WE have now had some experience of a Socialist Government in this country, and while some may be misled by the studied moderation of the new Government, others recognise in this move a well-planned and adroit scheme that will be made to play its part in the Socialist appeal to the electors in the near future. One of the London dailies pertinently remarks:—”When the present Government were urbanely handed into the seats of authority, in Mr Asquith’s best manner, there was a general feeling that, come there how they might, they should be given a square deal. The past, if not forgotten, was not to be mentioned. Unfortunate associations were to be politely ignored. If the leopard wore spots, it was to be tacitly assumed they would wash off. The sedative effect of responsibility was hopefully anticipated. And, in fact, alike by Parliament, the public, and the press, the Socialist party have been treated very much as if they had formally renounced Socialism, Communism, and their friendship with revolutionaries at home and abroad.”
It is well we should not forget that while for political purposes some of the men in power have seemingly renounced their old principles, that they still cling to them as tenaciously as ever. And as the Socialist party will soon make its appeal to the country, it is right that our readers should have well-informed views as to what Socialism really means, particularly in relation to religion. As an economic theory we do not intend to say anything by way of criticism, as that lies more particularly in the field of politics. But Socialism in its root principles aims not merely at revolution of the existing economic order, but of religion itself. This aspect of Socialism merits our most serious attention, for while some well-meaning men may accept its panaceas for remedying the existing condition of things in the body politic, they are blinded by the promises it makes of an earthly Eden, of the serious menace to religion which lie embedded in the very root idea of Socialism. This serious aspect of the question has been brought out most impressively by Mr H. Musgrave Reade in his “Christ or Socialism,”* from which a quotation was given in our last issue. In this remarkable book the author tells the story of his drift into Socialism and the part he played in its organisation in its early stages in this country, of his remarkable conversion, and his renunciation of Socialism. As one who knew its inner workings, his testimony is particularly valuable, and while a number of his religious views partake too much of modern evangelism to be palatable to us, yet his criticism of the system that made him an atheist is worthy of the serious attention of all those who wish to have a real knowledge of what Socialism means in its bearing on religion. Mr Reade says he hesitated for some time to cross swords with his former Socialistic comrades, but finally a sense of duty and loyalty to his Lord and Master Jesus Christ, and a growing conviction that many Christians are being unconsciously drawn into the meshes of a godless Socialism, constrained him to lay aside all such scruples. The first part of the book is devoted to an account of how one brought up as a “high Tory” and in good circumstances became enamoured of the French revolutionary watchword—”Fraternity, Equality, and Liberty.” Strauss and Renan helped him on the downward road. Auguste Comte then became his guide, and Haeckel, Darwin, Tyndall, and Huxley next led him in his homeless wanderings. He was an active supporter of Charles Bradlaugh, and a diligent student of the writings of Karl Marx, who laid the foundations of modern Socialism. Robert Blatchford had in him a devoted admirer, and the “Clarion,” which died recently unwept, received contributions from his pen. It was while possessed with the strong revolutionary theories of Socialism that he was asked to go to America on business by his firm, Messrs Ryland and Sons, Manchester. This visit, in the mysterious providence of God, was to be the deathblow of his atheism and Socialism. It was while
* Christ or Socialism: A Human Autobiography, by H. Musgrave Reade, Atheist, Socialist, Christian. Glasgow: Pickering and Inglis, Bothwell Street. Paper Boards, 1s net.
the train was slowly climbing up the Colorado Rockies, as his eye rested on the majestic panorama stretched beneath him, that the thought stole into his mind, “Surely all this is not the result of blind chance? Could evolution explain it all?” A feeling of irresistible wonder, awe and reverence crept into his thoughts. Overcome by these feelings, he knelt down on his knees with one of Ingersoll’s books, which he had been reading, in his hand, and prayed—”Oh, God, if Thou dost exist, reveal Thyself.” He says, I asked for light, and light came; the whole car seemed full of light. That was the end of his atheism, but as yet he knew not the Saviour. His past life, with its sins and blasphemies, now became a burden to him, and instead of getting better, he grew worse and worse, until sleep departed from him, and his agony became so great that he thought he would die if it continued much longer. At last he thought of purchasing a Bible, to see what it had to say about his state. He pored over its pages to see if there was any hope for such a great sinner as he. He read through the whole of the Old Testament, and trembled at the denunciations and punishments to be awarded to blasphemers, but finally deliverance came when he read in John—”For God so loved the world that He gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in Him should not perish but have everlasting life.”
