12 page printout

Reproducible Electronic Publishing can defeat censorship.

This disk, its printout, or copies of either
are to be copied and given away, but NOT sold.

Bank of Wisdom, Box 926, Louisville, KY 40201
**** ****
WAS CHRIST A POLITICAL AND SOCIAL REFORMER?
BY
CHARLES WATTS
(Vice-President of the National Secular Society).

LONDON:
WATTS & CO., 17, Johnson's Court, Fleet Street, E.C.
**** ****

WAS CHRIST A POLITICAL AND

SOCIAL REFORMER?

ALTHOUGH Thomas Carlyle has said that "in these days it is
professed that hero-worship has gone out and finally ceased,"
thousands of the professed followers of Christ idolize his memory
to such an extent that they appear to be entirely oblivious of any
defect either in his character or in his teachings. They regard
their hero as having been the very embodiment of truth, virtue, and
perfection; and those persons who are compelled to doubt the
correctness of these assumptions are regarded by orthodox believers
as most unreasonable and perverse members of society. Probably the
principal cause why such erroneous and extravagant notions are
entertained of one who, according to the New Testament, was very
little, if at all, superior to other religious heroes can be
accounted for by the fact that the worshippers of Christ were
taught in their childhood to reverence him as an absolutely perfect
character, and as being beyond criticism. Thus youthful impressions
resulted in fancied creations which, in matured life, have been
accepted as realities. The Rev. James Cranbrook recognized this
truth, for in the preface to his work, 'The Founders of
Christianity' (page 5), he observes: "Our own idealizations have
invested him (Jesus) with a halo of spiritual glory, that by the
intensity of its brightness conceals from us the real figure
presented in the Gospels. We see him, not as he is described, but
as the ideally perfect man our own fancies have conceived. But let
any one sit down and critically analyses the sayings and doings
ascribed to Jesus in the Gospels -- let him divest his mind of the superstitious fear of irreverence, and then ask himself whether all
those sayings and doings are in harmony with the highest wisdom
speaking for all ages and races of mankind, and with the
conceptions of an perfect human nature, and I am mistaken if he
will not find a very great deal he will be forced to condemn."

Even the sons of Labor, the apostles of Democracy, and the
advocates of Socialism appear disposed to adopt Jesus as their
Patron Saint. Conjectures are being constantly made by professed
modern reformers as to what the Carpenter of Nazareth would say
upon the many political and social questions that agitate the
public mind in this the latter half of the nineteenth century.
These hero-worshippers seem to overlook the apathy of Jesus in
respect to the evils of his own time. Of course, it is not

Bank of Wisdom
Box 926, Louisville, KY 40201
1

WAS CHRIST A POLITICAL AND SOCIAL REFORMER?

difficult for an impartial observer to learn why the name of Christ
is invoked to support the various schemes that are now put forward
to aid the regeneration of society. However little Christianity is
practiced among us, it is extensively professed, and it is thought
by many a virtue to assume a belief, whether there are sufficient
grounds for doing so or not. This slavish adherence to fashion is
an undignified prostration of mental freedom and independence, and
it is also a fruitful source of the perpetuation of error. My
purpose in examining the claims set up for Jesus as a political and
social reformer is to ascertain if the records of his life, doings,
and teachings justify such claims. If Jesus were judged as an
ordinary man, living nearly two thousand years ago, my present task
would be unnecessary. If we assume that such a man once lived, and
that what he said and did is accurately reported, he should, in my
opinion, be considered as a youth possessing but limited education,
surrounded by unfavorable influences for intellectual acquirements,
belonging to a race not very remarkable for literary culture,
retaining many of the failings of his progenitors, and having but
little regard for the world or the things of the world. Viewed
under these circumstances, I could, while excusing many of his
errors, recognize and admire something that is praiseworthy in the
life of "Jesus of Nazareth." But when he is raised upon a pinnacle
of greatness, as an exemplar of virtue and wisdom, surpassing the
production of any age or country, he is then exalted to a position
which he does not merit, and which, to my mind, deprives him of
that credit which otherwise he would, perhaps, be entitled to.

The contentions which it is my purpose to dissipate are: that
Jesus was a political and social reformer, and that his alleged
teachings contain the remedies for the wrongs of modern society.
Before directly dealing with these points it ma be necessary to
glance at the various aspects of reform that have, at different
times in our national history, been presented to the community;
also to briefly consider the nature of the required reforms, and
some of the principal methods that have been adopted to secure
them.

