Christian Socialism

The Promise of an Almost Forgotten Tradition

Philip Turner

• Publisher: Cascade Books
• Year: 2021
• ISBN:
  9781725259423
• Topic: Théologie et religion
• Subtopic: Théologie chrétienne

Christian Socialism is a movement that arose in England in the mid-nineteenth century and continues into the twenty-first century. This form of socialism was aimed, in the first instance, not at institutional reform or the nationalization of the means of production but at what its proponents viewed as the moral rot that lay at the foundation of first industrial and then digital society. They opposed what we call neoliberalism and what was then known as political economy because supporters of these ideologies believed that moral convictions had no proper place in the operation of markets. This conviction rested upon the false belief that people are essentially selfish, competitive individuals seeking personal happiness. The aim of Christian Socialists was to replace this "rotten" moral foundation with another based on the view that people are social and cooperative by nature rather than competitive. Their goal was nothing less than a new society built not upon selfishness and aggression but upon social virtues such as equality, fellowship, cooperation, service, and justice. They did not deny the presence of selfishness; however, they believed that the social nature of humankind lies deeper than egotism and conflict, and they sought a society built upon this belief.

Part One

Origins: Historical and Theological

A. Historical Change and Establishment

Most people are only dimly, if at all, aware of a tradition of social, political, economic, and moral thought known as Christian Socialism. In the nineteenth century it appeared in various forms not only in England but also in America and on the continent of Europe. The focus of the following chapters will be on Christian Socialism in England, but with the purpose of showing as well the promise this tradition holds in a time of crisis for the churches in North America. In England, as an organized movement, Christian Socialism lasted for only a short time; but its influence was extensive and continues, though in a weakened form, to this day. Its supporters published several journals, started schools for working-class people, and, in a more practical vein, founded cooperatives through which artisans could share in the production and distribution of goods and services and in the profits of such enterprise. They also formed societies (the left-leaning Guild of St. Matthew and the more centrist Christian Social Union) whose purpose was both education and advocacy. Through these efforts its supporters gained a wide following. Without question the movement had an influence on the Labor Government that came to power after the end of the Second World War. Indeed, at one point, a significant number of the new bishops within the Church of England were in some way or another associated with the movement. It numbered among its advocates such clerical luminaries as F. D. Maurice and bishops Westcott, Gore, and Temple, and among its lay members people of the caliber of John Ludlow and R. H. Tawney. Though influential, followers of this tradition were not of one mind in respect to the sort of socialism they espoused. It is certainly the case that its exponents in England held views different from their American cousins. Nonetheless, its English supporters shared a set of ideas of sufficient similarity to generate a tradition. The chapters that follow do not contain a comprehensive narrative of either their life and thought or of the institutions they founded. It is rather an interpretive essay intended to identify the theological foundations and major themes of the English version of this tradition and to highlight its value as an account of the social mission of the churches. This assessment will reveal a tradition that elicits hope because it is full of promise and, at times, pathos because its failures draw from us sympathy rather than disdain.

A critical account of Christian Socialism in England recommends itself for a number of reasons. First, the similarities between the present age and the one in which this tradition had its origins are striking. The Industrial Revolution, which came to full flower in the nineteenth century, uprooted significant numbers of people and, in so doing, presented English society with social, economic, political, and moral questions for which there were no ready answers. In like manner, today people are living through what might be called a “digital revolution.” As in the case of its predecessor, the digital revolution has brought with it dramatic social changes. These changes have presented populations throughout the world with social, economic, political, and moral questions of even greater complexity. Once again there are no ready answers to the questions these social changes present. Once again, social change and inequality have brought with them social and political conflicts that threaten the stability of society and its institutions. Once again, the churches find themselves divided, and once again they are being forced by circumstance to reexamine their relation to the societies of which they are a part.

A second reason, particularly for Americans, to focus on the English version of Christian Socialism is that, in contradistinction to the American version, its exponents, in responding to their circumstances, tended to be cautious in respect to policy advocacy and institutional reform. Instead of structural change they sought to convey to the British public a normative view of life in society. Their aim was to educate the public conscience through the articulation of a “Christian Sociology,” a view of life together shaped by what at times they called “ideals” and at others “Christian principles.” As Maurice Reckitt points out, the Christian Socialists in England believed that the church had a high calling, namely, to save their civilization by becoming disentangled from the basic assumptions of the “progressive” forces of the day.1 In place of these assumptions the Christian Socialists sought to provide English society not with a political program of reform but with a view of its social conditions in light of the eternal purposes of God. It is precisely this understanding of the calling of the Church of England that poses a question to the Protestant churches of America. There is no established church in America, but its churches have nonetheless, until recently, been charged with providing a religious and moral foundation for the nation.2 Is this still the case? Even if it is, one is forced to ask if the focus of America’s churches on public policy and institutional reform is the right way to fulfill this charge. To frame the question in an even wider context, establishment or no establishment, does a focus on ideals have a necessary place in any account of Christian social thought, or does talk of ideals, Christian or otherwise, within a political and economic order do no real work? These were questions presented to the Christian Socialists in their era, and they remain questions posed to Christian citizens at the present time.

