Приговор при свечах / Judgment in candlelight - Владимир Анатольевич Арсентьев

because they administer justice in accordance with the criminal law of the Russian Federation. Given the general fundamentals of law, prison must ideally remain outside the realm of politics.

The social conflict in question is characterized by utilitarian attitude, which, as it becomes the dominant mindset, is psychologically one of the links between psychopathic and spiritual traits of the personality. According to Nicolas Berdyaev (1874–1948), “the principle of utilitarianism is in the highest degree unfavourable to the principle of personality; it subjects personality to utility, which holds sway tyrannically over personality,”[138] leading to bondage. While the special procedure is new in form, it remains repressive by nature. Politically violent, it may instill a fear of sorts in the legal professionals who find this imposed imperative idea alien to justice. However, other executors of law take pleasure in removing the fundamental legal activities from criminal proceedings.

Thus, a change in the mindset has led to a crisis of the law enforcer’s personality, invalidating its appropriate qualities and exacerbating the crisis of the criminal justice culture. The special procedure, under which verdicts of guilty are delivered without a trial, forms a dialectical connection between the two.

1.5. Fundamentals of Justice in Biblical History

According to Chapter 3 of the Genesis, with exile began the life of the first human being who knowingly committed a crime and was subjected to inevitable punishment. This biblical story about the first crime – the fall – is true in the psychological sense.

First of all, the serpent approaches not the husband but the wife. Creeping up to her, the serpent coyly asks whether God really said, “You must not eat from any tree in the garden” (Gen. 3:1). In this way, the serpent is trying to communicate to Eve the feeling of distrust in God and enmity to Him. Eve expresses her grievance against the strict character of the commandment, adding to the taboo on eating the tree’s fruits something else that God had not forbidden: “You must not touch it, or you will die” (Gen. 3:2). Thus, the woman tells a lie and embarks on the way of the fall.

Hearing words of sympathy to his wickedness, the serpent becomes more insolent, directly slanders God and presents Him as deceitful and jealous. The serpent promises Eve: “You will not certainly die, for God knows that when you eat from it your eyes will be opened, and you will be like God, knowing good and evil” (Gen. 3:4). He offers an easy way, saying that the fruit has magical powers that liken human beings to God. The woman accepts the tempter’s offer. From that moment, she looks at the tree somewhat differently: it is good for food (desire of the flesh), pleasing to the eye (desire of the eyes), and delightsome because it can confer wisdom (equal to the omniscience of God – arrogance).

Formerly, sacred thoughts about God filled the woman’s soul. Now, she is filled with sensual ideas and wishes associated with the forbidden fruit. The sin of apostasy has already been committed within her soul. She only has to implement her evil intent: “She took some and ate it. She also gave some to her husband, who was with her, and he ate it” (Gen. 3:6).

However, the serpent was only the external reason of the fall. He did insidiously corrupt Eve, tempting her to sin, but he did not force her to violate God’s commandment. Therefore, the forebears themselves were the internal, more important reason why sin emerged. Yielding to the temptation, they abused their free will, but they did so not out of necessity or under constraint, but by their own decision. This is why they were held accountable for their actions.

After being expelled from the garden of Eden, Adam and Eve had sons and daughters (Gen. 5:4). Eve named their first son Cain, which meant “with the help of the Lord I have brought forth a man” (Gen. 4:1), erroneously assuming he was the Christ. The second son’s name was Abel.

Cain worked the soil, while Abel kept flocks. Cain brought fruits of the soil as offerings to God, and Abel best animals from the flock. Abel, who was kind and meek, brought offerings wholeheartedly, with love and faith in the promised Savior, with a prayer for mercy and a hope for God’s grace. Cain, however, was evil-tempered and cruel, and his offerings were just a custom carried out without love or fear of God.

Because God accepted Abel’s offerings, Cain became envious of his brother, took him out to the field, and killed him. Wishing that Cain would repent, God asked him, “Where is your brother Abel?” Cain replied brazenly, “I don’t know, am I my brother’s keeper?” Then God said, “What have you done? Listen! Your brother’s blood cries out to me from the ground. Now you are under a curse. You will be a restless wanderer on the earth.” So Cain, torn with remorse, took his wife and fled to another land, far away from his parents.

Human life is God’s gift, and therefore no human being is allowed to take their own or other people’s life. While taking another human life is called murder, taking one’s own life is suicide – the gravest sin.

The curse that resulted from the original sin came upon the earth and – vicariously – upon humanity. When the sin came to murder, the curse afflicted the murderer. Due to the severity of the punishment (exile), Cain’s perseverance broke and turned into cowardice. He cried, “My punishment is more than I can bear. I will be a restless wanderer on the earth, and whoever finds me will kill me.” This wish of his, arising out of desperation, was sinful and could not be fulfilled. As a punished murderer, he should have served as a cautionary example for others. So “anyone who kills Cain will suffer vengeance seven times over” (Gen. 4:15). His