In quite primitive ages important struggles took place to
establish greater equality in the conditions of life. In the time
of Moses, according to the Bible, the land, for instance, was not
merely the subject of "tracts for the times," but the laws and
regulations relating to it were practically dealt with. It did not,
however, cease to be property, and its inheritance was recognized
as a rightful thing. The stock-in-trade of many modern reformers is
the denunciation of those who "add house to house, field to field,
and grind the faces of the poor." If this condemnation is one of
the many features of Socialism, then Isaiah, Jeremiah, and Ezekiel
may, in this particular, be fairly termed Socialists -- a name
foreign to their language and to the ideas of their day.

The contention with some is, that Christ was a successor to
all these prophets, that he took the same kind of objection as they
did to the then existing state of things, and that he used the same
form of speech in denouncing them. The general reply to this is,
that Christ was, if anything only a prophetic reformer, not a real
one. In proof of this many facts in his alleged history may be
cited. For instance, he did not rescue the land from the control of


Bank of Wisdom
Box 926, Louisville, KY 40201
2

WAS CHRIST A POLITICAL AND SOCIAL REFORMER?

the Romans, who held it from the people very much in the same way
as landholders do now he did not attempt to render any aid to the
laborers of Rome, who in his day were resisting the injustice of
the capitalists he did not deliver his brethren of "the royal
house" from their foreign rulers; he did not redeem the Jews from
their social evils, or restore justice to their nation. In a word,
he entirely failed to do the reforming work that was expected of
him. About the year 1825 the "Christian Socialists of London"
called special attention to the question of land as regulated by
Moses, and the living in common by the early Christians; but no
practical issue arose out of the discussion. From that period down
to the present the same subject has been more or less agitated, and
still the matter is very far from being settled. Now, if it is
alleged that Christ sought to bring about a just settlement of the
land problem, then the existence of the present oppressive land
laws proves that he failed, and that his most devout followers have
been equally unfortunate. If Christ had been a practical reformer,
We should not have in our midst the deplorable injustice, the
wrongs, and the inequalities that now afflict society. These evils
and drawbacks -- the growth of centuries during which Christianity
was in power -- will doubtless be lessened, if not altogether
destroyed; but the work will be achieved by a moral revolution,
inaugurated and conducted by men who will possess ability and
experience that it is evident Jesus never had.

It must be borne in mind that there are two kinds of
revolution -- one that is gradual and intellectual, and therefore
useful; the other that is sudden, born of passion, and therefore
often useless as an important factor in securing permanent reforms.
We know that every change of thought, or condition of things,
involves a revolution which, if controlled by reason and regulated
by the lessons of experience, must aid rational progress, and tend
to build up a State, and secure its permanence. But there is
another kind of revolution, which is sought to be produced by
Nihilism and Anarchism, both of which aim at the destruction of the
State. I am not in favor of either of these "isms," believing, as
I do, that in our present condition of society some form of
government is necessary. Law and order, based upon the national
will, and the principle of justice, appear to me to be essential in
any scheme that is accepted for the purpose of furthering the
political and social progress of the world. Then we have Socialism,
which concerns itself with economic, ethical, political, and
industrial questions. The principal subject, however, dealt with by
Socialists is the accumulation and distribution of wealth. State
Socialism dates from the time of the eminent French writer, Claude,
H. Count de St. Simon, whose works were published in 1831. He tried
to secure the amelioration of the condition of the poor, and aimed
at the organization of labor and the distribution of the fruits of
industry, upon the principle of every man being rewarded according
to his works. Socialism is, in fact, an attempt (whether it is the
best that could be made is with some persons a debateable point) to
regulate the social relations, making them more equal than they are
at present, either by individual combination, by municipal or
cooperative action, by a philanthropic policy of the Church, or by
the control of the State. This last phase of the Socialistic scheme
means the complete regulation by law of the equality of



Bank of Wisdom
Box 926, Louisville, KY 40201
3

WAS CHRIST A POLITICAL AND SOCIAL REFORMER?

individuals, the State being the owner of the land, and of all the
instruments of industry that are at present possessed by
individuals, public companies, etc., who now regulate, in their own
interest, production and distribution.

