xt70rx937t9n_439 https://exploreuk.uky.edu/dips/xt70rx937t9n/data/mets.xml https://exploreuk.uky.edu/dips/xt70rx937t9n/data/46m4.dao.xml unknown 13.63 Cubic Feet 34 boxes, 2 folders, 3 items In safe - drawer 3 archival material 46m4 English University of Kentucky The physical rights to the materials in this collection are held by the University of Kentucky Special Collections Research Center.  Contact the Special Collections Research Center for information regarding rights and use of this collection. Laura Clay papers Temperance. Women -- Political activity -- Kentucky. Women's rights -- Kentucky. Women's rights -- United States -- History. Women -- Suffrage -- Kentucky. Women -- Suffrage -- United States. Methodist Review text Methodist Review 2020 https://exploreuk.uky.edu/dips/xt70rx937t9n/data/46m4/Box_16/Folder_12/Multipage19114.pdf 1912 1912 1912 section false xt70rx937t9n_439 xt70rx937t9n PRICE, 32 PER ANNUM SINGLE NUMBER, 50 CENTS

 

 

 

 

VOL. LXI.-NO. 1 WHOLE NO. 213

THE

HODIST REVIEW

QUARTERLY

EDITED BY

GROSS ALEXAEND S...TD
JANUARY, 1912

I. 77213 1511111115 jeac/zmrr 13/ (/11) 0/1/11111/ M1 :1

Yostaments‘ . . , . 1m E lH'l‘OH
II. jlfodcrfl, leeology 11111/ [/21 /’1 2111/1111” of '

[/16 Gospel . . . I" ROI \\ II. I [AM .‘\1)AMS BROWN

III. I/Vesley’s [31311111011 1‘11 T/11r11/11g‘1'o11/ Sf11111‘1'111'1/.\‘
(_TIIAN(:I£I.I.OR BURWASH

IV. C/zarles Die/cons After 11 [1111111’r1"1/ )1'1'11'5
PROD“. GEORGE HERRRR'I‘ CLARKE

V. 7716 flz'story 1f [/16 LVoer— I’Vz'a'v 11111211111011!
for 2711: Liberation of Woman . . MISS BELLE BENNE’I‘T

VI. 7716 First L1fo-a111Z-Doat/1 81‘1/1017‘11 of
C/u'z'sfz'aniéy . . . PROI IOIIN ALRRRO FA ULRNRR

VII. George E120! 1211dfi/1z1z/112t/1 [3111' 16/! Brown-
112g . . . MRS. (IKUSS 1\IIIKA1\DIIR

7/21: Poct— 6212 01,1 I of [/13 L111111’1ft/1c 11117511- N11.“ ION M ACT AVISII

C/zrzstzamty (1121/ [3611121 /)A11111.x11p/111:11/ 1121/1/—
enczes . . . II. M A LUVV Y N H UGHES

W071 (2751U01'f/2’I flail-11m l’ 11 111.1 . . M RS. F. L. ’I‘OWNSEND
77212 Resurrectzofl off/11511111111 . . I’ROR. GEORGE B. EAGER
Ediz‘orial Departments .'

I. THE EDITOR’S COMMENTS ON THE CON'I‘RIBUTED ARTICLES.
.3. BOOK REVIEVVE)‘.

A PRAYER \POem). Mary Mch'iIIIIOII McSwniu.
.REPBNTANCE (Poem). Francis McKiImOII MOI‘tOII.

[4111 [1117 Contents 5111' £11131 /1111:/' 11/ 2111111“ title.

PUBLISHED FOR THE METHODIST EI’ISCOI’AI. CHURCH, SOUTH
SMITH & LAMAR, AGENTS
NASHVILLE, TENN; DALLAS, TEX.;~ SAN FRANCISCO, CAL.

LONDON: ]. ALFRED SHARP, 25—35 City Road
TORONTO; WILLIAM BRIGGS, Wesley Buildings, Richmond Street, W.

 

 

Inland In the post 06m It Nashville, Tenn, n3 second-clan mutter.

