line is only an approach to the latter, so is every degree of perfection attainable by man — only an approach to the perfection of the Father, which Christ showed us the way to emulate. Therefore, in reality, every deed of the best man and his whole life will be always only a practical compromise — a resultant between his feebleness and his striving to attain perfection. And such a compromise in practice is not a sin, but a necessary condition of every Christian life.
The great sin is the compromise in theory, is the plan to lower the ideal of Christ in view to make it attainable. And I consider the admission of force (be it even benevolent) over a madman (the great difficulty is to give a strict definition of a madman) to be such a theoretical compromise. In not admitting this compromise I run the risk only of my death or the death of other men who can be killed by the madman; but death will come sooner or later, and death in fulfilling the will of God is a blessing (as you put it yourself in your book); but in admitting this compromise I run the risk of acting contrary to the law of Christ — which is worse than death.
It is the same with property. As soon as I admit in principle my right to property, I necessarily will try to keep it from others and to increase it, and therefore will deviate very far from the ideal of Christ.
Only when I profess daringly that a Christian cannot have any property — will I in practice come near to the ideal of Christ in this instance. There is a striking example of such a deviation in theory about anger in Matth., V, 22, where the added word είχη̃ («without any cause») have justified and still justify now every intolerance, punishment, and evil, which have been and are so often done by nominal Christians. The more we keep in mind the ideal of a straight line as the shortest distance between two points the nearer we will come to trace in reality a straight line. The purer we keep the ideal of Christ's perfection in its; unattainableness, the nearer we will in reality come to it. —
Allow me now to argue upon several dogmatical differences of opinion: about the meaning of the words «Son of God», about personal life after death, about resurrection. I have written a large work — the translation, concordance and explanation of the Gospels in which I exposed all I think on those subjects. Having at the time — ten years ago — given all the strength