Having thus briefly stated the general conceptions and aims of
political and social reformers, the next step is to inquire in what
relation Jesus stands to any or all of them. Of course there is
only one source of information upon the subject at our command --
that of the four Gospels. From these it will not be difficult to
demonstrate that Jesus was no mundane reformer. Although he was
surrounded by poverty, slavery, oppression, and mental degradation,
he made no effort to rid society of these curses to humanity. As
John Stuart Mill observes, in his work upon Liberty (pp. 28, 29),
in referring to Christian morality: "I do not scruple to say of it
that it is, in many important points, incomplete and one-sided, and
that, unless ideas and feelings, not sanctioned by it, had
contributed to the formation of European life and character, human
affairs would have been in a worse condition than they now are."

Professor Huxley, in the Nineteenth Century, No. 144, pp.
178-186, point; out that Christians have no right to force their
idealistic portraits of Jesus on the unbiased scientific world,
whose business it is to study realities and to separate fiction
from fact. The Professor's words are: "In the course of other
inquiries, I have had to do with fossil remains, which looked quite
plain at a distance, and became more and more indistinct as I tried
to define their outline by close inspection. There was something
there -- something which, if I could win assurance about it, might
mark a new epoch in the history of the earth; but, study as long as
I might, certainty eluded my grasp. So has it been with me in my
efforts to define the grand figure of Jesus as it lies in the
primitive strata of Christian literature. Is he the kindly,
peaceful Christ depicted in the catacombs? Or is he the stern judge
who frowns above the altar of Saints Cosmas and Damianus? Or can he
be rightly represented in the bleeding ascetic broken down by
physical pain of too many medieval pictures? Are we to accept the
Jesus of the second or the Jesus of the fourth Gospel as the true
Jesus? What did he really say and do? and how much that is
attributed to him in speech and action is the embroidery of the
various parties into which his followers tended to split themselves
within twenty years of his death, when even the three-fold
tradition was only nascent? .... If a man can find a friend, the
hypostasis of all his hopes, the mirror of his ethical ideal, in
the Jesus of any or all of the Gospels, let him live by faith in
that ideal. Who shall, or can, forbid him? But let him not delude
himself that his faith is evidence of the objective reality of that
in which he trusts. Such evidence is to be obtained only by the use
of the methods of science as applied to history and to literature,
and it amounts, at present, to very little."

Equally emphatic are the remarks of John Vickers, the author
of The New Koran, etc., who, in his work, The Real Jesus, on
pp. 160, 161, writes: "Many popular preachers at the present
day are accustomed to hold Jesus up to admiration as the
special friend of the poor -- that is, as the benefactor of
the humble working class, and their representations to this
effect are doubtless very generally believed. But a greater

Bank of Wisdom
Box 926, Louisville, KY 40201
4

WAS CHRIST A POLITICAL AND SOCIAL REFORMER?

delusion respecting him than this can scarcely be imagined;
for, however much he may have been disposed to favor those who
forsook their industrial calling and led a vagrant life, his
preaching and the course which be took were prejudicial to all
who honestly earned their bread. He did nothing with his
superior wisdom to develop the resources of the country and
provide employment for the poor; all his efforts were directed
to the unhinging of industry, the diminution of wealth, and
the promotion of universal idleness and beggary. It was no
part of his endeavor to see the peasant and the artisan better
remunerated and more comfortably housed, for he despised
domestic comforts as much as Diogenes, and believed that their
enjoyment would disqualify people for obtaining the
everlasting pleasures of Paradise. A provident working man who
had managed to save enough for a few months' subsistence he
would have classed with the covetous rich, and required him to
give away in alms all that he had treasured as the
indispensable condition of discipleship. On one occasion he is
said to have distributed food liberally to the hungry
multitude; but the food was none of his providing, since he
was himself dependent on alms. Moreover, the recipients of his
bounty were not a band of illfed laborers returning from work,
not a number of distressed farmers who had suffered heavy
losses from murrain or drought, but a loafing crowd who had
followed him about from place to place, and spent the day in
idleness. Such bestowment of largess would only tend to
produce a further relaxation of industrial effort; it would
induce credulous peasants to throw down their tools and follow
the wonder-working prophet for the chance of a meal; they
would see little wisdom in plodding at their tasks from day to
day, like the ants and the bees, if people were to be fed by
wandering about trustfully for what should turn up, as the
idle, improvident ravens (Prov. vi. 6; Luke xii. 24),"

