How the Daughter of the Science of our Struggle is Adorned

In the previous address we examined the art of fighting and over­coming our adversaries, generated, as it were, out of the science of our struggle. This art is figuratively called a trial. We said that the first practical method with which the task of 1821 can be completed as quickly and as best as possible is the formation of an academic court or tribunal comprised of the professors of our university. The purpose of this trial would be to weigh the evidence and to return its verdict with regard to the Christian philosophy of Greece and the anti-Christian philosophy of the schools of the West. In this way the rights of the Truth would be recognized, and the moral distinction of the Greek people, who hold to the Truth at all sacrifices, would become proclaimed to all peoples.

This practical method is formed by and adorned with three scientific reasons. The first of these is that the practical method I am suggesting contains within itself the whole mind of science, its mother. The second reason is that this method delivers Hellenism and the Greek nation from an impending danger. The third reason is that by staging the trial which I am urging we shall easily be brought to our desired goal. Two of these reasons were expounded in my previous address. We shall elaborate upon the third reason today, as we promised. Before undertaking this discussion, however, we must first mention the erroneous impressions and misinterpretations which were created in the minds of certain persons by the spiritual staff upon which I expounded in our last speech. I cannot understand why this should have happened.

In the second to last speech, it is true, I stated that, in order for us to crush the bondage of the barbarian Turks and to cast them out of our paternal inheritance, we have no need for artillery and weapons and other destructive machines of war, but for the staff whose power I explained in the previous discourse. This statement disturbed certain people, some of whom simply stated that I am making absurd statements for my lack of practicality which is absorbed supposedly by excessive theorizing. Others who think they are more perspicacious discovered that I say such things in order to betray our national interests, to disarm our nation for the sake of promoting the interests of Turkey. In the face therefore, of such a serious charge, we must give an account of ourselves by proving the correctness and usefulness of out statements.

It is obvious from the various inventions made every day that the more perfect instruments or means render the less perfect ones useless. For example, the bow and arrow at one time were weapons of war, but the invention of artillery made the bow worthless. And today no army carries bow and arrow in battle. Again the new invention of field artillery renders useless the older artillery which was useful to this time. I can also cite thousands of other examples by means of which is confirmed the general principle that the more perfect instrument renders the less perfect one obsolete.

Now imagine an army armed with bows and arrows. Let us suppose that a person having artillery approaches this army and advises that it put aside the bows and become armed with artillery. But a person who overheard this counsel and is ignorant of the power of artillery says to the soldiers: Men, beware of this man’s plot; he is deceitfully advising you to put away your bows in order that you may become spoils to your enemies. I ask you now, which of these two counselors is wiser and more beneficial to the army? Is it not he who asserts that the bows are worthless and urges the use of artillery? Yet there is something similar occurring now with regard to myself.

The entire nation to which I also belong wishes to throw the Turks out of our patrimony. For the fulfillment of this goal, I advise, instead of the use of war weapons, the employment of this staff which is not material, but spiritual. Those who ill hear this advice are like that man who argued for the use of bows and arrows, while ignorant of the power of artillery. Such people tell you: Beware of this man who counsels you to lay aside your weapons. Favoring the Turks, he would lull you to sleep, for he is looking out for their interest and not yours. But I say to you again: Be careful of these people who ill understand things and know not what they say. It is they who turn you away from using the more perfect means with which we can quickest and best attain to our goal.

In saying this to you, it is my duty also to prove that my statements are truthful, convincing you that there does exist in this spiritual staff adequate power to annihilate our enemies. I must prove that by employing this staff, we can shatter the bondage under which our brethren are grieviously groaning, and regain our patrimony. Should I, however, not convince you with irrefutable words, may you do as the others advise. I repeat that I do not advise simply the laying down of arms, but rather, the employment of a more perfect weapon, the power and effect of which we shall now consider.

As you recall, in one of the previous speeches we classified all types of power into the major groupings of the moral and the physical, and noted that the physical forces are ordered by and subjected to the moral agents. As of this order of things and mutual subjection, you can easily understand that he who subjects the moral powers concurrently also subjects the inferior physical powers, and manipulates their activity as he wills. For example, the steam engine of a ship is a physical force in the hands of the mechanical engineer who is a moral agent. The ship’s captain who has under his authority the mechanical engineer is also in charge of the ship’s engine, and runs it as he wills. But the person who has the captain under his authority is also in command of the mechanical engineer as well as the ship’s engine, and he runs the vessel as he wills.