So a third and fourth reason for an examination of Christian Socialist thought lies first of all in its call to consider the relevance of ideals within an economic and political order and second of all in its assessment of what ought to be the aim of Christian witness within society. There is, finally, a fifth reason for giving attention to this tradition. In making their defense of Christian ideals, the Christian Socialists in England had important things to say about the basic moral vocabulary we use to think about and promote what ought to be the political, economic, and social goals of life in society. So, for example, they argued that duties should be given priority over rights, the common good over individual interests, and public over private responsibility for addressing social problems.

For the Christian Socialists in England, the answer to these questions and others lay in a very distinctive understanding of socialism. To understand and assess the matters of importance to them one must begin with what they understood socialism to be when viewed from a Christian perspective. In his introduction to a collection of essays by Christian Socialists entitled The Return of Christendom, Bishop Charles Gore made clear the difference between the views of “Christian Socialists” and those of “Socialists” who wished government to address economic inequality by nationalizing the means of production. Speaking of Christian Socialists he wrote,

These are all Socialists in a general sense, that is to say, they are all at one in believing that no stable or healthy industrial or social fabric can be built upon the principle of Individualism, or is consistent with the assertion of an almost unrestricted Right of Private Property. Accordingly, they hold that our present industrial society rests upon a rotten foundation; and that what is needed to remedy the manifest “sickness” of our “Acquisitive Society,” is something much more than particular social reforms. There is needed the substitution of a true ideal or principle of Society—that is of Socialism in some sense—for false. What they ask for is such a peaceful and gradual revolution as can only come about if men’s minds come to be so fully possessed with a certain set of ideas, which are now in the air, as that they shall gain compelling or driving power in practical affairs.3

The concerns that led to this quest for “ideals” or “principles of society” that might provide an alternative to the “rotten foundation” of English society arose within a set of moral, social, economic, and political conditions easily recognizable in the present age. Social and economic change had forced large numbers of people off the land and crowded them into urban slums. Social dislocation was accompanied not only by grinding poverty but also by a high incidence of social insecurity and disorder. The depressed condition of these displaced urban dwellers stood in marked contrast to the huge concentrations of wealth that resulted from inheritance and the profits generated by the age of the machine. As is now the case with the arrival of a digital economy (perhaps the ultimate expression of the machine age), so the arrival of an industrial economy brought with it social disruption and a degree of economic inequality that threatened social stability. It was also accompanied by a form of competitive individualism that stood in marked contrast to the sense of commonality that had heretofore been characteristic of English society. It was this ideal that the Church of England (as the established church) supported, and upon it rested its moral responsibilities.

As previously noted, the response of the Christian Socialists in England was, with marked exceptions, unlike that of the Fabians in England, the Marxists in Europe, or the socialist followers of Walter Rauschenbusch in America. They sought no social or political revolution. Rather, in accord with the romantic idealism common in their age, they sought a “return of Christendom.” Their aim was to reestablish a society whose foundation rested in Christian belief and practice—a society of ideals that could be offered as a response to the holiness of God made known to the world in and through the incarnation of God in Christ.

It is important to note that, in pursuing this goal, they were not pursuing a social end discordant with the moral temper of English society of the day. As Gertrude Himmelfarb has pointed out, there was in England at that time moral agreement among the general populace that “those who were blessed not with poverty but with riches had a sacred duty of charity, the obligation to sustain the holy poor and to relieve the misery of the unholy.”4 Also, as Himmelfarb notes, the concern of most people was not industrialism and capitalism; they were concerned that society itself had deteriorated. They were troubled by what she calls “the complex of ideas, attitudes, values, and practices epitomized by a dismal philosophy that dehumanized human beings and the dismal science that demoralized social relations.”5 She refers here to “political economy,” the notion that economies work by laws internal to their operation and not in relation to moral norms. John Ruskin, whose work Unto This Last had, for several generations, a huge influence on Christian Socialists, described this dismal philosophy in the following manner:

Among the delusions which at different periods have possessed themselves of the minds of large masses of the human race, perhaps the most curious—certainly the least creditable—is the modern soi-disant science of political economy, based on the idea that an advantageous code of social action may be determined irrespectively of the influence of social affection.

Of course, as in the instances of alchemy, astrology, witchcraft, and other such popular creeds, political economy has a plausible idea at the root of it. “The social affections,” says the economist, “are accidental and disturbing elements in human nature; but avarice and the desire of progress are constant elements. Let us eliminate the inconstants, and, considering the human being merely as a covetous machine, examine by what laws of labor, purchase, and sale, the greatest accumulative result in wealth is obtainable. Those laws once determined, it will be for each individual afterwards to introduce as much of the disturbing affectionate element as he chooses, and to determine for himself the result on the new conditions supposed.”6

Ruskin concludes, “This would be a perfectly logical and successful method of analysis, if the accidentals afterwards to be introduced were of t...