Many eminent Christian writers maintain that Jesus was a
social reformer, because he is represented as having been in favor
of dispensing with the private ownership of property, and also of
people living together, enjoying what is called "a common repast."
Professor Graetz, in the second volume of his able 'History of the
Jews,' devotes a chapter to the social practices which prevailed at
the time when Jesus is alleged to have lived. On page 117 he states
that Christianity was really an offshoot from the principles held
by the Essenes, and that Christ inherited their aversion to
Pharisaical laws, while he approved of their practice of putting
their all into the common treasury. Farther, like them, Jesus
highly esteemed self-imposed poverty, and despised riches. In fact,
we are told that the "community of goods, which was a peculiar
doctrine of the Essenes, was not only approved, but enforced ...
the repasts they shared in common formed, as it were, the
connecting link which attached the followers of Jesus to one
another; and the alms distributed by the rich publicans relieved
the poor disciples of the fear of hunger; and this bound them still
more strongly to Jesus." But Graetz also adds that Christ
thoroughly shared the narrow views held by the Judaeans of his
time, and that he despised the heathen world. Thus he said: "Give
not that which is holy unto the dogs, neither cast ye your pearls
before swine, lest they trample them under their feet, and turn


Bank of Wisdom
Box 926, Louisville, KY 40201
5

WAS CHRIST A POLITICAL AND SOCIAL REFORMER?

again and rend you " (Matt. vii. 6). If this is "Christian
Socialism," it is far from being catholic in its nature. The
Socialistic element of having "all things in common" was limited by
Christ to one particular community; it lacked that universality
necessary to all real social reforms. It was similar to his idea of
the brotherhood of man. Those only were his brothers who believed
in him. He desired no fellowship with those who did not accept his
faith; hence he exclaimed: "If a man abide not in me, he is cast
forth as a branch, and is withered, and men gather them, and cast
them into the fire, and they the burned " (John xi,. 6); "I pray
not for the world, but for them which thou hast given me" (John
xvii. 9) ; "But he that denieth me before men shall be denied
before the angels of God (Luke xii. 9); "He that believeth not
shall be damned" (Mark xvi. 16). This may be the teaching of
theology, but it is not indicative of a broad humanity, neither
would it, if acted upon, tend to promote the social welfare of
mankind.

Professor Graham, M.A., of Belfast College, contends, in his
work, Socialism: Old and New, that Christ taught "Communism" when
he preached "Blessed be ye poor," when "he repeatedly denounced"
the rich, and when he recommended the wealthy young man to
voluntarily surrender his property to the poor. The Professor also
says: "In spite of certain passages to the contrary, pointing in a
different direction, the Gospels are pervaded with the spirit of
Socialism but be adds: "It is not quite State Socialism, because
the better society was to be brought about by the voluntary union
of believers." He admits, however, that "the ideal has hitherto
been found impossible; but let not any say that it does not exist
in the Gospels -- that Christ did not contemplate an earthly
society." Now this last point is just what could be fairly urged,
if the Gospels were trustworthy. There can be no reasonable doubt
that the disregard of mundane duties would be the logical sequence
of acting up to many of the teachings ascribed to Jesus. For
instance, he said, "My kingdom is not of this world " (John xviii.
36). "He that loveth his life shall lose it; and he that hatoth his
life in this world shall keep it unto life eternal" (John xii. 25).
"I am not of the world" (John xvii. 9). "Take no thought for your
life, what ye shall eat or what ye shall drink; nor yet for your
body what ye shall put on. ... Take therefore no thought for the
morrow, for the morrow shall take thought for the things of itself"
(Matthew vi. 25, 34). "If an man comes to me and hate not his
father, and mother, and wife, and children, and brethren, and
sisters, yea, and his own life, he cannot be my disciple" (Luke
xiv. 26). "Ever one that hath forsaken houses, or brethren, or
sisters, or father, or mother, or wife, or children, or lands, for
my name's sake, shall receive an hundred fold, and shall inherit
everlasting life" (Matthew xix. 29). Even the disciple who wished
to bury his father was advised by Christ to forego that duty of
affection, for "Jesus said, Follow me; let the dead bury the dead."

The fact is, Christ was a spiritualiser, and not a social
reformer. If he had been to his age what Bacon and Newton were to
theirs, and what Darwin, Spencer, Huxley, and Tyndall have been to
the present generation; if he had written a book teaching men how
to avoid the miseries of life; if he had revealed the mysteries of
nature, and exhibited the beauties of the arts and sciences, what


Bank of Wisdom
Box 926, Louisville, KY 40201
6

WAS CHRIST A POLITICAL AND SOCIAL REFORMER?

an advantage he would have conferred upon mankind, and what an
important contribution he would have given to the world towards
solving the problems of our present social wrongs and inequalities.
But the usefulness of Jesus was impaired by the idea which he
entertained, that this world was but a state of probation, wherein
the human family were to be prepared for another and a better home,
where "the wicked cease from troubling and the weary are at rest."

