -- bad of the good. I don't disclaim the greatness of this country, gentlemen, but you must understand the need to build

into this bigness something intimate and small is more {crying} than ever. Can you understand this?

And I -- I assure you, in the -- in the old-age problem, we'll have a tremendous catastrophe. And you will live to solve this problem, you see. Will you then -- let { }, will you not say that there are too many old people? We'll just have to have them down. We can't afford it. We are the wage earners. We are making the living. We are doing the work. And here are these people over 70. And you suddenly then will draw a trench sep- -- separating Florida from the rest of the United States, and let the people in Florida fend for themselves with their oranges. Well, it's a solution. But I mean, you must not think that human cruelty will stop when it comes to a crisis, and the age groups in this country will all be put up against each other. Ten years ago, there was already the Ham and Eggs Plan. Have you heard of Townsend Plan? It is forgotten. But that was an old-age movement, you see, trying to -- to salvage the rights of the old age, you see, to protect them against their { }.

The problem of the dependents of people who now will reach these tremendous ages, you see, on the -- on the -- on the earning power of the younger isn't solved, yet. It could only be solved if we would build up funds that would express the independence of these rights. But as long as you make the old people completely dependent on the daily election, gentlemen, in the { }, you see, the tyranny. You will have four years from now already the slogan, you see, of one party saying, "We will -- we will free all the fathers of families, you see, from half of the income tax, by no longer paying the old insurance." Very tempting. You all have four or five children during the next five years, as it goes now, you see, and these fathers of the large families can say, "Well, we have to support four children. Shall we otherwise also support -- maintain the luxury of great-, great-, great-grandparents?" You know what they have written, "As old as Methuselah." They have proclaimed that men can now live to be 150. Shocking. Idiotic. Complete disintegration. You -- you cannot live alone at 150. Your whole question is then: How are you then initiated into the life of the younger generation? Because what a curse it would be, to have to live up to 150, you see, and having no other dealings with the fourth generation away from you, except money. Because then the money would very soon be taken from you. And you have no teeth, and you {have your third} denture, and you wouldn't be able to do anything about it. You couldn't fight back.

No, gentlemen, the future of mankind is very dark. Not very agreeable, to -- to meditate about. If you ever { } the individual family, the individual family can love the grandparents, and even the great-grandparents, and if you can distribute the society in such a way again that an old man and an old woman belong to their grandchildren, you see, or to their -- the friends, the personal, spiritual

grandchildren, so to speak, then you are safe. But if you make them depend on the election issue, and what the gov- -- {Congress} decides, they are not safe. Do you see the difference? Therefore you need an intimate group again. You need the intimate group for bringing up the young. You need the intimate group for protecting the old. Because if they -- belong somewhere in a small way, they may feel safe. But as long as the old man at 90 will depend on the next election issue and on the budget plans of the next president -- oooh!

Think if Jim Roosevelt has to decide whether his grandmother gets a pension.

This is all very serious, gentlemen. The small group is the only protection you and I have, you see, that our lives' record totally lost, that we haven't lived in vain. You and I cannot impregnate the large society of 2 billion men with your virtues, and your record, and your memories, and your -- any respect. You have to belong somewhere that people remember you and love you. Isn't this obvious? Otherwise, it's just like water. Everything is forgotten. There is no indelible pencil then in the record of your life.

John Quincy Adams, gentlemen -- let me close today with this -- John Quincy Adams had been the President of the United States. He had been the inventor of the Monroe Doctrine. He had -- claimed Florida for the United States. He has many other merits. He had saved the Louisiana Purchase from being turned down. He was -- had been secretary of state. He had been ambassador to -- to London. He had signed the peace treaty in 1815 with England. And when he was in -- as a representative of -- in Congress, in the House of Representatives, in 1836, '37, a newspaper wrote: "What a spectacle. He is treated in this Congress as a man who has no record whatsoever, who's unknown. Just Mr. -- Mr. John Quincy Adams from Quincy, Massachusetts. And I -- he -- they ask, isn't it anomalous? Isn't it -- is it thinkable in any other country that the former President of the United States is here treated in this Congress of newcomers, of no -- man without a memory, as an absolute nobody?"

So you see, gentlemen, in this country through the immigrants, and the total change of the constituency of the country, we have had this problem of uprootedness and forgetfulness all the time. Things are just forgotten. And that happened in 1837. And technological progress, gentlemen, has this quality of obliterating anything that is only impressive within a smaller group. You cannot leave a record in a country of 160 million dollars -- dollars, {I'm sorry} -- 160 million people, you see, on the whole. Too many people every day crowd the newspapers. So you have to be a big stinker before you get the -- you make the headlines, you see. Public enemy Number 1, or some such thing may get the public sympathy. But as individual, you just can't do it.

So gentlemen, the initiation problem is the tribal problem. And we are back to the original beginnings of the human race. The tribal group gave man this intimacy -- there -- where he was totally known, and where he could exact -- enact all his faculties. He could be dancer, and chieftain, and warrior, and sorcerer, and hunter, and planter, and husband, and -- and son, and father to the full. And it is not accidental, gentlemen, that we are interested in -- today in anthropology, and ethnology, and prehistory, because in this vast, modern technological world, the great society must be replenished, and re-braced by small groups. Soci- -- that is, gentlemen, we have now the formula with which I want to conclude today. Our third millennium must be the -- a worldwide society renewed by the most intimate small groups. That's a paradox, but if we can't solve this, that is not a world in which it is -- would be, you see, would be -- good to live. So this large world which we are building must be revivified by small groups. That's not a contradiction in terms, but it is the taking-up of the heritage of the first millennium and before our era. So at the beginning of time, man grew up because of the warmth of this womb of his tribe. And today where we have the world, gentlemen, you have to put -- build into this world the little groups. And we will call then -- say then this, gentlemen, "group" of the third millennium must be understood in the light of the tribe, of the first beginnings of history. That is, the future groups must have features of initiation, and of solidarity, and of enthusiasm, and of sacrifice which relate this group to the beginnings of our group life on earth, because the problem -- the ending word -- the goal, gentlemen, is not, as I said, completeness only. It is not totality. It is not wholeness. It is re-vivification, because what we are -- have to lose is our vitality. And the tribes vivified, enthused -- deified, even -- men. And therefore put at the point -- pointing forward for the whole third millennium the one problem by which everything else will be measured is -- is it vivified? Is it champagne? You see, the campaign into the future is the campaign of champagne.