Fundamental Evangelical Testimony Against Socialism, Part 1
By Julio
Severo
“Fundamentalism”
today is a dirty word, and the reason is socialist hatred against conservative
Christians.
Because
socialists did not like “The Fundamentals” and its conservative Christian
stances, they worked for many decades to transform “fundamentalism” in a dirty
word. They were successful.
“The
Fundamentals” reveals that, even before the birth of the Soviet Union,
socialism was a strong influence in the U.S. society and churches.
The
chapter on socialism in “The Fundamentals” was written by Rev. Charles R.
Erdman (1866-1960), professor at Princeton Theological Seminary. Erdman was a
Presbyterian minister, and he could not have visualized his seminary sending
socialists to form socialists in other nations.
In
1952, the ecumenical Presbyterian missionary Richard Shaull (1919 -2002) was
sent to the Southern Presbyterian Seminar, in Campinas, Brazil, where he taught
until 1959. Shaull was a doctor in theology through Princeton Theological
Seminar. The birth of the Theology of Integral Mission (TIM) in Brazil is
traced and credited to him.
Even
though TIM is labeled as the Protestant version of Liberation Theology, TIM was
born before Liberation Theology. For more information, download my free e-book
here: http://bit.ly/15AJmMC
TIM
is the most widespread theological liberalism in Protestant churches in Latin
America, especially in Brazil, in our days.
The fundamental
evangelical testimony by Rev. Charles R. Erdman against socialism 100 years ago
denounces the powerful inroads of socialism in the U.S. society and churches
when there were no Soviet Union and KGB. I am publishing his testimony to help
evangelicals in Brazil to avoid TIM and its socialist pitfalls.
His
denunciation against socialism will be published by me in 4 parts, and this is
the first:
The Church and Socialism
By Professor Charles R. Erdman, D. D.,
Princeton Theological Seminary
The
sudden rise of Socialism is the most surprising and significant movement of the
age. A few years ago the term suggested a dream of fanatics; today it embodies
the creed and the hope of intelligent millions. For example, in America the
Socialistic vote increased from 20,000, in 1892, to 900,000 in 1912. In France
this vote numbers 1,104,000, and in Germany more than 3,000,000; and in these
and other lands multitudes who are not openly allied with political Socialism
are imbued with Socialistic principles and are advocates of Socialistic
theories.
With
this great movement the Christian Church is deeply concerned; first, because of
the endeavor which many are making to identify Socialism with Christianity;
and, secondly, because, on the other extreme, popular Socialism is suggested as
a substitute for religion and is antagonistic to Christianity; and, thirdly,
because the strength of Socialism consists largely in its protest against
existing social wrongs to which the Church is likewise opposed but which can be
finally righted only by the universal rule of Christ.
I.
Socialism, strictly defined, is an economic theory which proposes the abolition
of private capital and the substitution of collective ownership in carrying on
the industrial work of the world. This collective ownership is to extend to all
the material instruments of production; these are to be publicly operated, and
the products to be equitably distributed. The government is to be wholly in the
hands of the people, and it is to assign to each individual his task and to
determine his wage. Every citizen is to be actually a government employee.
It is
evident that Socialism is to be distinguished from Communism with which it is
often confused. The latter advocates a collective ownership of all wealth.
Socialism does not deny the right of private property, but of private capital.
In a Socialistic state one might own a house, but he could not rent it to
increase his income. He might own a yacht, but he could not use it to carry
passengers for pay. Under Communism there would be no private ownership, but it
would be literally true that "no man could call aught that he possessed
his own."
Socialism
is still more easily distinguished from Anarchism. The latter seeks the
abolition of all government; but Socialism advocates the extension of the
functions of government to regulate the life and labor of every individual and
even in the most minute details. Anarchy means no government; Socialism
proposes more government than any nation has ever known.
Quite
as obviously Socialism should never be confused with that extreme form of
Anarchy known as Nihilism. The latter advocates the violent abolition of all
existing institutions, social and political. It is true that Socialists often
propose revolution and violence; but an ever increasing number believe their
ends will be attained by a gradual process of social evolution moving toward
the goal of a collective ownership of capital. It is not right therefore to
identify Socialism with assassination, lawlessness and outrage.
Published
originally in 1910.
To be continued,
in part 2.
Portuguese
version of this article: Testemunho
Evangélico Fundamental contra o Socialismo, Parte 1
Source: Last Days Watchman
Recommended Reading:
No comments:
Post a Comment