We have thus seen the views of the scientist, the historian,
and the professor, upon the subject under consideration; it will
now be interesting to learn what one of the successors to the
apostles has to say in reference to the same question. B.F.
Westcott, D.D., the present Bishop of Durham, in his work, Social
Aspects of Christianity, says: "Of all places in the world, the
Abbey, I think, proclaims the social gospel of Christ with the most
touching eloquence. ... if I am a Christian, I must bring within
the range of my religion every interest and difficulty of man, for
other foundation can no man lay than that is laid, which is Jesus
Christ."

This is not by any means correct, for many other
"foundations," which have nothing to do with Christ, have been
laid, and upon them systems, some good and some bad, have been
built. For instance, there are Individualism, Socialism, material
standards of progress, unlimited competition, and the application
of science. These are "other foundations" that men have had apart
altogether from Christ. But the solution to present social evils,
Dr. Westeott considers, is to be found only in the Christian faith.
He says: "We need to show the world the reality of spiritual power.
We need to gain and exhibit the idea that satisfies the thoughts,
the aspirations, the aims of men straining towards the light." He
admits that science has increased our power and resources; but, he
adds, it "cannot open the heavens and show the glory of God, and
Jesus standing at the right hand of God." Of course it cannot for
science has nothing to do with the impossible, or with the wild
speculations of theology. In the 'Social Aspects of Christianity,'
as presented by the Bishop, it would be difficult, indeed, to
recognize the principles of true Socialism. Moreover, as it is
admitted by him that science has increased our "power and
resources," it is a proof that Jesus must have been a poor
reformer, when we remember that he did nothing what ever to aid
this strong element of modern progress.

From the references which I have here made to some of the
ablest writers of to-day, it will be seen how Jesus is estimated by
them. I now propose to analyses the various statements which,
according to the Four Gospels, were uttered by him, that have any
bearing upon the political and social questions of our time. It
will then be seen whether Christ has any claim to be considered a
political and social reformer.

That the political views held by Jesus were exceedingly crude
is evident from the circumstance recorded in Matthew xxii. It is
there stated that, on finding a coin of the realm bearing the
superscription of Caesar, Jesus declared that both Caesar and God
were to have their due. The very pertinent question put by the
disciples afforded a good opportunity for some sound advice to be


Bank of Wisdom
Box 926, Louisville, KY 40201
7

WAS CHRIST A POLITICAL AND SOCIAL REFORMER?

given upon the political subjection in which the people to whom
Christ was talking were living. They were in bondage to a foreign
power, and were anxious to know if it were "lawful to give tribute
to Caesar or not." Instead of returning a clear and intelligible
answer, Jesus replied in words which were evasive and meaningless,
so far as the information sought for was concerned. If he had any
desire to alter the then existing political relations, or to
suggest any improvement, he might have given a practical lesson
upon the duties and obligations of the ruled to the rulers. Another
opportunity was lost when, Pilate having asked Christ an important
question, "Jesus gave him no answer" (John xix. 9).

Subsequently, however, Jesus recognized the "divine
government," for he said: "Thou couldst have no power at all
against me, except it were given thee from above" (John xix. 11).
He also, having stated, "My kingdom is not of this world," added:
"If my kingdom were of this world, then would my servants fight,
that I should not be delivered to the Jew." Christ's notions of
government were similar to those of St. Paul, who said: "The powers
that be are ordained of God. ... and they that resist shall receive
to themselves damnation" (Romans xiii. 1, 2).