 

 

 

  

 

What Is the Best commentary on the Bible? _ -

ONLY_§_TEN uCENTS

The Editor 'of the REVIEW, being asked again and again what is the
best. commentary in existence on the Bible, requested Dr. McFadyen,
now a professor in the Free Church College, Glasgow, Scotland, to select
frOm all the commentaries and series of commentaries in the English
language the very best one on each book of the Old Testament for schol-
arly students and the very best one for general use, and make two lists
accordingly. He did so.

Professor C. W. Votaw, of the University of Chicago, made two sim-
ilar lists of best commentaries for the New Testament. These four lists
are printed, with much other valuable information on books for various
"departments of Bible study, in a small paper-covered pamphlet which,
while worth ten times the amount, is ofiered for sale by Smith & Lamar
for only ten cents. Every student of the Bible should by all means have
a copy of this booklet.

 

BEST BOOKS
‘ OLD AND NEW TESTAMENT STUDY

ESPECIALLY THE BEST COMMENTARIES

CAREFULLY SELECTED BY

JOHN E. MCFADYEN .
Professor Old Testament Exegesis and Literature. The Free Church Cotkge, Glasgow

AND

S , CLYDE w. VOTAW
Professor New Testament Ezegesis and, Literature, University of Chicago

WITH AN INTRODUCTION BY

GROSS ALEXANDER

N ABHVILLE. Tie-um; DALLAB. Tax.
Punnxemxa House: or ran- anonrs'r Emscoun Cannon, Scum
Snrrn & Lam. Acme
1911

 

 

 

  

 

_ ~ ~ MSW-aw... 41-4;

 

 

 

 

 ,TTETTTODTST REVIEW

QUARTERLY ~

EDITED BY

GROSS ALEXANDER. S.T.D.

JANUARY, 1912.

 

PUBLISHED FOR THE METHODIST EPISCOPAL CHURCH, SOUTH
, SMITH & LAMAR, AGENTS
NASHVILLE, TENN. ; DALLAS, TEX.; SAN FRANCISCO, CAL.

LONDON: J. ALFRED SHARP, 23-35 City Road.
TORONTO: WILLIAM BRIGGS, Wesley Buildings, Richmond Street, W.

   

 CONTENTS.

PAGE
. THE SOCIAL TEACHING OF THE OLD AND NEW TES—
TAMENTS. By THE EDITOR. Address at the Ecumenical Con-
ference

.MODERN THEOLOGY AND THE PREACHING OF THE
GOSPEL. By WILLIAM ADAMS BROWN, Professor of Theology,
Union Theological Seminary, New York .......................

.VVESLEY’S RELATION TO THEOLOGICAL STANDARDS.
By CHANCELLOR BURWASH, Victoria University, Toronto ........

.CHARLES DICKENS AFTER A HUNDRED YEARS. By
GEORGE HERBERT CLARKE, Professor of English Literature, Uni—
versity of Tennessee ..........................................

. THE HISTORY OF THE WORLD-WIDE MOVEMENT FOR
THE LIBERATION OF 'WOMAN. By MISS BELLE BENNETT,
President of the \Voman’s Council .............................

.THE FIRST LIFE-AND—DEATH STRUGGLE OF CHRIS—
TIANITY. By JOHN ALFRED FAULKNER, Professor of Church
History, Drew Theological Seminary ..........................

. GEORGE ELIOT AND ELIZABETH BARRETT BROWNING.
By MRS. GROSS ALEXANDER, author of “Light Through Darkened
Windows” ....................................................

. THE POET-SINGERS OF THE LAND OF THE MAPLE. By
NEWTON MACTAVISH, Editor Canadian M agazinc, Toronto ......

. CHRISTIANITY AND RECENT PHILOSOPHICAL TEND-
ENCIES. By REV. H. MALDWYN HUGHES, Southport, England.

. WORDSWORTH’S HEALING POWER. By MRS. F. L. TOWN-
SEND, author of “In the Nantahalas” ...........................

