4 WHAT 15 JusTicE? is, independence from political influence, but if there is also freedom within science, the free play of arguments and counter arguments. No doctrine whatever can be suppressed in the name of science, for the soul of science is tolerance. I started this essay with the question as to what is justice. Now, at its end I am quite aware that I have not answered it. My only excuse is that in this respect I am in the best of company. It ‘would have been more than presumptuous to make the reader be- lieve that I could succeed where the most illustrious thinkers have failed. And, indeed, I do not know, and I cannot say what justice is, the absolute justice for which mankind is longing. 1 ‘must acquiesce in a relative justice and I can only say what justice is to me. Since science is my profession, and hence the most impor tant thing in my life, justice, to me, is that social order under whose protection the search for truth can prosper. “My” justice, then, is the justice of freedom, the justice of peace, the justice of democ- racy—the justice of tolerance. THE IDEA OF JUSTICE IN THE HOLY SCRIPTURES ‘THe TRANSCENDENTAL CHARACTER oF Divine Justice O.. of the most important elements of Christian religion is the idea that justice is an essential quality of God. Since God is the absolute, his justice must be absolute justice, that is to say, eternal and unchangeable. Only a religion whose deity is supposed to be just can play a role in social life. To attribute justice to the deity in order to make religion applicable to human relations im- plies a certain tendency of rationalizing something which, by its very nature, is irrational—the transcendental being, the religious authority, and its absolute qualities. From the point of view of rational cognition the absolute justice of God must necessarily be in conflict with another absolute quality, as essential as the former, namely, his omnipotence. If God is omnipotent nothing which actually happens can happen against or without his will. Since injustice actually exists—if it would not exist, the idea of justice were meaningless—how is God's omnipotence compatible with his justice? This is the prob- lem of theodicy, insoluble for rational cognition. It is, however, no valid argument against a religious belief in an almighty and at the same time absolutely just God, because the facts of faith are outside of rational cognition. The transcendental nature of God in general and his absolute justice in particular are inaccessible to human knowledge, based on sensual experience controlled by reason and hence subjected to the principles of logic. What is incompatible for rational cognition is by no means incompatible for religious faith From RivstaJuridice de le Universidad de Puerto Rico, Sept, 1053-Aps 3526 JUSTICE IN THE HOLY SCRIPTURES If the idea of absolute divine justice shall be applicable to the social life of men, that is to say, if divine justice shall serve as a standard of the justice which men are secking for the regulation of their mutual relations, theology must attempt to proceed from its starting point, the incomprehensibility of absolute justice, to a less rigid position—to the assumption that God's will, although incomprehensible by its very nature, may nevertheless be com- prehended by man in one way or another. The inconsistency of the position makes it inevitable that this turn of thought must ultimately result in a re-turn to the starting point. Since God ex- ists, absolute justice exists; and as man must believe in the exist- ence of God though he is not able to comprehend his nature, ‘man must believe in the existence of absolute justice, though he cannot know what it really means. Justice is a mystery—one of the many mysteries—of the faith. Justice i Divine Revetation anp Mopern Cirnisttan Moraztry ‘The specific means of theology in its attempt to let the incompre- hensible appear comprehensible is its doctrine of revelation. God reveals himself in two ways: in his acts and in his word. If God has created the universe, the whole creation is a manifestation of his will. Then it is possible to find the answer to the question as to what is just and what unjust in nature as well as in history. ‘The natural-iaw doctrine is based on the one, the Hegelian pl losophy of history on the other assumption. However, both mai festations of God show to the human mind facts which, if in- terpreted as being in conformity with divine norms, lead to con- tradictory statements, In nature as well as in history we sce a pitiless struggle in which the stronger destroys the weaker; and at the same time mutual help. The most careful analysis of na- ture and history cannot furnish a criterion to distinguish good and evil; and our reason tells us that it is not possible to conclude from that which is, that which ought to be, Natural and his- torical reality seem to be a manifestation of God's omnipotence rather than God's justice, and their mutual relation remains an JUSTICE IN THE HOLY SCRIPTURES 7 open question. Revelation of God's will in creation is evidently not sufficient to solve the problem of justice. ‘The other revelation—God's word in the Scriptures—scems to ‘be a much clearer manifestation of his justice. But many institu- tions presented in the Scriptures as directly approved, or at least not disapproved of, by God or the men inspired by him—polyg- amy, slavery, blood revenge—are in open opposition to the feel- ing of justice of modern Christians. Lamech married two wives (Genesis IV:19); Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob had each more than ‘one wife; Deuteronomy XX1-15 refers toa man having two wives as toa legally recognized relationship. In view of these facts Luther and Melanchthon declared in their famous opinion justifying, by divine law, the bigamy of Philip of Hesse, “What is permitted concerning matrimony in the Mosaic law is not prohibited in the Gospel.” * Not only in the Old but also in the New Testa- ‘ment slavery is recognized as a legal and just institution, although