Now, in the very face of these scriptural utterances, we have
men to-day who allege that Christ is their hero of democracy. The
belief that he ever intended to improve the government of this
world by secular means is utterly groundless. His negligence in
this particular cannot be explained away by saying that society was
not ripe for reform, and that Jesus lacked the power to
revolutionize the institutions of his time. There is truth, no
doubt, in the latter allegation, for the power of Christ for all
practical work seems to have been very limited indeed, He did not
attempt any political reform, as other men in all ages have done;
he did not make honest endeavors to inaugurate improvements which,
under happier circumstances, might have been carried out. There is
no evidence that Christ ever concerned himself with such reforms as
civil and religious liberty, the freedom of the slaves, the
equality of human rights, the emancipation of women, the spread of
science and of education, the proper use of the land, and the
fostering of the fundamental elements of human progress. His
language was: "Behold the fowls of the air: for they sow not,
neither do they reap, nor gather into barns; yet your heavenly
Father feedeth them. Are ye not much better than they? And why take
ye thought for raiment? Consider the lilies of the field, how they
grow; they toil not neither do they spin. And yet I say unto you,
That even Solomon in all his glory was not arrayed like one of
these. Wherefore, if God so clothes the grass of the field, which
to-day is, and to-morrow is cast into the oven, shall he not much
more clothe you, O ye of little faith? But seek ye first the
kingdom of God and his righteousness, and all these things shall be
added unto you."

Christ's declaration that his kingdom was not of this world
may be taken as a reason why he made no adequate provision for
secular government; but those who worship him assert that his pain
is the only one that can be successfully adopted to secure the
desired reforms, and that he really did contemplate a better state
of society on earth than the one that then obtained. Where is the


Bank of Wisdom
Box 926, Louisville, KY 40201
8

WAS CHRIST A POLITICAL AND SOCIAL REFORMER?

evidence that this was so? Not in the New Testament, for it is
nowhere recorded therein that such was his mission. With him the
question was: For what shall it profit a man if he shall gain the
whole world and lose his own soul" Even Renan, who is so frequently
quoted by Christian advocates as extolling Jesus, admits that he
lacked the qualities of a great political and social reformer. In
his 'Life of Jesus' Renan says that Christ had "no knowledge of the
general condition of the world" (p. 78); he was unacquainted with
science, "believed in the devil, and that diseases were the work of
demons" (pp. 79, 80) he was "harsh" towards his family, and was "no philosopher" (pp. 81-83); he went to excess" (p. 174) he "aimed
less at logical conviction than at enthusiasm"; "sometimes his
intolerance of all opposition led him to acts inexplicable and
apparently absurd" (pp. 274, 275); and "bitterness and reproach
became more and more manifest in his heart" (p. 278.)

But let us further consider what it is said that he taught in
reference to life's social requirements, and also what was his
estimate of the world and the things of the world. Under any system
conducted upon rational principles the first social requirement is
to provide for sufficient food, clothes, and shelter; for to talk
of comfort and progress without these requisites is absurd. Now, it
was about these very things that Jesus, as it has already been
shown, taught that we should take no thought. In Matthew (e. vi.)
special reference is made to the Gentiles who did take Thought as
to the necessities of life; but other people were not to be anxious
upon the subject, "for your Heavenly Father knoweth that ye have
need of all these things," and a promise is given that he will
provide them as he "feedeth" "the fowls of the air." Poverty and
idleness were essentials to Christ's idea of a social state, as is
proved by his advice to the rich young man, to whom he said: "If
thou wilt be perfect, go and sell that thou hast, and give to the
poor" (Matthew xix. 21). In John (vi. 27) it is also said: "Labor
not for the meat which perisheth." What wealthy Christian will sell
what he has and give to the poor, and thus carry out Christ's idea
of social duties? And if the toiling millions did not labor for
their meat, they would get but little of it. It is not overlooked
that Jesus said to the young man, "and follow me"; which meant, I
presume, that he was to join the Christian society in which they
had "all things common" (Acts iv.). But this state of existence
could only be maintained by giving up all one's possessions and
adding them to the general stock. If all did this, the stock would
be soon exhausted. And the point here to be noted is, that in
Christ's scheme no provision is made to provide for a permanent
mode of living, except by prayer or miracle.

Surely it must be obvious to most people that a communion of
saints, fed directly by God, could not be any solution of the
social problem for those outside such communities Besides, there is
little prospect of outsiders being made partakers with the saints,
unless God the Father draws them unto Christ (John vi. 44); but no
one can go to the Father except by Christ (.John xiv. 6). Thus our
chances of admission into the Christian fold are very remote, for
if we are admitted it must be through Christ, to whom we cannot go
unless the Father draws us; but then we cannot go to the Father
except by Christ. This is a theological puzzle, which must be left
for a "Christian Socialist" to unravel if he can.


Bank of Wisdom
Box 926, Louisville, KY 40201
9

WAS CHRIST A POLITICAL AND SOCIAL REFORMER?