. THE RESURRECTION OF JERUSALEM. By GEORGE B. EAGER,
Professor in the Southern Baptist Theological Seminary, Louis—
ville, Ky.

XII. EDITORIAL DEPARTMENTS.

I. THE EDITOR’S COMMENTS ON THE CONTRIBUTED ARTICLES .........

II. BOOK REVIEWS.

SCHLEIERMACHER: The Christian Faith (160). . . .Gross Alexander.

BRUCKNER: The Fifth Gospel (165) John C. Granbery.
MOFFATTZ Introduction to the New Testament (168) . .Thos. Carter.
HASTINGS: Encyclopedia of Religion and Ethics
(173) ..................................... Gross Alexander.
MURRAY: Christian Faith and the New Psychology
(176) G. B. Winton.
COULEVAIN: On the Branch (178) ............ Mary Stuart Smith.
GLADSTONE : Correspondence on Church and Religion (180).
J. L. Kirby.
DU BOIS: Psychic Treatment of Nervous Disorders (185)
J. M. Moore.
ROBERTSON: The Glory of the Ministry (189) ........ Thos. Carter.
CLARKE: The Ideal of Jesus (191) ................ John A. Kern.
BEACH: Missionary Atlas and Directory (193) ..... W. W. Pinson.
MOUZON: Life and Sermons of Bishop Ward (195) . . . .J. M. Moore.
BROWN: Elkanah Settle, His Life and Works (198)
Gross Alexander.
LELIEVRE—OSUNA: Juan Weslei , Sn Vida y Sn Obra (200)
G. B. Winton.
ROBERTSON: Commentary on Matthew (202) ........ Thos. Carter.
MRS. WALTER B. NANCE: The Love Story of a
Maiden of Cathay (204) . . . . ................. Gross Alexander.
FORBY’I‘HE: The Person and Place of Christ (205) ..... L. D. Lowe.

A PRAYER (Poem). Mary McKinnon McS'wain ........................ 117
REPENTANCE (Poem). Francis McKinnon Morton ...................... I30

 

 

 

 

 

  

“ 1.

THE
METHooisT REVIEW

QUARTERLY

Enigma)- :» JANUARY, 19.12 strains-1., No.1.

THE SOCIAL TEACHING OF THE OLD AND NEW
TESTAMENTS.

BY THE EDITOR.

I. THE TEACHING OF JESUS.

IN studying the social teaching of Jesus we should exercise great
care that we do not, in our zeal to fit his message to the social
ideals, theories, and programmes of our age, rob it of that which
makes it the message for all ages.

It will be necessary, therefore, at the outset to get as clear a
conception as possible of the primary aim of his mission and the
fundamental principles of his teachings. He was not a social
reformer in the modern and conventional sense of those words.
His primary aim was not the reorganization and reconstruction
of human society. He had a higher aim and a broader one,
which, however, included and provided for this lower one—a plan
which, if carried out, would involve the solution of the social
problems of this world. His primary object and his supreme
concern was the spiritual regeneration of the individual human
being through the revelation of God and his true relation and
attitude toward men, that they might become subjected and con-
formed to his will.

In the nature of the case this process and this result was an
individual matter, which could be realized only through individ-
ual action. Jesus’ message, then, as has been well said, was pri-
marily about God, and it was primarily to the individual. This
does not imply that it was intended for the individual only, or

 

  

 

 

 

 

 

4 THE METHODIST QUARTERLY REVIEW.

that it ended with the individual. By no means. On the contrary,
it gave .the individual a new relation to others, to all others, and
laid upon him an unescapable obligation to love them and to serve
them with a self-denying and sacrificial devotion.

