THE PROBLEM OF DISTRIBUTION

Otago Daily Times, Issue 21920, 4 April 1933, Page 8

THE PROBLEM OF DISTRIBUTION

TO Tine EDITOR. Silt, —In your issue of March 28 appeared the llcv. B. S. Tuckwell’s harvest thanksgiving sermon, in which he forcibly presented a tragic picture of unemployment where “ 90,000,000 men, women, and children are living in hardship to a greater or lesser degree.” No one questions the figures or doubts the hardship inflicted, but such a statement, coining from the pulpit, arouses feelings that prompt one to ask the question: Are these millions of victims members of n Christian or of a barbarian community? It is absurd to claim that a community is civilised when millions of its number are deprived ot earning their living, and it is the height of impudence for it to call itself Christian. No wonder Mr Tuckwell felt the necessity to explain that .he never before felt it so hard to preach a harvest festival sermon and to say “ There are elements in the situation to-day which make such a service as this perilously near a piece ol mockery or hypocrisy, or apathy to tragic facts.” In the feeling that prompted Mr Tuckwell to give expression to his thoughts lies the hope that other Christian leaders have similar feelings, which, if united, would strengthen the Church—that is, if the Church is to be a factor in the solution of the problem. Here we have the very first question to answer: Is Christianity to be a factor in the solution of the problem? Or, to put the question in another form, can the problem of distribution be solved without the power of Christianity? It is quite useless for the clergy to preach to the public until Christian leaders themselves are united about the practical application of Christianity, because nothing is plainer than that the present chaos is the result of the absence of Christianity, and not of its presence. If Christian leaders are all agreed upon Christianity being indispensable to a solution, it follows that the Church must act as a collective body. It must present a united front. Individual Christians can do nothing. The Scripture save. “ A house divided within itself will fall.’' I need not remind Mr Tuckwell that the prominent division visible in the Church is strong evidence of human dogmatism

working in opposition to Christianity. The division in the Church is there, because of the absence of Christianity. The presence of it always unites and strengthens. Everybody can agree with Mr Tuckwell that "something is wrong, not from God’s side, but from man’s,” and it is precisely upon the Church the duty falls to explain what this wrong is. Those who make the accusation must sustain the charge. If it be true that the fault lies with man, why does Mr Tuckwell fear to name him? Define his actions-by which the wrong is inflicted, so that steps can be taken to correct the error. Someone must do this, and only the Christian Church is competent to do it, because it is the only institution that claims to have the key to the solution by the application of Christian ethics. It is fortunate that God baa given every man a “ consciousness ” by which to distinguish right from wrong, and promptly inform him in his dealings with his fellows when he meets a genuine Christian. This inherent quality in itself does not constitute Christianity; it only performs the function of detecting the effects of Christianity as practised by others. But this gift enables every intelligent man to see that there is no Christian ethics in our system of distribution. Even men who do not profess to be Christians know this to be true. Mr Tuckwell correctly says the “ Church is concerned not with machinery but with principles.” We certainly have all the necessary machinery. The principles we have clearly defined in the four Gospels. The paradox to be explained lies in those who pretend to act on Christian principles and fail to see that our economic system of distribution requires to be reconstructed before the principles of Christian ethics can be put into practice by the human operator. This brings us to a part which requires further explanation from the leaders of_ the Christian Church before the community can give an intelligent support to Mr Tuckwell s prayers. —I am, etc., W. Sivertsen.