Workmen's advocate., 1890-05-24
CHRISTIAN CONTRADICTIONS.

by MT. c. II. Brown, of the Newton Theological Seminary, before the Bos- ton Section of the s. l.. r. In so far as the speaker explicitly declared his belief in social equality and industrial co-opera- ton it would seem, C praOri, that there can be no substantial ground of differ ence between him and any expor t of scientific Socialism, since botf fear to have the same economic fleet in view. And yet his sociological and religious postulates are in themselves such absolute denials of the fundamental principles which scientific Socialism claims to have established beyond ques ton; they would, if admitted, SC inevit- ably lead every man who was not q Christian believer to the absolute denial of Socialism itself, that we cannot allow | them to pass without at least some emphatic expression of dissent.
 The first postulate to which we object is, that "the benefits of organization can be had only at the price of d surrender of equality" because of "the law of or ganzation, that the few must rule and the many be subordinate" There is no such Claw of organization. This is the law of disorganized or imperlectly organized society. The whole tendency of progress, as shown throughout the course of history that is, if we take mankind as a whole and compare long periods) is to greater equality, coinc- dent with better organization. And if we take short periods and individual nations, we find that despotism is sure sign of decay, whereas equality is the promoter of healthy growth. The div ision of functions--the specialization of organs which accompanies the evolution of the organism from the lower to higher forms--is not subordination of any one of them to any of the others. but is, on the contrary, an assertion of their more equal necessity and rights in higher state of co operation.
 The second objectionable postulate is
 that there is "a contradiction between v the natural aspirations of men to equal
 ity and the natural inequalities of men
 in the social state." According to Mr.
 Brown, the Socialist and the Nationalist
 las well as the Anarchist ask themselves chow this contradiction is to be solved, 7
 and they ask it in vain, 'often in the
 language of passion, because they have
 not yet found the answer in terms o reason"
 In reply to this and speaking for th'
 Socialists, we deny that they ever aske,
 such a question. They assert-and the, prove-that there is "a contradiction
 between the natural aspirations of mel
 to equality in cooperation and thei -, existing inequalities under capitalism. , And they demand that these unnatura
 inequalities be brought to an end by tn abolition of capitalism and the substitu
 ton therefor of the cooperative con
 monwealth.
 Such is also, we believe, the postio of the Nationalists. As to the Anarcl
 ists, they can so well contradict then . selves, each other and the whole worl that we may safely trust them with tn ,o task of dealing as they please with NJ
 Browns "social contradictions" or The third objectionable postulate is k religious one and may be formulated , ev follows: "There is an irrepresssible Col ,es flict between the natural desire of me he for equality and their natural inequa ,se ities in the social state, Therefore
 must and can only be ended by gener lot belief in Christianity if Christian