Jesus’ doctrine of the necessity of the regeneration of the in-
dividual and his doctrine of social righteousness are complemen—
tary; indeed, they are organically one and inseparable. His stand-
ard and his demand of social righteousness are so high and so
inexorable that without a renewal of the nature, a change of
heart, a second birth (whether realized all at once or gradually),
it is a simple, primary impossibility. “A bad tree cannot bring
forth good fruit.” Take, for example, his teaching on the sub-
ject of chastity, or the relation of the sexes, which is a social
question: “Blessed are the pure in heart; whosoever casteth a look
with lustful thought, desire, intent, is a criminal, guilty of adul-
tery.” Take again his teaching on the nonresistance of evil, the
guilt of retaliation; or his teaching concerning one’s attitude to—
ward his enemies. Once more, take his insistent and emphatic
teaching on the subject of wealth (a social question), which is
the hardest, the most unwelcome, and the most persistently re-
jected of all his teachings. Speaking specifically on this subject,
he said, expressly and explicitly, that only the power of God, to
whom alone impossible things are possible, can make it possible
for the possessor of wealth to enter the kingdom of God.

Spiritual Regeneration M alces All Righteousness Possible.

On the other hand, when the spiritual regeneration and trans—
formation of the nature, “the change of heart,” has taken place,
which the teaching of jesus explicitly demands or implicitly as-
sumes, and which he makes possible, then all righteousness is
made possible, inevitable, spontaneous, second nature, easy—“a
good tree cannot bring forth evil fruit”——and specifically, all so-
cial righteousness is potentially provided for. Not that there is
no longer need for specific prescription and instruction, such as
that which we find in the Sermon on the Heights, the greater part
of which is devoted to social duties, or that express and lucid
teaching which we find on the duty of service, with himself as the
object—lesson, and the tender—hearted Samaritan as the illustration.
These are given that they may furnish a plain objective rule of

 

4.

 

  

 

SOCIAL TEACHING OF OLD AND NEW TEST/lillENT‘S. 5

action, an objective test of the genuineness of the process of trans—
formation, and as the stimulus and inspiration of lofty ideals to
noble striving.

And, by the way, this is quite in accord with what our own
great \IVesley, who had in a singular degree the mind of Christ,
insisted on. For does he not say, at the conclusion of those Gen-
eral Rules which give such explicit and inclusive directions for
the regulation of the lives of the people called Methodists, “All
these things we know the Spirit writes on truly awakened hearts”?

In short, to be a disciple of Christ is to be a servant of men,
and one who does not serve men is {p50 facz‘o shown not to be a
disciple of Christ. The distinguishing mark of his followers is
service, and the degree of service determines place and rank in his
kingdom. In order the more effectually to enforce the necessity
of service, Jesus lays on the colors in depicting a scene the most
awful and awe—inspiring to be found in the Bible or out of it. It
is the emphasis of the final judgment and of eternal destiny laid
on the duty of loving service to the poorest, the lowliest, and the
neediest, and that to their physical wants. And it may not be
amiss to say that we need to be reminded in these days, when we
are so Willing to spend our‘money in ways that will gratify our
pride or pleasure, that the Judge is not represented as saying,
“Come, ye blessed of my Father, inherit the kingdom, for I was
Without a fifty-thousand-dollar church and a ten—thousand-dollar
organ and ye gave me both”; but rather as saying, “Some of the
lowliest of my brethren were hungry and ye gave them food.
strangers and ye took them into your homes, without clothing and
ye clothed them, sick and ye visited them, in prison and ye went
to see them. And all that ye did to them, ye did to me.” All this
is a complete answer to those superficial interpreters who say that
the so—called individualistic interpretation of the message of Jesus
excludes social teaching and leaves no room for social ethics.

N 0 Specific Directions about Forms of Organization.

