CHRISTIANITY AND THE LABOUR PARTY

Press, Volume LXXIV, Issue 22508, 16 September 1938, Page 15

CHRISTIANITY AND THE LABOUR PARTY

TO THB EDITbX OB TH* PEBSS. Sir, —“Polemic.” writing under the above head in “The Press” this morning. makes the mistake of taking a text from Luke 17:21 out of its context and misapplying it. The words are those of Jesus to the hypocritical Pharisees: “The kingdom of God is within you.” Many think this to mean that the, kingdom of God is something inside the individual, but such interpretation is obviously false, for God would not set up His Kingdom in the hearts of His enemies, the Pharisees’ clergy. In his book, “Kingdom, —Hope of the World,” Judge Rutherford > points out that the marginal reading in the King James version, and most other translations give the rendering “the kingdom of God is among you,” or “is in the midst of you.” A foot-note in the Emphatic Diaglott shows that the meaning is “The King is among you"; that is, Christ was referring to Himself as the future King of the world. That the Pharisees so understood him is shown by their later laying of the charge of sedition against him. However good its Intentions, the Labour Party will never be a Christian organisation, and will never bring about God’s kingdom on earth. Before that kingdom is fully established on earth, God, through Christ Jesus, “shall break in pieces and consume all these' kingdoms” of the world; that is, Satan’s rule of the world. Then Christ, the world’s rightful King, without the assistance of either the Labour or the National Party, will proceed to make the earth glorious (Isa. 60:13; 66:1>. A reading of the early chapters of Genesis shows that Jehovah God has purposed to make this earth perfect, and to fill it with a perfect human race. If God purposes to do a thing he does it (Isa. 46:11), and this He will do through Christ’s Kingdom. Neither politics, nor religion, nor big business will be asked to help in that kingdom; such, systems of the Devil simply will not be in existence any longer.—Yours, et.-., W. L. BARRYSeptember 14, 1938.

TO THE EDITOR OF IHE PRESS Sir,—l agree with “Polemic” that it is false and absurd to call the Labour programme Christianity in practice. Many of Labour’s ideals are in agreement with Christian teaching, such as helping the poor and the sick and protecting the weak. Their mistake is in regarding material well-being as an end In itself. Instead of a means to a higher end.. ‘ The goal of Socialism is a materialistic goal, directly opposed to Christianity. - The trouble with most governments and political parties today is swelled head. The tendency of governments to claim omnipotence and infallibility .used to be checked, before the “Reformation,” by the general recognition of a really infallible authority, the Papacy. Now the world thinks all religions are fallible, and governments Ignore religions which are no more sure of being right than themselves. Yet the old infallible Church, founded by Christ, still speaks to a heedless world. Again and again the Popes proclaim the unchanging moral principles on which sound government must rest.. They warn the world that Socialism, certain forms of capitalism, extreme nationalism, racialism, etc., are contrary to these principles. Governments which refuse to heed these'

warnings are heading the world for disaster.—Yours, etc., PAPIST. September 15. 1938.

TO TU BOITOB or CKX PRESS. Sir, —There is a timely warning conveyed in “Polemic’s” letter on "Christianity and the Labour Party”: we are apt to forget that “the Kingdom of God is not meat and drink but righteousness.” In so far as any political party is intent on establishing righteousness it may perhaps lay claim to have some part in that Kingdom. But it may be doubted whether either party in New Zealand to-day is actuated solely by this pure motive. Both parties have, at least, a strong sectional bias.

To look at the question in a still broader aspect, we find there is still the old battle between the “haves” and the “have nots.” There is not a scrap of difference between the mentality of these two: both can be lumped together under the heading of "getters” or “would-be getters." The capitalist and the Marxian are both alike in this; nor does the fact that one may be poor and the other rich alter, the case. A cynical philosopher has said: “I am tired of hearing this talk about ‘poor honest men’; believe me, the poorer the man the greater the rogue.” It is not necessary to endorse this utterance, but it is necessary for men to examine their motives If they are to find their true position and value in the world. There is, however, another class, that of the “givers.” There is no hope of salvation or regeneration from the “getters”; if the capitalists tend to produce war, the Marxists merely substitute class war. If the lion capitalism is killed there will be further squabbles among the Marxian jackals. The hope of humanity lies with the “givers.’ and in the spirit that animates them. The poor Indian who gives up part of his scanty portion of rice in order to aid the starving Chinese is a more advanced thinker than Karl Marx. 1 have nothing to say against better conditions for any class in the community, but without some of the Christian virtues of temperance, regard for others, integrity, and purity of character, these things may be anything but a blessing.—Yours, etc., MINOR PROPHET. September 15, 1938.