Page images
PDF
EPUB

THE APPEAL.

FRATERNITY.

TO A SOCIALIST.

Only four years ago the most civilized of modern nations adopted for its motto the words “Liberty, Equality, and Fraternity.” The last of these comprehends the other two, Where there is acknow. ledged, practised brotherhood, there must be liberty, there must be equality ;—such liberty at least as brotherly love wishes for itself and for all;—such equality of comfort and happiness as brotherly love longs to enjoy and to witness. That great nation caught a glimpse of a great truth. It saw that literal, unrestricted liberty would not do. Liberty to wrong another would engender resentment. Resentment would appeal to the stronger for help. Combination of the strong would soon destroy the liberty of all whom they could prevent from combining. Unrestricted liberty, therefore, would end in slavery. It is, indeed, liberty abused which has successively enslaved France to two Napoleons,—to two perjured military despots. Equality, also, France perceived could never be literally realized. Every man's income could not be made equal. If it could, health, locality, family, variety of tastes, bodily and mental differences, would destroy the practical equality. No; liberty and equality, such as rational, imaginative, independent beings can enjoy, must have some internal, self-regulating power which shall harmonize into even and pleasant working the otherwise unhappy diversities and changes of our individual condition. Fraternity_brotherhood (in plain Saxon English)-is that power. As the governor, sensible of the least undue rapidity or slowness of motion, lessens or increases the supply of steam or water to the machine,-as the vanes of the windmill give way before too powerful a gust and moderate the speed of the sails,so brotherly love, both in the family and the neighbourhood, and also amongst separated nations, could adjust, to the utmost desirable and attainable degree, the inequalities between men and countries. It could watch over the wants of others with as deep an interest as over our own. It could feel no rest while able to relieve those whom it saw needed relief. It could save the humiliation of appealing to workhouses and poor rates as a shelter from want. It could seek its chief happiness in the more blessed to give than to receive.While, on the other hand, brotherly love in the needy could not endure to accept another's earnings to maintain itself in indolence, or to con. sume them upon needless pleasures which perhaps the giver denied himself, much less to obtain charity by dissimulation, fraud, or artifice. In a word, true brotherhood would neither withhold what it could bestow, nor accept that it did not need. It is the only thing which can make a family, a village, a kingdom, a world, happy.

The ardent mind of France, four years ago, saw this. But one thing it saw not. It saw not the way to attain it. A large and a bad class in the kingdom, with some really benevolent minds in it, could only think of compulsory brotherhood. They began at the wrong end. By law and mechanical organizations they wished to compel a kingdom to fraternize in the division of the profits of labour, and in the common possession of capital. They alarmed, in consequence, all who possessed anything either by inheritance or industry. They prepared the way for the most barefaced and villanous usurpation of despotic power which perhaps history records. It can never be otherwise. Fraternity cannot be the work of law or even of organisation. It can be the work of love alone. Many “brotherhoods," indeed, there have been, but they have been substantially “brotherhoods of thieves," brotherhoods of rulers, brotherhoods of ecclesiastics, brotherhoods of classes, brotherhoods of trades, but all selfish brotherhoods, designed more to keep others out of the privileges they claimed for themselves than to diffuse those privileges. The intelligence of the civilized world, spurred by the necessities of a growing population, is fast overthrowing such brotherhoods; and so much the better. Still we want the real brotherhood. Where shall we find it? We ask the candid sceptic even, whether he can find it anywhere save in those records which narrate the origin of real Christianity ? Real brotherhood is recorded there. Brotherhood Howing too from deep internal fountains. Brotherhood which left each man's possessions his own, yet arranged so that “no one had need.” It was spontaneous, heartfelt, efficient brotherhood. Those who preached the doctrines which engendered this brotherly love, declined the administration of the common purse; and each man gave to his neighbour's wants “as the Lord had prospered him.” Now the grand peculiarity of all this was! that it was no prescript from without, no mere formal organization for comfort's sake, which all joined for temporal advantage. No; it was the unthought-of development of new ideas and principles. They BELIEVED IN CHRIST. Believed in redemption from sin, superstition, and misery, through the blood which they had lately shed. Believed in that incomprehensible love of God which gave his own Son to enrich them with a Heavenly and Eternal Inheritance. They prayed, too, for the out-pouring of a Holy Spirit he had promised them, and believing such truths, and moved by that Spirit, they were taught of God to love one another. There was a real foundation for their brotherly love. They were all really “one in Christ Jesus.” Bar. barian, Scythian, bond, or free, they were all one in Him. “Every one for himself,” was now to them a profane, heathen motto. Brotherly love, instead of mere equity and law, became the acknowledged standard. Indeed, love was their equity. They wished to "owe Do