But Jesus did not give his disciples any specific directions for
associating themselves together, nor did he prescribe any form
of organized activity. He was content to implant the princi-
ple and power of love, and leave it to work, the very nature of
which is to draw men together and to unite them in some, though

 

  

6 THE METHODIST QUARTERLY REVIEW.

it be at first only the most rudimentary, form of association. And
there has never yet been anything quite equal to the triumphant
illustration of this principle which we find in the scenes of the
first Pentecost, a more disinterested and beautiful realization of
Utopian conditions than has ever elsewhere been seen. (Acts iv.
31-33)

In the second place, Jesus, with a wisdom deeper than that of
any socialistic theorist or dreamer of schemes, knew that no one
form or type of organization, whether religious or social or even
political, would suit all ages, and places, and circumstances, and
kinds of men. If Jesus had prescribed authoritatively any one
form of government or organization or organized movement, it
would have meant that that particular form was to be permanent,
unalterable, universal. For in accordance with his profound in-
sight he dealt only with what was permanent, unchangeable, uni-
versal. How carefully and with what far—seeing wisdom he
avoided it! He did not do this even for his Church. Indeed,
according to the record of his life in the Gospels, he did not use
that word but twice during his ministry, and those cases are
thought by some to have been editorial insertions of a date when
the Church had been organized under the potential organizing
impulse of which I have spoken—though that is by no means cer-
tain.

Jesus trusted his regenerated disciples, under the inspiration
and guidance of his still living presence in their hearts and midst,
to take care of outward forms of organization. And here again
one cannot help thinking of that marvelous and matchless man
whom we Methodists have a sanctified pride in calling our Father
and Founder. He said with reference to the various peculiarities
of Methodism, “Everything arose as the occasion demanded.”
Jesus did not, then, give instruction to or for any form of organ-
ized society. He did not even instruct his individual disciples
as to how they should act or deport themselves as members of
any civil or social or religious organism. Does this mean that all
the cooperative social movements of our day for righting social
wrongs, for bettering social conditions, for reconstructing the
entire social order, are ruled out and have no place in the teach-
ing of Jesus and the mission of his Church? No! A thousand
times no! The so-called individualistic and the current social

 

.495. .

 

 SOCIAL TEACHING OF OLD AND NEW TESTAMENTS. 7

(or socialistic) views of the teaching of Jesus ought not to be
thought of as different theories, antagonistic, exclusive, irrecon—
cilable; they are both included in his teaching and are parts of
one whole, and for both there is full provision in the amplitude of
his thought and purpose. (The potency of all social adjustments
and fulfillments is latent in the far-reaching principles of his
teaching and his plan. Certainly, society must be saved as well
as the individual, and environment must be changed as well as
character. For we know that environment is influential and often
decisive in shaping character, and the individual is, as a matter of
fact, in a large measure, what society makes him}, And for these
reasons it is the bounden duty of all Christian hien and women
to unite and cooperate in all social movements of all kinds for
the speedy and complete removal, on the one hand, of all social
evils and wrongs, such as that monstrous and unspeakable in—
iquity, the liquor business, the circulation of demoralizing liter-
ature, the toleration of indecent plays and shows, hard conditions
of the laboring classes, degrading and dehumanizing poverty, the
employment of child labor, the oppression of employees (espe—
cially women) by employers, plutocratic and monopolistic com-
binations for the appropriation of nature’s resources, the dishon-
esty, despotism, and cruelty of soulless corporations as well as
soulless individuals, corruption in politics, illiteracy and insani-
tation among the poor, etc.; and on the other hand, for bringing
to all, even the poorest of the poor, all possible advantages, com-
forts, and blessings, physical, intellectual, educational, social, aes-
thetic, and especially moral and spiritual. The various churches,
all the various churches, ministers, laymen, and women, ought
to take the initiative and the leadership in all such social enter-
prises and to thank God for the opportunity and privilege of
employing their time, their talents, and their money in making
them successful; and that for two reasons, (I) because these
things are good in themselves, and (2) because when accom-
plished, they would make it immeasurably easier to win the
masses, thus relieved, to Christ and salvation. The Church of
Jesus Christ cannot afford not to give its cooperation and lead-
ership in all these social reforms. If they excuse themselves,
they pay the penalty in their own spiritual declension and deteri—

 

  

8 THE METHODIST QUARTERLY REVIEW.

oration, in losing all power with God and all influence with men,.
and in becoming despised and rejected cumberers of the ground.

Silence as to the State.