If we take a look at the societies and the nations on the political scene, we see nothing else but the ordering of physical and moral forces, and the inferior members of these two classifications functioning according to the will of the superior moral powers. Every European nation has fleets and armies, i.e. physical and moral powers ordered by and subjected to superior powers. At the head of all the armed forces is the highest moral power, as is the king of a country, and his government. If I overpower the sovereign ruler of a certain nation, or the supreme moral powers of a country, it is evident that I also subject their subordinate forces and I thereby maneuver them as I will.

I ask now: are the armies and the fleets of all the European nations strong enough to cast the Turks very quickly out of the land they now occupy, or are they not? We are convinced that even only a part of the army and fleet of a single European power suffices for this purpose. We admit, however, that the armies and the fleets are forces dependent upon and maneuvered according to the will of the superior moral powers. Thus if our spiritual staff contains within itself the power to place under our command these superior moral powers, do we not clearly manipulate all the armies and the naval fleets of Europe against our enemies, and do we not cast them out of the land of our Fathers without any struggle or bloodshed? There is not the slightest doubt about this matter. The issue here, however, consists in proving and convincing ourselves of the fact whether there really exists in the spiritual staff the power of subjecting moral powers to those employing the staff. And now we come to the solution of this problem.

On this staff you see these three words inscribed: nous (mind) , logos (reason), dynamis (power), from which we make this geometric proportion:

Mind : Reason : : Reason : Power

We note that the first two terms of the proposition give rise to science, while the other two terms give rise to art. Science and art are two moral powers to which every moral agent is necessarily subjected. And by means of these powers we too will subject all the moral agents of the whole of Europe, and thereafter, also of the entire earth. Since there are, however, many sciences and arts, with what science and with what art shall we bring about this miracle? By means of the science of the first Truth and by means of the art of political existence which is nothing else but justice. The Truth and justice–behold the mightiest of weapons with which the moral agents are conquered and subdued. And if we learn how to use these weapons and their power, we will both annihilate our enemies and come to be at the head of all the nations of the world. Let us now take under consideration the potency of the first of the weapons cited above, and then that of the second weapon.

Every soul by its very nature acknowledges all truth which is either self-evident or proven scientifically. A soul which fails to do this and rebels against the truth cannot but fall victim to the dreadful misfortune of madness. For example, let us suppose that a certain policeman, upon entering a bakery, orders the baker henceforth to make bread not with flour, but with the soil of the earth. The reason people die, says the policeman, is that they eat bread made of flour. But according to. the latest scientific research, if people became used to eating bread made of the soil of the earth, they shall become immortal. Because the baker pays no attention to the policemen’s words, the latter, becoming enraged, overturns the baker’s basin and throws out the flour it contained. Seeing that the policeman is not jesting, the baker runs out of his shop crying out and summons the citizens with these words: Come, see a policeman who has gone mad thinking that hereafter bread should be made not of flour, but of the soil of the earth. Upon hearing these same words from the mouth of the policeman himself, the citizens are convinced that the unfortunate fellow has really gone insane, and they apprehend him, and put him away in a mental institution.

One may now ask: in what does the policeman’s madness consist, and why was it considered proper that he be put away? The policeman’s madness is nothing else but his disregard for and denial of the truth. The symbolical law enforcement officer became insane because he thought in terms contrary to the truth, contrary to the nature of things. Since he also tried to actualize his ridiculous thought or madness, he was deemed fit for a mental institution until cured.

Here is another example: Let us suppose that a person entered a merchant’s shop and purchased five yards of broadcloth at ten drachmas a yard, with the promise that after three days he would pay for the fabric. True to his word, three days later the customer brings sixty drachmas to the merchant. The merchant, however, thinking five times twelve equals eighty demands of the customer eighty rather than sixty drachmas. They quarrel over this matter for quite a while, and the customer leaves without paying his bill because of the absurd demand of the merchant. Becoming indignant and believing that he was wronged, the merchant sues the customer for eighty drachmas, while admitting that he sold the man five yards of broadcloth at twelve drachmas a yard. How will this merchant be judged by the judges, by the lawyers, and by anyone who hears his foolishness? No doubt he shall be considered mad and committed to a mental institution until his health is restored. His foolishness consists simply in the disregard for an arithmetical truth.

