THE CHRISTIAN SOCIALISTS.* IF an average Englishman well read in
the history of modern politics were to be asked who were the founders of Christian Socialism he would almost certainly say F. D. Maurice and Charles Kingsley. Mr. Raven's ably written study of Christian Socialism is likely to convey to a far wider public the fact, already known to the intimate students of Christian Socialism, that the real founder of the movement was J. M. Ludlow. In the middle of last century Ludlow on several occasions wrote in the Spectator appreciations of Maurice and interpretations of Maurice's policy. Yet so modest was Ludlow himself that it would have been possible for people to read everything he ever wrote about Christian Socialism without discovering that he was the author of it. Maurice as a militant theologian, as a preacher, and as a leader of the Broad movement within the Church which has had deep and lasting effects, was of course a far more famous man. Charles Kingsley was also of course far better known than Ludlow. Though Kingsley did not give his services to Christian Socialism for more than a very few years, his writings were read from one end of the Empire to the other. A pronouncement by Ludlow, even though it contained much more of the pure Milk of Christian Socialism than anything ever written by Kingsley, had no chance of fame when it was set beside those more or less Christian Socialistic novels Alton Locke and Yeast or even beside tho thundering of Parson Lot.
Mr. Raven prepares the ground for the coming of Christian
• Christian Seriafiem. 1848-1854. By C. E. Raven. London: Macmillan [Ile. nee.) Socialism in the annua mirabilie 1848 by a survey of what he regards- as the deadened' and sterile state of- the Church. in the preceding generations. He does not find the condition of the Church in the early part of-the 19th century a great. improvement upon the worst part of the 18th. He says. that the Church, neither through the- medium- of the Tractarians!' nor, through that of the Evangelicals showed any sign• of recognizing its proper attitude towards industrial problems. There is no doubt truth in what he says. The Evangelicals were, one might almost say, inclined to gloat morbidly upon the miliaria' and inequalities of this life if only thesecould be used to enhance the glories of the • life to come. The- chief redeeming point, in Mr. Raven's opinion, so far as the Evangelicals were concerned, was that they did- encourage education. They wanted, by comparison with the Tractarians, to dispossess. the Church of traditional authority and to place the authority in the hands of every man capable of reading his Bible. Since every man's- authority was to be his. own conscience, guided and inspired by Scripture, it was necessary to teach every man to- read. The policy of the open Bible postulated education. As for Traetarianism, Mr. Raven writes of it as nothing more than a glorification of patristic teaching which necessarily confined itself within very narrow borders. No more than. Evangelicals did the Tractarians concern themselves with-the material affairs of this world. Maurice launched one othis moat brilliant pieces of dialectic in- 1837 when he said of the Pueeyites that their error consisted in opposing the spirit of a former age to the spirit of this= age and of the over-living and' acting Spirit of God. This, he argued, was a denial of the present organic life of Christianity, and was consequently a negation of the very principle of continuity on which the Tractarians rightly laid Frees. Mr. Raven therefore oelebratee the arrival of Christian Socialism as a pumping of fresh blood into the hardening exterior_ uf the Church.
He glories in the prowess of the Christian Socialists whenthey smite the doctrine laissez faire hip and thigh. The Church, be seems to say, will never truly live in the hearts of the people unless it leads the way in industrial progreea, and for this reason Christian Socialism was one of the most vital episodes in the whole of Church_ history, and none• the- less. vital because it failed. But all this leaves na with the doubt whether Mr. Raven's premise is right however correct.he may be in his historical details. It seems to us that if the.Church commits itself immutably to this or that political solution. of present discontents itis.doing precisely what the Founder of Christianity refrained from doing. Christ offered His followers a set of principles which were to be the touchstone of their lives. He seldom or never offered- a statutory injunction. He said in effect if we may without irreverence paraphrase His teaching " I tell you what is the law of-God. That is perfection. So far. as you fall short of perfection you are still sinners." A body of teaching which declares that nothing is satisfactory which falls below the ideal•is surely a better inspirer of. men's lives than the translation of a spiritual code into Acta of Parliament. A mere material policy may be proved by events to be wrong, sad if so the Church and the spiritual doctrine for which the Church steads become associated in men's minds with the discredit. Mr. Raven speaks with some asperity and contempt of men like Wilberforce who not only seemed blind to the sufferings of their own countrymen on the starvation line, but counselled the sufferers to discipline themselves and be patient. One might interject that Wilberforce'a record in the matter of the slave trade was enough to stand to the credit of any one man in mundane affairs. But be that as it may, Mr. Raven would be able to find many men who were not really the worse Christians because they believed in " enlightened self-interest." There was John Bright, for example. Mr. Raven, however, Is as severe on laissez faire as Carlyle was in Past and Present. And this is not surprising, as the Christian Socialists owed their inspiration as much to Carlyle as they owed their opportunity to the .Chartiat movement.
J. AL Ludlow derived most of his Socialistic ideas from France, and if he had lived- in our own day we think be would admit that the French as & nation have less true socialism in their hearts than he supposed. Besides, Ludlow, Maurice, and Kingsley, there was one other who might be .called one of the original founders of Christian Socialism. That was Mansfield. He had been. a friend of Kingaley's at Cambridge. Most people would have called him a crank—a- rigid vegetarian and a teetotaler, who gravely argued that the wine of the New
Testament was not fermented, wine, and: who wore boots made of cloth on rubber in order that the skin of, no animal might be used' in their making. Thaokeray, who, knew Mansfield and- who appreciated, the sterling virtues behind his- oddities, said. that he must have " the rudiments of wings under his waistcoat." 01, the four founders. Ludlow came nearest to -what we should call. a Socialist Maurice himself did not believe democracy to be possible except upon a basis of slavery. " I must," he wrote;. " have- monarchy,, aristocracy and socialism, or rather humanity, recognized as necessary elements or conditions_ of organic, Christian society." Outside the inner circle of the, four founders there- were several irregularly attached memberee among whom may be mentioned. Campbell, Walsh, Furnlvall., Ellison, Clough, Alexander, and Donald Macmillan, Llewelyn: Davies and finally Torn Hughes, the author of Tom. Brozoa's Schooldays. Cuthbert Edward, Ellison was the " swell " of the movement,, a member of 'Disraeli'a.Young England party which is described in-Kingsley's Yeast. Ludlow- said that this exponent of mediaeval chivalry, wafted into modern industry was the original- of Thackeray's Penchsnnis.
The weekly Bible reading, at Maurioe's house was the Round Table of the movement. From these meetings almost every act of the Christian Socialists emerged—the placard or mani- festo to workmen at the time of the Chartist movement ; the paper called Politics for, the People; the journal called the- Christian Socialist,, and the famous Tracts; and the founding: of the Working Men's College. The political results were- the foundation of the Co-operative Societie& and also of the. Christian Socialist Industrial Associations which aimed at avoiding the competition of capitalists. E. V. Neale, a man of high ideals, of wonderful unselfishness and large privates:wane, joined the movement in order to place his money and personal services at the disposal of the Associations. He ruined. himself ; and how far his self-saoriftee was. worth while must be judged by the reader's estimate of the effects which have- been left by what was from any point of- view & noble movement. Mr. Raven defends, the Association against all comers, but we cannot help agreeing with the criticism that such associations must end- either in competing with one another, and thus-restoring the state of things which they are designed- to prevent,. or in setting, up a, monopoly,
Previous page
