CHRISTIANITY AND DEBT.

Hawera Star, Volume LIV, 28 March 1935, Page 4

CHRISTIANITY AND DEBT.

* (To the Editor). Sir,—Churchgoer is evidently one of those hopelessly vague Christians, who think that the church should just go on preaching to the few, instead, of becoming practical in everyday affairs, and letting people outside the church see the force of Christianity. He does not seem to know that Douglasites are the Christians, drawn from all the churches (to use his own words), “whose feelings are aroused, and consciences perturbed, to such an extent that they have the will to reform” (a very strong will, too). In the Gospels we' read that Christ entered the Temple and cast out the moneychangers, saying that they had made of His House a den of thieves. We believe that the moneychangers are making of this earth a den of thieves, and again have to be cast .out. How can the church obey the command, “Feed My sheep” when she has allowed herself to become pawned to the money-lend-ers. The church, like the people, is bankrupt to-day. Shfe lias no property and the people have no alms to give. Every penny in circulation is a loan from the private money-lenders. The church’s and the people’s properties are in pawn and are held at the pleasure of the money-lenders. When the church in Hawera collects money to repay her debts on her (so-called) property, she is only adding to the debt burden of her people by that amount, plus compound interest. How does “Churchgoer” expect the church or any Christians to be Good Samaritans under these false conditions? I challenge “Churchgoer” to show the Christian direction in the action of the Japanese or British 'Government, or any Government, in raising loans to rehouse slum dwellers. Living in new houses will not educate people to a spiritual life, nor will it educate them for higher-paid jobs. It simply means that those people rehoused are required to find a larger sum out of their weekly wage (if they’re lucky enough to have one), or out of their dole, for the privilege of living. Moreover they are expected to keep up a higher standard of living commensurate -with their surroundings, on the remainder of their wage. If they, as a class, fail to repay the money spent on rehousing, then the country is called on to pay it—result, increased taxation to pay increased interest on increased national debt to the moneylenders. Where is the benefit, and to whom? Again, “Churchgoer,” the Douglas reform lias not yet been attempted, therefore cannot be said to be either adequate or inadequate as a solution of our economic problem, but it is receiving widespread and increasing support, not only in the British Empire and U.S.A., but in foreign countries.—l am, etc., COMMUNICANT. Hawera, March 27.

Sir, now is: “that the Douglas proposals . . . are inadequate as a. solution of economic, let alone social, problems, and moreover are not likely to receive general support.” His reason for the first part of this contention is, I gather, that he thinks the proposals do not deal with the spiritual problem, which lies behind the moral problem at the back of the economic problem. The latter part of his statement he explains by the fact that only a few people are alive to the social problems of the day, owing to their lack of interest in and knowledge of Christianity. It seems that “Churchgoer” and I are really arguing along similar lines to make the same point, with but one small difference; this being that “Churchgoer” has not yet studied the social credit proposals with a sufficiently warm interest to find out whether they do touch on the aforementioned spiritual problem. They are the only proposals for a change of policy I have yet discovered which' could be carried out in complete accordance with Christ’s teaching. “Churchgoer” goes on to say that people who are really trying to live the Christian life cannot avoid facing social problems—again a point in common. He quotes as an example Kagawa, the Japanese, who persuaded his Government to. spend an enormous sum on slum clearance and other social reforms. Christians everywhere must be anxious to have large sums spent on social reforms. But has every Christian a feasible plan by which these sums may be found Avithout plunging the community further into debt? Every social credit student has. Douglas is right, says “Churchgoer,” in his hypothesis that we need more spending power, but will that persuade conservative people into action? If it. is right it should persuade all Christian people into action, therefore, let me suggest to all who profess and call themselves Christians that they make a sincere and open-minded study of the social credit proposals, so that in facing social problems they may be prepared with a solution.—l am, etc., A WOULD-BE CHRISTIAN.