The science of geometry proves that the three angles of every triangle are equal in degrees to two right angles. Let us suppose that a certain teacher of geometry, having proved to his students this geometrical truth, tries thereafter to prove to the same students that the three angles of a triangle are not equal to two right angles, but rather, to four. Despite the fact that the students are young people, they shall immediately conclude that their teacher has gone mad and must be confined in a mental institution to be cured. The geometry teacher’s insanity consists in his disregard for a geometrical truth.

What conclusion is to be drawn from these examples and from countless others which we could cite? The conclusion is that all moral agents willingly subject themselves to every truth, averting the misfortune of insanity which consists in the disregard for the truth, in understanding and acting in a manner contrary to the natural order of things. Our entire life is an act of willful servitude to the truth, and we cannot exist in any way other than serving the truth. If we rebel against the truth, we are very quickly destroyed, for the only condition of our existence and life is the truth. Having arrived at this point of our discourse, we must make a distinction between the Primary or Primordial Universal Truth and all the particular truths which are related to it as the results are related to their own cause.

The Primary and Universal Truth is the Incarnate and living Logos of God through whom all things were made.[1] The nature and the order of all created things, visible and invisible, the laws of energy and movement, of reproduction and birth, of decay and change, of understanding and action–all these things and others like them are the natural result of the first Logos who expresses the Primary and Perfect Mind and reigns supreme over all things that were made and have their being through Him.

Now that we have this distinction between the Primary Truth and the particular truths which depend upon it, let us take up the following thought: If disregard of and objection to only one particular truth makes foolish and unfortunate that soul which dares to understand and act in a manner contrary to a self-evident or proven verity, one wonders what does that soul which disregards the Truth of truths suffer–that soul which is so brazen as to think and act contrarily to the Primordial Truth? Such a soul suffers something similar and equal to the punishment of the Devil and his angels.

The so-called Devil suffered something similar to the misfortune of the policeman whom we used as an illustration. Just as the policeman disregarded the goodness of the bread and attempted to feed himself and the others with soil of the earth, so too the Devil disregarded the benefit to be gained from subjecting himself to the Living Logos of God. And having rebelled against God, the Devil nourishes himself with falsehood whose father he became. Christ bears witness to this misfortune of the Devil’s insanity, saying: ” . . . (The Devil) has nothing to do with the truth, because there is no truth in him. When he lies, he speaks according to his own nature, for he is a liar and the father of lies.”[2]

These words of Christ testify that the Devil suffered the misfortune of complete madness which is incurable, for he rebelled against the Primary Truth, thinking and acting in opposition to it. This calamity of madness and foolishness was passed on from the Devil to the human race which is mad and senseless in that we more often than not disregard the Truth and fall into sin. But God, our Father, in order to deliver us from the dreadful disease of Satanic madness, sent the Truth into the world. It is this Truth which holds the cup filled with wisdom, so that He may give foolish men to drink and restore them to health. Whosoever approaches and drinks from the cup of the Wisdom of God sobers up, is cured, and rejoicingly bows down in obedience to the Truth. But whosoever persists in not tasting the divine potion suffers from the disease of the Devil, raging mad and being led astray, while ignorant of the evil from which he is suffering.

The written word of God and the scientific proof of the truth are the only antidotes for the insanity of which we speak. With these means alone can foolish persons be healed and willingly bow down in recognition of the truth. Those people, however, who are convinced neither by the written word of God, nor by the scientific proof of the truth have no hope of cure, just as the Devil has none. But such people do not number very many, and most persons can be cured. For most people avert the misfortune of insanity, as they desire to know the truth and to think in accordance with the natural order of things.[3]

We have examples from our own life which testify that we seldom rebel against the truth, and more often willingly serve the truth. We have the anxiety within us that we cannot exist and live orderly if we fight against every truth. Examples from human existence testify that we are led forward every day to knowledge of truths, rejoicing for both the discovery and the proof of any particular truth whatever. Bearing in mind, therefore, that almost all souls ward off the misfortune of insanity, and that every person willingly acknowledges and works for every self-evident or scientifically proven truth, let us consider the following:

If a certain self-evident or scientifically proved truth is so convincing that it subjects to itself every soul, how much more shall the Primordial Truth upon which all the other truths depend–once it has been proven scientifically and made evident–prevail over all the moral powers, and subject to us that bear it those moral forces of Europe with which we shall be able to maneuver against our enemy countless armies and fleets? If we understand that almost all people avert madness, and that all desire to think and act according to the truth, according to the natural order of things; if we understand the power of the Primordial Truth that springs from its scientific proof and subjects in obedience every moral agent, we can conclude with certainty that the practical means we have set forth leads us smoothly and easily to our set goal, as capable of moving against our enemy all the armies and fleets of Europe.