We have dwelt at some length on this event of such deep interest, because of its bearing on the testimony he bears against Socialism. With him, as with all believers, “Old things had passed away: all things had become new.” He soon discovered that Christ’s laws were a dead letter to all but a small and insignificant body of His followers, while to nominal Christians and people of the world they were practically non-existent. “I found,” he says, “that even in so-called Christian England the basis of the laws of the country was built upon pagan jurisprudence of ancient Rome, and not upon Mosaic or Christian principles; and that it would have been considered the height of absurdity had any legislator, before introducing any Bill into Parliament, suggested the consultation of the New Testament point of view.” His Bible taught him “that man’s golden age was in the past, while that of evolution was supposed to be in the future. The whole of Scripture showed that mankind, as a race, was going from bad to worse; that the progress of the world was not upward, but downward; that unless men accepted God’s gracious salvation through Jesus Christ, they would end in destruction.” This struck directly at Socialism, which must take it for granted that there is some good to work on before its scheme can be carried out. This led Mr Reade a step further. “The Bible,” he says, “taught me that I could never expect an earthly paradise whilst sin, sorrow, and death reigned upon earth. We might improve the material surroundings and increase the wealth of the people, give greater facility for culture and ease to the working class, but until sin, sorrow, and death were abolished, true and lasting happiness was impossible. I saw the eternal truth in these hard facts of existence. I was not to be blinded by optimistic Socialist scribes, full of the fervour of a new delusion. I knew how it was all worked up. I had bottomed the depths of Socialism by a study of the subject for nearly twenty years; I had felt all its hollowness; I knew it was a counterfeit of the Devil. I saw that what man needed, and what society needed, was a Saviour. No mere reorganisation of society would be remedial; a change in form is not a change in essence. This is where the Socialist reformer or revolutionist will fail in the ultimate; he works from outside in; he tries to create life by organisation. Jesus Christ is not the Great Reformer, but the Great Regenerator. He aims at a new social order, but it must come from a new social life emanating from Himself—”Ye must be born again” (John iii. 3, 7) is both applicable to the individual and society.” It may be said that it is not fair to charge Socialism with the wild vagaries of some of its extreme advocates. To this Mr Reade replies—”I do not say that every seeker after liberty gravitates to anarchism, nor that every Socialist puts into practice the principles of ‘determinism.’ They are not so logical or consistent. But the inevitable tendency of modern Socialism, I believe, leads to a laxity of moral restraint and to practical atheism in daily walk and life.”
It has further been argued that such a charge is too sweeping, as there are men who style themselves Christian Socialists. To this Mr Reade replies:—”I am aware there are some persons who call themselves Christian Socialists, and even ministers and clergymen are declaring their adherence to the principles of Socialism as being compatible with the doctrines and teachings of Christianity. Without in any way apologising for my temerity, I boldly assert that they must have a very superficial knowledge of their Bibles, and the basis of the Christian religion, if they can in any way harmonise the theories of Socialism with the sacred revelation of God’s will as it is recorded in the Holy Scriptures.”
Again, it surely ought to cause deep heartsearchings when we run our eye over a list of the leaders of Socialism, such as Karl Marx, F. Engels, F. Lassalle, Leibenecht, Bebel, Louis Blanc, Fourier, St Simon, Proudhon, Jaures, R. Owen, Hyndham, W. Morris, G. Bernard Shaw, Belfort Bax, Dr Aveling, R. Blatchford, Ferri, etc., to find that they are atheists or non-Christians.
The Socialists will soon be making their appeal to the country, but we warn our readers not to be deceived by fair speeches and fairer promises. The Socialist orator is an adept in this line of things, and bails his hook with consummate skill. “If you examine the Utopias of these Socialist dreamers,” says Mr Reade, “you will see that they are all Godless and Christless, built upon the evolutionary theory that sin is only ‘a striving after the best’ in a race of humans descended from the brutes, and who vainly imagine they are going on to perfection—all without a Saviour. Now, however pleasing these lofty ideals may be, they are not Christian, but anti-Christian, because they ignore or deny that man needs a Saviour.”
“He hath made to meet on Him the iniquities of us all.”—So did God lay all the sins, all the punishment due to them, really upon One that was fit, able, and appointed to bear it, which He suffered under to the utmost that the justice of God required on that account. He then took a view of all our sins and iniquities. He knew what was past and what was to come, knowing all our thoughts afar off. Not the least error of our minds, darkness of our understandings, perverseness of our wills, carnality of our affections, sin of our nature or lives, escaped Him. All were “naked and opened” before Him. This is set out by the variety of expressions used in this matter in the type, “All the iniquities, all the transgressions, and all the sins” (Lev. xvi. 21). And so by every word whereby we express sin in this 53rd of Isaiah—going astray, turning aside, iniquity, transgression, sin, and the like. God, I say, made them all to meet on Christ the punishment due to them.—Owen.
“Let no man, then, who will say, ‘The Lord He is God,’ presume to intrench on His sacred royalty, by seeking a reason of His decrees beyond, or besides the good pleasure of His will.”—Elisha Coles.