As to the State or civil government, Jesus had nothing to say.
It is to be supposed that he tacitly assumes—certainly he did not
say anything which implies that he denied—the necessity of some
form of civil government. He seems to recognize it in what he
said about taxes to be paid to Czesar. Paul and Peter, in their
epistles (we may infer under the influence of the Christian spirit),
exhort Christians to obey the civil government. But Jesus does
not indicate the province or functions of civil government; he
does not define the relation of his disciples to it, or its relation to
the kingdom of God.

This is another instance of his deep wisdom and in accordance
with his invariable method. He reveals the great Personality, he
declares great germinal principles, he releases potent spiritual and
ethical forces, brings these to bear on men, and leaves them to
produce their legitimate effects in quickening men’s capacities-
and powers, transforming their natures, and guiding their activi-
ties. {The way to make a good State is to make good citizens;
the way to make good citizens is to make good men; the way
(and the only way) to make good men is to bring them face
to face with God, to awaken in them a sense of the ugliness, the
guilt, and the ruinousness of sin, and the beauty and blessedness
of righteousness, and to subdue their wills and willfulness, and
Win their hearts, by the appeal of God’s fatherly love and for-
giving grace:

Least of all does Jesus teach, or say anything that can be twist-
ed to imply, that (at any time or under any circumstances) the-
kingdom of God is to be identified with the State or that it is to
take the place of the State. We know the disastrous results of sev-
eral experiments that have been made in this direction, and notably
those made by the Roman Catholic Church at sundry times and in
divers places. “My kingdom is not of this world,” he said as
explicitly as language can be made to say it. The kingdom of
God exists simultaneously with, and in the midst of, but still in
rigid and perpetual separation from, the State. Otherwise we
should witness a repetition of the history of Europe from Hilde-

 

 SOCIAL TEACHING OF OLD AND NEW TESTAMENTS. 9

brand to Pius IX. We can but sympathize with and admire the
patient efforts which the noble army of our Nonconformist breth-
ren in England are making to bring about the separation of
Church and State; and we pray God to give them success.

Some of our enthusiastic Christian Socialists, like my gifted
and honored friend, Prof. \Valter Rauschenbusch, in his beautiful
and inspiring book on Christianity and the Social Crisis, and Dr.
Samuel Newton Clarke, in his recent book, The Ideal of Jesus,
come perilously near to the doctrine of the ultimate identification
of the kingdom of God and the civil State.

Jesus and the Fan'zily.

It has been said in this paper that Jesus gave no instruction
concerning any kind or form of social organism. There is one
notable and profoundly significant exception. He did give some
very explicit instruction, and he laid down inexorable law for
safeguarding the integrity and preserving the sanctity of the
Family.

The Family is a social organism of a nature and kind radi-
cally and essentially different from any and all others. It is an
organism of nature, so to speak. According to the Old Testa-
ment and the interpretation of it by Jesus, “it was instituted of
God in the time” of the race’s infancy. Without it, natural so~
ciety is chaos. Without it, the kingdom of God is not possible.
Two things are elemental—the individual and the Family, the
individual unit and the social unit. These two secured in accord-
ance with the ideal and the teachings of Jesus, all other organisms
and forms of social life will take care of themselves—the com—
munity, the State, the Church.

Forbids Divorce.

In keeping With his lofty teaching as to the origin and sacred-
ness and the divine sanctions of marriage and the Family, are his
explicit, repeated, insistent, impassioned utterances on the subject
of divorce—the dissolution of the marriage bond and the separa-
tion of the husband and wife with liberty to form a marriage (sex-
ual) relation with a third person. If the family is fundamental,
divorce is fundamental. This is why Jesus devotes to this subject
so much attention—seemingly out of all proportion in the opin-

 

  

10 THE METHODIST QUARTERLY REVIEW.

ion of those—shall I say of us?—who have not thought so deeply
as he did. , ‘

The old law (Deut. xxiv. I), on account of the hardness of
the hearts of the men of that primitive time (as Jesus said), tol-
erated divorce, and, as it was interpreted by the rabbis, for any
cause that might seem good and sufficient in the eyes of any
husband who had found or was looking for a new “affinity.”
The only thing required was that the husband give his wife a
certificate of dismissal. Jesus forbade divorce for any but one
cause, and many of the best scholars think, for (my cause, in
View of the fact that the exceptive clause (“saving for the cause
of fornication”) is not found in the parallel passage in Mark (x.
II), the earliest Gospel, or in Luke (xvi. 18), which probably
follows the earlier form.