[ocr errors]

man anything, but to love one another.” This picture is not overdrawn. It is but literal fact. And even now, however sad may be the outward spectacle of wealthy and avaricious Churches, which in this country especially have actually absorbed the tithes once devoted to the poor; however meagre a representation of Primitive Chris.. tianity may be presented by some Free and Dissenting communities, yet neither individuals nor communities are wanting who fully exemplify the brotherly love of the first christians. A truly christian society could not fail to be essentially socialist. It would nullify the evils of competition by annihilating the selfish motives which appropriate all its profits to the few successful ones. It would stimulate. competition, but it would be that each might voluntarily contribute more "to those that needed.” It would do from within what never can be done from without.

Now, it is this brotherly-love of which we have spoken, and which the first christians exemplified, which must return before a nation can even exist, without the prison, the constable, and the drilled manslayer. Belief, belief in the only Truths wbich can humble, and melt, and purify the heart to brotherly love, is the first condition of Universal Brotherhood. Jesus Christ-not the Christ of Statesmen, not the Christ of Ecclesiastics, but the Christ of the New Testament, of the apostles themselves-He is the only founder of the Brotherhood of Nations: in Him, according to the promise of four thousand years, shall “all the nations of the earth be blessed.” Looking back, then, over the history of the world, we see but one source of Human Brotherhood, and that is, “faith which worketh by love.” We may see that fraternity is good. We may exclaim, “Behold, how good and how pleasant it is when brethren dwell together in unity.” But it is only love to Him who created us, and to Him who has bought us with his blood,” which can root the principle of brotherly love in selfish human hearts. The cross of Christ is the only spring of a kindly, and holy, and lasting Socialism.

A FEARFUL CONFESSION.

I was reading the other day of a good man, who went to visit a poor creature who was suffering on the borders of eternity, and he asked him, “Do you think that Christ can save you ?” He replied, I believe he can, but I will not ask him.” There is something very dreadful in this reply, because it displays such rebellion and enmity against the Lord Jesus. The sinner was perishing; he was within a few steps of the burning lake, where he must suffer the just wrath of God for ever; there was one that could save him, and but one; he knew this, and yet he deliberately said, “I will not ask him.How very few would have the hardihood to say this with the mouth, and it could bestow, nor accept what it did not need. It is the only thing which can make a family, a village, a kingdom, a world, happy.