The belief that a social condition of society is sustained by
an invisible power, where no labor is performed, and where no
interest is taken in its progress, or in the dignity and personal
independence of its members, is the height of folly. It implies the
destruction of all human institutions, and the substitution of a "divinely-ordered state of things," such as some of Christ's
followers allege they are now hourly expecting. Well might the late
Bishop of Peterborough say: "It is not possible for the State to
carry out all the precepts of Christ. A State that attempted to do
so could not exist for a week. If there be any person who maintains
the contrary, his proper place is in a lunatic asylum"
(Fortnightly, January, 1890).

The Sermon on the Mount, or "in the plain," as stated by Luke
(vi. 17), has been called the Magna Charta of the kingdom of God,
proclaimed by Christ, although it has never been made the basis of
any human government. Its injunctions are so impracticable and
antagonistic to the requirements of modern civilization that no
serious attempt has ever been made to put them in practice. It may
be mentioned that the genuineness of the "Sermon has been boldly
questioned. Professor Huxley writes: "I am of opinion that there is
the gravest reason for doubting whether the Sermon on the Mount was
ever preached, and whether the so-called Lord's Prayer was ever
prayed by Jesus of Nazareth" (Controverted Questions, p. 415). The
Professor then gives his reasons for arriving at this conclusion.

The Rev. Dr. Giles, in his 'Christian Records, speaking of the
Sermon on the Mount, says: "There is good ground for believing that
such a collective body of maxims was never, at any time, delivered
from the lips of oar Lord"; and Milman declares that scarcely any
passage is more perplexing to the harmonist of the Gospels than
this sermon, which, according to Matthew and Luke, appears to have
been delivered at two different places.

Mr. Charles B. Cooper, a very able American writer, aptly
observes: "If this discourse is so important, as Christians profess
to believe -- the sum of all the teachings of Jesus, and the
sufficient source of all morality -- it is curious that Mark and
John knew nothing about it, and that Luke should dismiss it with
such a short report. Luke, omitting the larger part of the matter,
takes only one page to tell what occupies three pages in Matthew;
and to find any parallel to much of Matthew we have to go to other
chapters of Luke and to other occasions. In addition to which, they
disagree as to whether it was given on a mountain or in a plain."

Taking a broad view of the teachings as ascribed to Christ, I
should describe most of them as being the result of emotion rather
than the outcome of matured reflection. They are based upon faith,
not upon knowledge, trust in Providence being the cornerstone of
his system, so far as his fragmentary utterances can be
systematized. In my opinion, the idea of his being a political and
social reformer rests upon an entirely mistaken view of the union
of what are termed temporal and spiritual things. Examples of this
may be seen in such injunctions as "Love one another" and "Love
your neighbor as yourself." The first was clearly applicable to the
followers of Christ, for he expressly states, "By this shall all
men know that ye are my disciples" (John xiii, 35); and the second


Bank of Wisdom
Box 926, Louisville, KY 40201
10

WAS CHRIST A POLITICAL AND SOCIAL REFORMER?

command applied only to the Jewish community, not to strangers who
lived outside. These injunctions did not mean that those who heard
them were to love all mankind. Christ himself divided those who
were for him from those who were against him. To the first he said,
"Come, ye blessed of my father"; to the other, "Depart from me, ye
cursed, into everlasting fire prepared for the devil and his
angels."