Indeed one has little difficulty in understanding that once the trial proposed above has taken place; once the account of the proceedings has been translated into all the European languages, and has been sent to all the academies and schools of Europe; the facts shall become known to all through the press. In this manner, all Europe shall learn the science and the art of the Greek race. And having drunk, as it were, of the excellent potion of wisdom, Europe shall sober up from its torpor, and, having come to know the disregarded Truth, it shall subject itself to it. As soon as the Primary Truth has become obvious to all Europe by virtue of unquestionable scientific proof, unanimity and united action shall ensue very quickly, as all people shall see that their personal and common interest lies in their commitment to the divine Truth.[4]

All people shall then say with one voice: The barbarian authority of the anti-Christ Mohammed in the East must come to an end! The people of God must receive justly whatever was unjustly taken from them. All Christian nations must inaugurate the Kingdom of Christ upon earth, the kingdom of peace and righteousness. Such is the favorable result, I foresee, of the proposed practical method which we perceived was adorned with these three virtues: 1) This practical method contains within itself the whole mind of science, its mother. 2) It saves Hellenism and the Greek nation from a most evident impending danger. 3) It leads to the completion of the task of 1821 in the quickest and best manner possible by means of the unanimity of all the nations which shall subject themselves to the Primordial Truth proved scientifically.

Thus when I say that we have no need for weapons, and that we can take over our patrimony without any struggle or bloodshed, I make no empty statement, as they who ill hear me assert in slander. Rather, I say these things with confidence in the might of this spiritual staff, in the moral power of science and art, in the moral strength derived from the truth and justice. Today we took under consideration only the power of the truth over moral agents. In the next discourse, we must consider also the power of justice so that we may be convinced beyond the shadow of a doubt that it is impossible for us to fail in our purpose, being armed with these two most potent weapons, the truth and justice.

But now we must respond to a certain gentleman by the name of Mr. Epaminondas Schinas who was disturbed by my statements, and wrote the following article in Evangelismos:

“It did not please Mr. Makrakis to respond to our question which appeared in the last publication of Evangelismos concerning his failure to cite the plagues of Egypt. It is our honor once more to ask him kindly to do so. Perhaps we misunderstand what Mr. Makrakis means, but we thought that in his last oration he strongly urges the enslaved peoples of the East never to take up arms. Therefore, they who have already taken up arms should lay them down and allow Turkey to beat them as a cruel and blood-thirsty man beats a frail young woman until such time as the other nations, having been moved by compassion, hasten to the deliverance of the enslaved. We were given the impression that, while Mr. Makrakis was calling for agreement, he sowed many seeds of dissension by declaring that the elderly alone are pious, whereas our young people are irreligious and have denied our heritage. And he leveled all these charges without any substantial basis. We thought it very inconsistent of him first acridly to deprecate the West and now to approach the West with flattery. Mr. Makrakis led us to believe that instead of awakening, he is attempting to lull to sleep the nation’s conscience. We hope that Mr. Makrakis shall take it upon himself to resolve these questions, unless he does not want us to understand him better than what we have.”

My response to these charges was given as we expound upon the various matters in the course of the speech, and all our listeners justified my statements, as they were convinced that I conscientiously offer the nation the very best and most beneficial advice. At the time of the address there was also present the man who is seeking the answer to his questions. On the next day, this gentleman published the following comments:

“In yesterday’s oration, Mr. Makrakis responded to the questions we raised in Evangelismos. He abolished these charges, as he referred to the questions, in the following manner: Never did he assert that because God detests destructions, we have no need for destructive weapons of war; Mr. Makrakis rather urged that we, the New Israel, arm ourselves with the spiritual staff, as Old Israel did with the one given to Moses. At no time did he urge the enslaved peoples of the East not to take up arms. Mr. Makrakis did not sow seeds of dissension, but rather pointed to our ailments and advised us how we should seek out therapy. Upon proving that the West has a false philosophy and false civilization, he does not flatter it today, but rather is endeavoring, by opening the eyes of the West to the light of the Truth which we proclaim, to help the West understand our just claims and grant them to us.