Jesus did not explicitly or implicitly forbid simple separation

and living apart where conditions became intolerable, but not
"with the right and privilege of forming a new (sexual) union

with some other “affinity.” If peOple knew absolutely that it

*_ was absolutely impossible to get divorces, they would be pretty

sure to find a modus vivehdi, and be willing to make all necessary
concessions and compromises rather than forego marriage alto—
gether. But Jesus saw clearly what our modern moralists and
lawmakers do not see—that the easy disruption of the marriage
bond means the ultimate destruction of the family; and the de-

,struction of marriage and of the family inevitably leads to free-
love, which even now prevails to an extent which, if known, would

be appalling.

We need more preachers like Dr. Hammond, of Philadelphia,
who so fearlessly and mercilessly exposed the iniquity of the re—
cent marriage of a divorced millionaire of high degree. All honor
to him, and equal honor to the poor Methodist preacher who flatly
refused a fee of $10,000 to perform the ceremony and afterwards
declined a large gift offered to him as a reward for doing his
duty! -
“H onor Thy Father and Thy Mother.”

As to the authority of parents and the honor due them, as well

as the sacred duty of providing for and supporting them in time ‘

of need, Jesus approves with impassioned emphasis the stringent

 

 

E

- "an.

.r ‘;:r::'r..l;u_.;f ‘ ..._ .M

 

 SOCIAL TEACHING OF OLD AND NEW TESTAMEN'IS. II

and inexorable law of the Old Testament (see Matt. xv. 4, 6;
Mark vii. 9, 13). The way in which, till his thirtieth year, he
himself was subject and obedient to Joseph and Mary is a com-
mentary on his teaching which is as charming as it is illuminating.

The interest that Jesus took in little children, his unfailing
fondness for them, the beautiful things he said about them, and
the estimate he put on the beauty, the purity, the glory of child-
hood in making it the ideal of discipleship and the symbol of fit—
ness for the kingdom of God—these are but another, if incidental,
way in which he paid tribute to the sacredness of the marriage
relation and the sweetness and beauty and holiness of family life.

With all this in our minds, we can better understand the sig—
nificance of his presence at the marriage in Cana and his contri—
bution to the joy of the occasion. Does it not mean much that
the first act of his public career was the performance of an appro—
priate miracle at a wedding? Was it an accident that when he
was at a wedding, the hour struck for him to leave his retirement
and to inaugurate by a miracle his world—redeeming mission and
ministry? ,

C hrist’s Teaching as to W with.

The persistent attitude of Jesus toward wealth, and his con—
sistent and insistent teaching on the subject, constitute the most
extraordinary and revolutionary element of his social ethics. All
sorts of methods have been employed and efforts made to explain
it away, to evade it, to tone it down. It has been systematically
ignored. It has been denounced as Socialistic and Anarchistic.
It is his one teaching that men will not accept. It is his one
teaching that his followers will not put in practice. All men
are afraid of it, as if it had dynamite in it; and it has.

But it will not down. If there is any one subject upon which
he speaks with more frequency and with greater emphasis and
earnestness than upon any other, it is the subject of Money. If
we may trust the Gospel records of his teachings, and if we may
judge by the frequency with which he talked about it and the
various terms and figures which he used, it may be unhesitatingly
asserted, (I) that it was to Jesus the subtlest and deadliest of all
perils to its owner, and (2) that with the single exception of
religious hypocrisy no sin struck him as did the sin of unconse-

 

  

12 THE METHODIST QUARTERLY REVIEW.

i
l
!

crated wealth. VVendt, the great German scholar whose work on
The Teaching of Jesus is the greatest in existence, declares that
Jesus made the renunciation of riches a condition of entrance into
the kingdom of God, coordinate with repentance and faith. And
surely nobody can accuse W endt of being an Ebionite.