It has always appeared to me to be remarkably strange that
Christ should be regarded as the exemplar of universal love.
Neither his own words, nor the conduct of his followers, justify
such a belief. It is, of course, desirable that a social state of
society should be based upon love and the universal brotherhood of
man. This is the avowed foundation of the religion of the
Positivists, their motto being, "Love our basis, order our method,
and progress our end"; but no such commendable features are to be
found in the Gospel of Christ, or in the history of the Church.
Jesus declared that his mission was only to "the lost sheep of the
house of Israel" (Matthew xv. 24). Moreover, the conditions of
discipleship which he imposed would, if complied with, exclude the
possibility of love among all men (Luke xiv. 26); as would also his
avowed object of breaking the peace and harmony of the domestic
circle (Matthew x. 34, 35). It may be said that such are the
contingencies attending the belief and adoption of a new religion.
Be it so; but that only shows the futility of the contention that
Christ established universal brotherhood. It is absurd to argue
that he did so, when we are told in the Gospels that his mission
was to the Jews only (Matthew xv. 24); that he would have no
fellowship with unbelievers (Matthew xv. 26); that he threatened to
have his revenge upon those who denied him (Matthew x. 33); that he
instructed his disciples to "go not into the way of the Gentiles,
and into any city of the Samaritans enter ye not" (Matthew x. 5);
and, finally, that he commanded those disciples, when they were
about to start on a preaching expedition, that "Whosoever shall not
receive you, nor hear your words, when ye depart out of that house
or city, shake off the dust of your feet. Verily I say unto you, it
shall be more tolerable for the land of Sodom and Gomorrah in the
day of judgment than for that city" (Matthew x. 14, 15). Shaking
the dust from the feet, be it remembered, was an Oriental custom of
exhibiting hatred towards those against whom the act was performed.
And surely the punishment that it is said was to follow the refusal
of the disciples' administration was the very opposite of the
manifestation of love. This accords with the non-loving
announcement that the lord Jesus shall be revealed from heaven with
his mighty angels, in flaming fire, taking vengeance on them that
know not God, and that obey not the gospel of our Lord Jesus
Christ: who shall be punished with everlasting destruction from the
presence of the Lord, and from the glory of his power " (2 Thess.
i. 7, 8, 9).

These references ought to be sufficient to convince any one
that Jesus cannot be reasonably credited with a feeling of
unqualified love for the whole of the human race. His conduct, and
the general spirit of his teachings towards those who differed from
him, forbid such a supposition. His injunctions, if acted upon,
would annul the influence of the ancient maxim of "doing unto
others as you would they should do to you." Certainly he failed to


Bank of Wisdom
Box 926, Louisville, KY 40201
11

WAS CHRIST A POLITICAL AND SOCIAL REFORMER?

set a personal example by complying with this rule, as his harsh
language to those who did not accept his authority amply proves. It
is reported that Jesus said (Matthew v. 22), "Whosoever shall say
Thou fool shall be in danger of hell fire"; yet we find him
exclaiming, "Ye fools, ye fools and blind" (Lake xi. 40; Matthew
xxiii. 17). He advised others to "Love your enemies, bless them
that curse you," while he himself addressed those who were not his
friend's as "hypocrites" (Matthew vii. 5); "ye serpents, ye
generation of vipers" (Matthew xxiii. 33). We may here apply
Christ's own words to himself: "I say unto you that every idle word
that men shall speak, they shall give account thereof in the day of
judgment. For by thy words thou shalt be justified, And by thy
words thou shalt be condemned" (Matthew xii. 36, 37). In Luke (vi.
37) he counsels us to "forgive, and ye shall be forgiven"; but in
Mark (iii. 29) it is stated, "He that shall blaspheme against the
Holy Ghost hath never forgiveness, but is in danger of eternal
damnation." The unfortunate point here is, that we are not told
what constitutes blasphemy against the Holy Ghost.

From these cases, and there are many more in the Gospels of
like nature, it is clear that Jesus taught one thing and practiced
another -- a course of conduct which his followers have not been
slow to emulate. But such an inconsistent trait of character
disqualifies those in whom it is found from being the best of
social reformers. Example is higher than precept.

Whatever may be urged in favor of Christ's supposed "spiritual
kingdom," his teachings have but little value in regulating the
political and social affairs of daily life, using those terms in
the modern and legitimate sense, inasmuch as he has given the world
no practical information upon either the science of politics or of
sociology. The affairs of this world had but little interest with
Christ. With him preeminence was given to the soul over the body.
We are not to fear him who can kill the body only, but rather fear
him "who is able to destroy both soul and body in hell




**** ****

Reproducible Electronic Publishing can defeat censorship.

The Bank of Wisdom is a collection of the most thoughtful,
scholarly and factual books. These computer books are reprints of
suppressed books and will cover American and world history; the
Biographies and writings of famous persons, and especially of our
nations Founding Fathers. They will include philosophy and
religion. all these subjects, and more, will be made available to
the public in electronic form, easily copied and distributed, so
that America can again become what its Founders intended --

The Free Market-Place of Ideas.

**** ****




Bank of Wisdom
Box 926, Louisville, KY 40201
12

Charles,
telnet://ricksbbs.synchro.net:23
http://ricksbbs.synchro.net:8080
IRC www.irccloud.com/irc/ricksbbs/channel/ricksbbs
---
þ Synchronet þ Rick's BBS telnet://ricksbbs.synchro.net:23