there are also prescriptions aiming at restricting the right of the owner and thus to soften the situation of the slave, In Leviticus XXV:6 slavery is presented as ordered by Yahweh or at least as not incompatible with the law he gave on Mount Sinai through Moses. Exodus XXI:2 ff. shows that it was not unlawful to make even an Israelite a slave and that it was permitted to sell one’s own daughter asa slave. In the Epistle which Paul wrote to Philemon concerning the slave Onesimus who ran away and was sent back to his master by the Apostle, the latter did not at all deny the justice of the institution; in his Letter to the Ephesians (VI:5-9) he even declared the obligation of the slave toward his master a sacred duty, whose fulfillment is also a duty toward God. Although Yahweh’s Law shows a tendency to restrict blood revenge, this custom appears as firmly established among the Jews and recognized by God. Cain, after having killed Abel, says, “Any- one who comes across me will kill me,” whereupon Yahweh says, “In that case, sevenfold vengeance shall be taken on anyone who kills Cain” (Genesis IV:14 £2 And to Noah Yahweh commands, “Whoever sheds the blood of man, by man shall his blood be shed” (Genesis TX:6). Yahweh does not forbid blood revenge. He only orders to set apart three cities in the land which he is giving to his people, “that any homicide may flee there, so that the28 JUSTICE IN THE HOLY SCRIPTURES avenger of blood may not pursue the homicide in the heat of his anger, and overtake him, because the way is long, and take his life, when he did not deserve to die, since he had no standing feud with him” (Deuteronomy XIX:1 f). There is a procedure directly ordered by Yahweh, which aims at determining whether a woman suspected of adultery has com- mitted it. In this rite a “water of bitterness that causes a curse” plays the decisive part. The priest performing the rite has to put into this water “dust that is on the floor of the tabernacle, Then he must have the woman take an oath, saying to her: “If no man has lain with you, and if you have not turned aside to indecent acts while married to your husband, be immune to this water of bitterness that brings a curse; but if you have gone wrong while married to your husband and if you have defiled yourself, and some man besides your husband has lain with you . . . then may Yahweh make you an execration and an oath among your people by making you have miscarriages, along with a womb easily fer- tilized; may this water that brings a curse enter your bowels causing your womb to be easily fertilized, but making you have miscarriages’; and die woman must say, “Su be it; so be it” Then “the priest must write the curses in a book [that is, on a slip of parchment] and then wash them [that is, the ink with which the curses have been written] off into the water of bitterness, and ‘must make her drink the water.” If she is innocent, the water will do her no harm, if she is guilty, the water will have the effect indicated in the curse. “This is the law in case of suspicion, when a woman while married to her husband goes wrong and de- files herself, or when a fit of suspicion comes over a man and he becomes suspicious of his wife” (Numbers V:11 ff.). This pro- cedure prescribed by Yahweh as law is hardly different from the magic operations known as poison ordeal and practiced among primitive tribes.‘ It is doubtful whether the “water of bitterness” contained any poison. But this is of no importance as to the magic character of the rite. This character is evident from the fact that the written curse must be put into the water, which presup- poses the belief that the curse, imagined as a powerful substance, has the desired effect. It is just the magic element of the rite which is highly repulsive to the religious feeling as well as to the idea of due process of law prevailing among modern Chris- JUSTICE IN THE HOLY SCRIPTURES 29 tians. The same is true with respect to the belief in demons or “foul spirits” entering the bodies of men and causing mental dis- cases, of which the Gospels report. According to them Jesus him- self believed in the existence of these demons and used his di- vine power to exorcise them, as in the strange story of the Gerasa demoniac (Mark V:1 ff). ScripruraL RevELation Conrrapicrory iN InseLe Scriptural revelation is not only in some parts in direct opposition to the morality of modern Christianity, it is also contradictory in f, no less contradictory than revelation in creation. Sarah, Abraham's wife, is his half sister, the daughter of his father though not of his mother (Genesis XX:12). But in Leviticus (XVIII:g; XX:17) and Deuteronomy (XXVII:22) intercourse of a man with his half sister is absolutely forbidden and a great sin. Jacob married two sisters, Rachel and Lea, the daughters of Laban (Genesis XXIX:1 ff); but in Leviticus (XVITI:18) it is written: “You must not marry a woman in addition to her sister as a rival wife having intercourse with her as well as with the other, while she is alive.” * As to divorce, the code of Deuteronomy, which presents itself as an act of divine legislation, contains the rule: When a man please him, because he has found some indecency in her, he may write her a bill of divorce, and, putting it into her hand, may dismiss her from his house. And when she has left his house she may go and marry another man (Deuteronomy XXIV:1 ff). But when the Pharisees asked Jesus whether it is lawful for a man to divorce his wife, Jesus answered that husband and wife “shall become one, so that they are no longer two, but one. What there- fore God has joined together, let not man put asunder.” “Who- ‘ever divorces his wife and marries another, commits adultery against her; and if she divorces her husband and marries another, she commits adultery” (Mark X:2 ff). Jesus’ answer implies the principle that a man must have only one wife. There can be little doubt that two totally different ideas, incompatible with each other, are at the basis of the divine law instituting the polygamous