SOCIALISM.

Lyttelton Times, Volume XCVIII, Issue 11333, 29 July 1897, Page 6

SOCIALISM.

TO THE EDITOR. ' Sir,— The Rev T. A. Williams is more of a Socialist than he is aware of, and next time the Church meets with a well-merited castigation he had better leave its defence to the doctrinal theologians, and stick to the lines of work mapped out , by the “ Shaffcesburys, the Barnardos, the George Mullers, &c.” It would be waste of :time

for me to point out the weakness of bis defence, as ho is doubtless well aware of it himself. Suffice it to say that his selection of typical ■ churchmen is (for him) a most unfortunate one. If by their fruits we know them, then the Shaftesbury’s, &e., are much better Socialists than they are churchmen. Because of the “ fund of self-sacrifice and love let loose 2000 years ago ”, —preserved “in the freezing chambers of the church,” and galvanised into vigour and vitality by the socialist sentiment of to-day—the Barnardos and the Mullers are allowed to “ bind up tho bruised reeds,” with tho sanction and approval of the Church. But how different was itwith Shaftesbury fifty years ago. The public Press denounced him as a modern Jack Cade, and covered him with the most violent of abuse. Tho Churchmen iu : the “Lords” strove to strangle with amendments his socialist Bill for the better protection of women and children. The heads of the Church purposely left the House rather than support it, and in bitterness off soul he (Shaftesbury) afterwards exclaimed, “Sinners were, with me, saints against jne.” Again, in his diary we yuid the following*: —“ The Evangelical religionists are not those on whom I cau rely. , The factory questions and every question of humanity receive as much support from the men of the world as from them. Good old Shaftesbury! It is bis Socialism not his Churchism that has made his name honours d and revered to-day. The reverend gentleman seems to think that Socialism is but a thing of yesterday. The name is new certainly, but the principle implied therein is older than tho everlasting hills. It is co-eternal with and dwells in't-he bosom of our All-Great Father. _ A germ idea was implanted in- the lower life forms of creation. For countless ages it blindly" struggles upwards towards the light of consciousness, ever weaving fuller organisms and freer forms of life, until, wilh. the advent of man, it finds conscious expression in tho mother, love. Hoi ® man and the animal part company, but the impress of the blind, brute struggle still mars his mind and retards his progress. The rise and fall of past civiliantions are more episodes whicn mark the progress or decline of the altruistic principle in human life, but tho tendency is ever upwards. _ Two thousand years ago the great Principle itself became incarnate, and for a time sojourned amongst men. To-day - the quickening spirit of the Nazarene is again abroad, working on the human organism through various phases of the great socialistic principle. The dry bones of the desert are a-shaking. The animal in man is not yet dead; but let us hope that our era will witness the dawn of that new reformation “which will lead mankind one step nearer to tho great destiny which awaits him.—l am, &c., Timarn. J- STORRIER.

TO THE EDITOE. _ _ ' Sir, —Your correspondent Mr Williams, in a somewhat long and loose-jointed letter dated June 3, and published in your issue of July 16, is severe upon Ben Tiilett bocauso in an address he had made the statement that “the precepts of the Church differ from its practice,” and asks if the churches are not in the main striving to embody in the life the lofty precepts of the Divine Teacher. Does Mr Williams himself believe that the Church of to-day, with its cardinals and its aronbishops and bishops in palaces, and living in pomp and luxury, while _ its poor starve in hovels, with its simony and its-utterly worldly means of raising money; with its incense and candles and millinery, its homage to wealth and its contempt for poverty, its rented sittings and its sectarian differences and jealousies, in anyway resembles the Churcn pictured in Acts 2nd and 4th ? Tho Founder of the Church was a volunteer to poverty; He chose the poor for His friends and companions ; He was utterly empty of self, and sought only the good of others, and those not always His friends, but His enemies. His disciples and their converts walked in His footsteps, made the teachings cf Jesus the rule of their lives, and wore not only Socialists, but Communists. The_ Socialist may bo wrong in some of his ideas and methods, but surely he is right in contending that, as the Church of the present claims to be the Church of Christ, so it should somewhat resemble the Church of the New Testament, and that he who claims to bo a follower of Jesus should walk in His footsteps and live out His precepts.—l am, Ac.,