“Mr. Makrakis wishes us to explain to him whether it is the good or the wicked thoughts of the people that he seeks to lull to sleep. He wanted to justify himself that he is not an emissary of Turkey. It was to our great surprise that we heard this justification, inasmuch as we never wrote any such thing. He said he lacks funds because Evangelismos refused to accept an article he submitted for publication. He also was unable to give a direct answer to our first question. But under such circumstances, why did he not place his answer in the newspapers whose columns are open to him?

“Everyone accepts the fact that Hellenism owes its salvation to its Orthodox faith and its language. Whoever would question this certainly is not well. Anyone who says that something can be done without God’s will, or tries to abolish the truths of the Gospel must be a fool. No matter from what perspective Mr. Makrakis proves these things. no one certainly shall have anything to say to the contrary. In seeking certain explanations from Mr. Makrakis, we shall constantly ask him where does he base himself in desiring that we be armed with his spiritual staff alone? And why did he say not even a word as to whether they who have already taken up arms should put them down? We ask Mr. Makrakis, Did or did not Emperor Constantine the Great have this spiritual staff? Why was it that when there appeared to him the Cross with the inscription, ‘By this sign conquer (En touto nika),’ he employed both the banner with the cross and weapons to destroy Maxentius? We ask: when did the Byzantine Empire begin to decline, but only when the Byzantines desisted from military training, and the national armies were replaced by mercenaries gathered from here and there?

“The intent of Mr. Makrakis that we clearly show Europe the truth and thus oblige her to send her armies and naval fleets to set us free is a good and holy one. Does he deem it proper, however, that we too take part in this struggle with weapons, or not? Should we prepare ourselves for this purpose from now, or not? If Europe does not accept the decision of our University’s faculty that ours is the truth and not theirs, and if she sets up a new court of law comprised of the faculty of a European University which reaches a contrary decision, what must we do? In working out the subjection of the West to the truth, is it not prudent in so doing that we also be concerned about the subjection of the East?

“We can discern our sin clearly when we recall that while Moses did receive the staff from God, he nevertheless trained the Jews in the wilderness for warfare, when we recall that while St. Constantine received the sign of the Cross from God, he nonetheless did not leave the sword drop from his hand. We are disturbed over the fact that Mr. Makrakis can say to the Greek nation at this time, when a low fire is roaring in Turkey and a volcano is erupting in Crete, that after six or sixteen years God said that He wants the Eastern Question to be resolved; and that we must arm ourselves with the rational staff alone and with nothing else. This is why we are wondering whether Mr. Makrakis seeks to lull to sleep the spirit of our people. We do not reject the spiritual staff of Mr. Makrakis. We assert that the Greek people must love and believe in God; that they must keep their religion intact and pure, and have faith in the Most High. Our nation must always bear in mind, however, that at no time did Old Israel lay aside its weapons; and that when our forefathers were fighting, in one hand they held the cross and in the other, the sword.”

On the basis of the statements quoted above, it appears that the commentator is questioning my position not in order that he may learn more about it, but rather, that he may lay a snare for me. It seems that he too has sensed the power of the spiritual staff, having seen that the charges made against me have been abolished by this staff. Since he is incapable, however, of comprehending all the power of the staff, the commentator once again expresses the apprehension that for the sake of Turkey we seek to lull to sleep the militant spirit of the people. I responded to this false accusation in another discourse, and Mr. Schinas was left completely defenseless.

[1] John, 1:3 “All things were made through Him.”

[2] John 8:44

[3] Typical of Makrakis’ moral optimism and trust in the goodness of man. Evil becomes the result of a badly enlightened intellect. This is not uncommon in the theology of the Greek Fathers of the Church.

[4] This is indicative of Makrakis’ unreserved trust in the intellectual capacity of man to recognize Christ as ultimate Truth. Throughout all his writings he assumes that faith in Christ rests on being rationally convinced that He 1s the Truth and that unbelief results really from the lack of intellectual persuasion. This is due to his overmastering conviction that unbelief is irrationality and thus madness, whereas to believe in Christ is to be truly rational and thus truly sane.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s