The ardent mind of France, four years ago, saw this. But one thing it saw not. It saw not the way to attain it. A large and a bad class in the kingdom, with some really benevolent minds in it, could only think of compulsory brotherhood. They began at the wrong end. By law and mechanical organizations they wished to compel a kingdom to fraternize in the division of the profits of labour, and in the common possession of capital. They alarmed, in consequence, all who possessed anything either by inheritance or industry. They prepared the way for the most barefaced and villanous usurpation of despotic power which perhaps history records. It can never be otherwise. Fraternity cannot be the work of law or even of organization. It can be the work of love alone. Many “brotherhoods," indeed, there have been, but they have been substantially “brotherhoods of thieves,” brotherhoods of rulers, brotherhoods of ecclesiastics, brotherhoods of classes, brotherhoods of trades, but all selfish brotherhoods, designed more to keep others out of the privileges they claimed for themselves than to diffuse those privileges. The intelligence of the civilized world, spurred by the necessities of a growing population, is fast overthrowing such brotherhoods; and so much the better. Still we want the real brotherhood. Where shall we find it? We ask the candid sceptic even, whether he can find it anywhere save in those records which narrate the origin of real Christianity ? Real brother. hood is recorded there. Brotherhood Howing too from deep internal fountains. Brotherhood which left each man's possessions his own, yet arranged so that “no one had need.” It was spontaneous, heartfelt, efficient brotherhood. Those who preached the doctrines which engendered this brotherly love, declined the administration of the common purse; and each man gave to his neighbour's wants “as the Lord had prospered him.” Now the grand peculiarity of all this was that it was no prescript from without, no mere formal organization for comfort's sake, which all joined for temporal advantage. No; it was the unthought-of development of new ideas and principles. They BELIEVED IN CHRIST. Believed in redemption from sin, superstition, and misery, through the blood which they had lately shed. Believed in that incomprehensible love of God which gave his own Son to enrich them with a Heavenly and Eternal Inheritance. They prayed, too, for the out-pouring of a Holy Spirit he had promised them, --and believing such truths, and moved by that Spirit, they were taught of God to love one another. There was a real foundation for their brotherly love. They were all really “one in Christ Jesus.” Bar. barian, Scythian, bond, or free, they were all one in Him. “Every one for himself,” was now to them a profane, heathen motto. Вгоtherly love, instead of mere equity and law, became the acknowledged standard. Indeed, love was their equity. They wished to "owe no man anything, but to love one another.” This picture is not overdrawn. It is but literal fact. And even now, however sad may be the outward spectacle of wealthy and avaricious Churches, which in this country especially have actually absorbed the tithes once devoted to the poor; however meagre a representation of Primitive Christianity may be presented by some Free and Dissenting communities, yet neither individuals nor communities are wanting who fully exemplify the brotherly love of the first christians. A truly christian so. ciety could not fail to be essentially socialist. It would nullify the evils of competition by annihilating the selfish motives which appropriate all its profits to the few successful ones. It would stimulate. competition, but it would be that each might voluntarily contribute more “to those that needed." It would do from within what never can be done from without.

Now, it is this brotherly-love of which we have spoken, and which the first christians exemplified, which must return before a nation can even exist, without the prison, the constable, and the drilled manslayer. Belief, belief in the ONLY TRUTHS which can humble, and melt, and purify the heart to brotherly love, is the first condition of Universal Brotherhood. Jesus Christ-not the Christ of Statesmen, not the Christ of Ecclesiastics, but the Christ of the New Testament, of the apostles themselves. He is the only founder of the Brotherhood of Nations: in Him, according to the promise of four thousand years, shall “all the nations of the earth be blessed.” Looking back, then, over the history of the world, we see but one source of Human Brotherhood, and that is, “faith which worketh by love." We may see that fraternity is good. We may exclaim, “Behold, how good and how pleasant it is when brethren dwell together in unity.” But it is only love to Him who created us, and to Him who has bought us with his blood," which can root the principle of brotherly love in selfish human hearts. The cross of Christ is the only spring of a kindly, and holy, and lasting Socialism.

A FEARFUL CONFESSION. I was reading the other day of a good man, who went to visit a poor creature who was suffering on the borders of eternity, and he asked him, “Do you think that Christ can save you ?” He replied, I believe he can, but I will not ask him.” There is something very dreadful in this reply, because it displays such rebellion and enmity against the Lord Jesus. The sinner was perishing; he was within a few steps of the burning lake, where he must suffer the just wrath of God for ever; there was one that could save him, and but one; he knew this, and yet he deliberately said, “I will not ask him.How very few would have the hardihood to say this with the mouth, and

« PreviousContinue »