RELIGIOUS ACTIVITY.

Dominion, Volume 3, Issue 669, 20 November 1909, Page 9

RELIGIOUS ACTIVITY.

CHURCH, CONGRESS, AND SOCIALISM. ; ..' : A LIVELY ' DEBATE. "A'PURGE AND A BLISTER." ; The prospect of a stirring debato on Socialism drew together a largo audience at the Anglican Church Congress at Swansea on October G. 1 The Bishop of Truro, after, describing tho ■various schools of Socialism, from the Christian Socialist on the extreme right toi tho revolutionary Anarchist on , the extreme left, spoke of tho difficulty of defining a Socialistic creed which would satisfy all, but maintained that oyery man might safely bo a Socialist to-morrow if the world would become Chris-tian-to-day. His contention was that whilo material good was a good thing, they needed first of all a heavenly vision, and it was the mission of the Church to roveal this vision to men. ■■•■•.■ |.' Dr. < Arthur Shadwell then read a paper, which elicited frequent storms of protest and of approval. It.was afterwards described by the Bishop of Southwark as "a purge and a blister/',; Dr. Shadwell said all-phases -of Socialism ■ lent themselves to ono description —a movement for preventing the present unequal distribution of wealth and the abolition of society. : The ultimate end was tho universal happiness of mankind, the extinction of Btrife, and the "establishment of brotherly love. Ihesn: ends'were ideal. They included justice, equality, sympathy, harmony, love, but .these were not.peculiar to Socialism...They had been borrowed chiefly from Christianity. . .

A Degrading View, > ■ ' ; .The scientific Socialists dealt primarily, with the distribution; of wealth in the belief that redistribution would establish the ideal state, lie underlying assumption was that those who na»e were to bo envied and those who have to be pitied. Ho protested against sucn a view. as degrading to human nature, it,was as. false to life as it was opposed tothe teachings of Christianity.' So far from nappmess being dependent, upon economic conr£> ons i he beloved that no factor'had bo little to do with; it, '.and he expressed his astonishment that any clergyman should accept or advocate such views. His second objection was. that Socialism destroyed • moral responsibility. .In tho whole range-of Socialistic literature, lio asserted amid angry, de-' nials, there was nothing about duty, moral law, and the penalties for its infraction, except denunciation of theso conceptions. No commands were laid.on the individual. The Christian.'■virtues of : : self-sacrifice and humillty were replaced by self-assertion and sordid demands. His objection was that Socialism inculcated class, warfare and greed. Thus, its antagonism' to Christianity was fundamental, bpeakmg on collective ownership,, ho said the collective programme .would result in national bankruptcy, and universal poverty. -i

A.Warning/ -\ ■ ■'■:,■, '. •;. . ■ ' : The.Eev. John Wakeford (Liverpool)' was tho next speaker. He sWd people oftenxursed a •thing they could not understand. He said tho yraron-. had ■• to a largo measure forfeited her right -to condemn and denounce ' Socialistic movements by her inexplicable cowardice and culpable silence when, commons had been ]' enclosed: and .peasant holdings swept away, and foetid slums had been made to yield • swollen profits to ground landlords and' property-job-b?r?\ He earned tho Church against the folly of identifying; her sacred mission with.- , property- and .vested interests. : He thought that the appeal of Socialism vras often-made to,the wrong, persons and on the wrong ground. Socialism i ought not to be. thought of as a- seditious temper to be cultivated among ttie desti■tute:and desperate; It was rather a high princinlo of,-altruism .to be propagated amongst those .who had- everything but that happiness which, could only- come'through self-denial in the discharge'of .duty. '■•■ : ~'\ ■' '•■! ■■!'-• i The Archdeacon-of Ely-protested against union h o{ Socialism' -with:. Christianity. .•' Tile Socialist; he s^idj-appealed to the interests of the greatest; number, .and-held .that in the-So-cialistic State opportunities, for the; best', personal, life, would be open to all, while Christianity sought to' rouse ■a' personal enthusiasm which could. inspire to'-"- acts 'of ■'; self-sacrifice. These two ' points of view were quito . distinct as'thero wore Socialists who' had.lost all faith in tho' power of .Christianity, to regenerate society; and there were. Christians who could be persuaded of the • power ■of Socialism' to;'eloyate' character; If Christißnity-'and' Socialism ; wero identified as-being one.andi.the.same thing',:tnp distinctivo.claims' of,'-the"spirihial 1 element in man..might.bo -loftioin,one- sido;and forgotten. ..-'.'■■,'•■'■■ '";■''.'■ '■■':','■;''■'■■;: .•'•?.'-.-■■..--. The Quesiidn of the Hour, , : >; / '■'"'■'■■'■' " ■'■■

; .The Bishop! of London' 1 delivered a 'racy speech,.which was frequently, applauded.' "Hβ said. Socialism was-going to bo the question of the hour, and everything depended on what the Church was prepared to dp. ■ There were things that •made, him agree 'with Socialists—with, divine discontent with things as they with the.belief'.that/every man'.counts.for one-, man, arid, no. JO. counts ,i or ;mbre, Jth'at: there ought! fto be equality of opportunity for overy-.man, that Christ, is the living Master and.King ;of everything, ■ that thire is- no; sttfh thing: as ■ business with a big B, and that there -is 'nothing essentially un-Christian in the collective ownership of land. • On the other hand, they must avoid; the un-phristian ; setting of class against class in public .speech, and of declaring that Jjabou'r and Capital are'; enemies. It was impossible to believe in the absolute equality.of all'meh.-. He. believed there wast as much selfishness- and greed' among the working, classes as among any> othor class, 1 ■',and he concluded with the assertion thdt'if we.:were. going to have a Socialistic' Stoto,\we should require more religion than \we ever had before. ■; Bifihop Welldon, opposed Socialism because it was false to huraannature. It appealed too much to man's lowest passions,, and avSocialistio. State would lay. a burden on.. the • Government which it would bp unable to bear. ■ ■ •' The Bishop ofSouthwark said-society at present gave the impressiori of a ruthless and irresponsive ■'machine without- heart, and soul. In all'that concerned the collective life of men the will of the.'.people must bo-paramount.