The daily sentinel., 1912-01-23
THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH AND
SOCIALISM.
lContinued from Page Al

influence on the people. To sub
merge the individual, ether wholly
or partially, in the social mass is a
decided evil. The unit must maintain
q distinct and selfresponsible iudivid-
uality. This is evidently Gods pur-
pose. I'VE must all give an account.
Responsibilities are assigned "ac-
cording to their several mot collec-
tIveD ability In the parable of the
Wise and Foolish Virgins" it is ex-
pTessly taught that there can be no
massing of community merits or
rights so as to make up for the neg
lect by the few but that each indi-
yidual must stand or fall on the ba-
sis of his personal merit.
To a limited and necessary extent
society is a partnership but this part
Lership must not cover too much
ground. As the parent who protects.
nourishes and provides for the child
finds that all of this may be over
done and that he does a positive harm
to the child when he does for him
that which he could do for imself, so
society has her positive limitations.
As the parent, at first partially and
later wholly, casts the child, on his
own resources, for the child's own
resources, for the child's own good. in
lie manner must the individuality OF
the citizen be maintained.
Too much paternalism on the part
OF the state is a greater evil than not
enough That which will call out
self-reliance is more helpful than
guaranteed competency. Socialism
would menace the stalwartness of
our citizenship, would cut the nerve
of our industrious and ambitious life
and make out of now industrious SOW
ereigns land of shiftless dependents.
2. The unwise tendency of social
ism would be to reduce the mass of
the members of society to common
| level.
With the disappearance of compe-
tition and common ownership and the
| bringing in Of a guaranteed suffic-
| iency to every person on the basis of
actual needs tand these are practic-
| ally unifOrm,l the present difference
es in station, plane of living and in
| dividual contributor to the common
veal would theoretically largely
cease Efforts to secure this result
proceed on the suppositiun that these
at present existing differences are
unjust and invidious. This in my
| Judgment is a false concept of the
fundamental order of society. Socie-
ty. Society, since the human family
has become large has never existed
on such a dead level and the probab-
ilities are that it viii never so exist
either in this life or the life to come
hereafter. If by some mighty up
heaval and readjustment it should
now suddenly be brought to such a
condition, it would not long so re-
main. Differences just like those of
the present would quickly creep in
and assert themselves and only brief
lperiod would be necessary to reestab-
lish the present differences. 1t is all
according to an original proclivity.
Several ability" difference in impos-
ed tushs As seen Ia the parallels of the
Talents and the Pounds, differ
ences in natural endowments, con-
trasts in the very possibilities of life
as predetermined in some by natural
handicaps and limitations and n 9TH
ers by unaccountable advantages. Is
il conceivable that socialism would
eliminate such inequalities? Ger
tainly not. Then, will it prevent in
equalities of results or reward? 1t
certainly ought not to do So Under
any system, actual or conceivable,
men viii display unequal industrial
powers. Some are energetic, others
lazy; some are quick. others are dull;
some are thrifty, others are wasteful
some are born leaders. others are born
to follow. Hence, inequalities of
wealth are logical, not abnormal as
Professor Laughlin has correctly
said. The distribution of wealth is
no test OF the success of a system
The Procrustean purpose of social
ism would be as unnatual and uncall-
ed for as was the policy of the ancient
Greek robber, cruel and inhuman.
The fact is that human nature does
not require this policy in order TO
its happiness and success. Quite nat
urally, the disparities alluded to and
others that are equally natural and
unavoidable work no great hardship
or real disadvantage since there is a
marvellous adjustment to powers of
appreciation and enjoyment with
large possibilities for change through
the effort of the individual as ne may
have taste and ambition.
g. Instead of the revolutionary
proposition of socialism, the true
scheme should be wise and humane
modification of the present order,