Wealth has possession of many a man who honestly thinks he
has possession of his wealth. For so it is that when wealth gets
possession of a man’s heart it jmts out the inner light, as Jesus
says, and chloroforms his capacity of spiritual discernment. But
he doesn’t know it, of course. {The drunkard, the prostitute, the
robber, the murderer, know that they are wicked, and they have
at least seasons of maddening remorse, but the man who is guilty
of wealth never suspects that anything is wrong with him. Cath-
olic priests have said, as quoted by Professor Rauschenbusch, that
people confess all sorts of sins and crimes, but that nobody ever
confessed the sin of riches:- Few of us have progressed to the
point at which we appreciate and accept the Views and teachings
of Jesus concerning wealth. John Wesley had. We need only to
recall his consistent practice through more than fifty years, and
his unwaveringly strong and searching words on the subject. 5

And yet Jesus does not teach asceticism, socialism, or commun—
ism. He believes in the joys and enjoyments of life, and him—
self partook of them. He gives to no man or set of men, to no
community, church, or council, the authority to take away or to
touch another man’s property or wealth. His appeal is to the
rich man himself to relinquish his hold on wealth, or rather to
break its hold on him, and by using it for the relief of the poor,
the destitute, the helpless, and the suffering, or for the great en-
terprises of social amelioration or missionary evangelization, save
himself from the curse of inner darkness and the hopeless doom
of Dives, whose only sin, according to the parable, was that he
rioted in luxury while a fellow human being just outside his
bronze gate was rotting with disease and dying by the slow proc—
ess of starvation on scraps that he picked out of the garbage pile.
And there are plenty of church members who are doing to-day as
Dives did, but they think it is all right.

Nor did Jesus, save in exceptional cases, require that a man
shall part with his wealth all at once or cease to have the use and
control of it. When, in the course of his ministry, he came across

 

 

 

 

 SOCIAL TEACHING OF OLD AND NEW TESTAMENTS. I3

one rich man who proved, by giving half his fortune away on
the Spot and devoting a good part of the other half to restitution,
that he could be trusted to use the rest without peril to himself or
selfish deprivation of others, he accepted it as a demonstration
that that man was savingly converted, and he left the remainder
in his hands with his blessing.

Charles N. Crittenton, of New York, had a legitimate, honest
income of $60,000 a year, all of which but a living (after the
manner of Wesley) he devoted regularly to the establishment and
equipment of rescue homes for our unfortunate sisters, in all the
leading cities of this country. This is exactly in accordance with
the ideal and teaching of Jesus. Jesus himself no doubt would
have forbidden his giving away the capital through which this
income was made. If all who are members of the various Chris—
tian Churches would use their wealth as Charles Crittenton used
his; in other words, if all those in the world who bear the name
of Christ and permit themselves to be considered and called
Christians should begin to—morrow, and from to-morrow con-
tinue to live in accordance with the teachings of Jesus on the
single subject of Money, as Crittenton did, there would come
throughout the world a social, industrial, economic, moral, and,
lastly, spiritual, revolution inside of a hundred days, of vaster
extent than that which Christianity wrought in the world in its
first hundred years. Do you doubt it? Stronger words than
these have been said by secular economists. Laveleye, a great
European writer, in his work on Primitive Properly (Chap.
xxxi.), says: “If Christianity were understood and taught (and
practiced) conformably to the spirit of its Founder, the existing
social organism could notiost a single day.” And James Russell
Lowell said, in his Essay on the Progress of the l/Vorld: “There
is dynamite enough in the New Testament, if illegitimately ap-
plied, to blow our existing institutions to atoms.”

But it is objected, and the objection seems to have force: If
wealth is a sin, and if a man ought not to use it