The Labor enquirer., 1886-05-29


ambition, that even in the churches, in
their every work, bellies the fatalism il
teaches. There is no sneer in this. Dc
they ever submit anything to the will o.
God so long as there is shot in the
box2 They know they don't. There ii
no limit to the success that God is asked
to approve, the enterprises, in a thou
sand opposing interest.
There was broken-down minister, g
returned missionary, who sat opposite
me last wintLr at the table of mine
inn," and who often drew from me some
expression of opinion upon the ques-
tions of the hour. One Sunday he had
made me give him an outline, as concise
as could make it, of che theory OF
Christian Socialism; and after approx
ing the points in detail he summed up
with the usual clincher: Yes. see.
Its the M1LLENNIUM you are looking for ;
l don't think it will come, in your time,
or mine"
As an expression of opinion now l
don't find this at all Objectionable. 1t is
the putting away ofthe whole thing, into
the realms of nonsense as 1t we're; that
is the fact in point. l said: "Mr. x" i"
and the whole table heard. II would
like to know how a minister of the Cos
pei can sneer at that which he prays for !;
the kingdom of Christ upon earth -?
There were l believe three other min
listers present, regular boarders at this
house. None of them tried TO answer
for him, and I think he gave 1t up him
self. He went the same day to some
other place to stay, and hope it was not
at all on account of my impertinent puz-
zle. l suppose 1t isn't hard, but he
didn't want to guess.
While l am about it want to give
what seems to me the most damaging Of
al the arraignments to be found In tn
commissions of the teachers of the
church orthodoxy of to-day. While
they carefully hold in constant view the
occasional obscure sayings that fit the
purpose of necessity to account for
things and the warrant for keeping
them as they are, they avoid the proof
to be found in the lives of His immedi-
ate followers, who of course, knew dl-
rectly from the Master what His will
was, without ambiguity on His part or
doubt on theirs. Doubtless self was as
deep-rooted motive in the human
makeup then as to-day. The young
man once stirred to ask the way of SAL
walton. still thinking of self, had gone
away sorrowing, "for his possessions
were very great" So great that it tseems
he could not make up his mind to drop
them into the common use to save his
precious soul How very like the typi-
Cal wealthy man of later times. who pre-
fers something certain in the present to
the promise of safety to his least valu-
able possession; one that after all he
has very little left of after the terrible
wear it ls subjected to, no matter what it
NAV have originally been, when the ma
ture of his success is understood.
The record those foil )wers Of Him left
of themselves was this,-realizing all
that the most dangerous Communist
could ask: "And they had all things in
common, neither said any man that any
thing was his own"
And If to-day we would see how far
the church, which has so long taken to
itself alone the application of this
brotherhood of living as too good for
every day and temporal matters, has fin
ally got away from it and adopted the
class distinctions of aristocracy and the
trade methods Of commerce, we have but
to enter tie house of God. Once, when
dedicated it was in some sense gwen to
Him, and within its walls, if nowhere
else, No man said that anything was
his own" To-day God is made land
lord, and his agent rents or sells pews OF
"sittings" to the highest bidder. Walls
and boundaries define the limits be-
tween man and man among the rich
and the poor who would have the once
refuge of the poor, the place of prayey,
needs first to pass the scrutiny of
trusty usher; who may cnaritabiy. if the
applicant be not too dreadfullY miser'
able TO be tolerated as pretending to the
benefits of His house who said He was
friend of the miserable and needy, per
NIT him to shrink into some chill corner
there to say "OUR Father" if he feell
like it.
But now that l think Of it needn'
have written all this about the ushel
with the keys of Peter. At the same
table mentioned as b ling in part sur
rounded daily bv ministers of the gospel
l heard one of them report the business
of the day at his conference. 1t was th'
question whether it has not now become
necessary to build "seperate churches
for the poor ?'
For my part think it has not.
Yours in the faith,
]. HARRISON MILLS