By James Stalker
PHILANTHROPIST may be thought too light a name to apply to Christ. And it must be confessed that it has a secular sound.
Some words are unfortunate: in common usage they are degraded, and their original meaning is lost. The word " charity " is a well-known instance. Originally meaning " love," it had at one time a good chance of being the technical term for the very highest kind of love-that passion which is kindled by union with Christ. This is its meaning in the thirteenth of First Corinthians, and the authority of so great a chapter might have been expected to determine forever the usage of Christendom. But somehow the word missed this honour and suffered degradation; and now " charity " is another name for " alms." In like manner, " philanthropy " has been brought down by usage to denote work done on behalf of men's bodies and temporal condition, as distinguished from work done for their spiritual good. But originally it was not so restricted, but meant simply love to men.
In this wide sense it is ascribed in Scripture to God Himself. Thus, in a well-known passage in the Epistle to Tiptoes, the literal rendering is, " But after that the kindness and philanthropy* of God our Saviour appeared, not by works of righteousness which we have done, but according to His mercy He saved us, by the washing of regeneration and renewing of the Holy Ghost, which He shed on us abundantly through Jesus Christ our Saviour." Here, it will be perceived, philanthropy denotes, not God's kindness to the bodies of men, but His grace to their souls; for it displayed itself in bestowing the washing of regeneration and the renewing of the Holy Ghost.
It was in the same way that the philanthropy of Christ also primarily manifested itself, His work and sufferings being gone through with a view in the first place to the salvation of men's souls, while the relief of their bodily wants and ailments came in only in the second place. Nor is it easy to under stand why work done for the soul's sake should not be called philanthropy as much as work for the body's. From the Christian standpoint at least it is a far greater kindness; and none can deny that it often involves far-reaching temporal advantages. In both foreign and home missions the success of the Gospel, when it saves men's souls, generally includes, as a secondary but inevitable accompaniment, the sweeping away of masses of cruelty, poverty and ignorance.
If, indeed, the improvement of men's temporal condition be dignified with the name of philanthropy, and sharply dissociated from spiritual aims, the name of Philanthropist must be denied to Jesus. He unfolded the utmost consideration for the physical necessities of men, but always in subordination to the higher wants of the soul. His love extended to the whole man-body and soul together. His love to God and His love to man were not two passions, but one. He loved man because He saw God in him-God's handiwork, God's image, the object of God's love.
This must ever be the pulse of a powerful philanthropy-to see God in man; or, as Christians more naturally phrase it, to see Christ in man. " Inasmuch as ye did it unto the least of these ye did it unto Me," are Christ's own words. When I touch the body of a man, I am touching what was made to be a temple of the Holy Ghost. In the humblest - ay, in the most sinful - human being we see one whom God loves, whom the Saviour died for, and who may be an heir of the glory of Christ. These are the deep wells of conviction out of which a strong philanthropy is nourished.
II.
It cannot be said that an active philanthropy has always been a characteristic of those professing godliness. Jesus Himself gave a significant hint of this in the Parable of the Good Samaritan. The priest and the Levite passed the poor maltreated wayfarer by, whereas the milk of human kindness was found in the common, unordained man. History supplies too many instances to confirm the parable. Often has the untrained heart of humanity noted and branded a wrong, and the uncovenanted hand sprung forth to the relief of misery, when those expressly called by their offices to the service have remained silent and supine. It would even seem sometimes as if intense sympathy with God destroyed sympathy with man. But one of the greatest services of Jesus to the world was to harmonize religion and morality. He would not allow neglect of man to be covered by zeal for God, but ever taught that he only loves God who loves his brother also.
At present we see these things, which He joined, put asunder from the other side. One of the novelties of our own age is an atheistic philanthropy. There are those who do not believe in God or the God-man, or in the spiritual and eternal world, but yet make a life of sacrifice for others the sum of morality. They confess that it was Jesus who brought their ideal into the world, and that it was established in the convictions of mankind by His authority; but now, they maintain, it is able to dispense with His support, and they call on us to love man, not for Christ's sake, but for his own. They profess to see in man himself, apart from God, enough to inspire hourly and life-long effort on his behalf; and in the very brevity of his existence, which comes completely to an end at death, they find a pathetic motive for instant activity, because he must be helped now or never.
In so far as any may be induced by such motives to embrace the life of self-denial and really grapple with the problems of poverty and crime, Christians need not hesitate to wish them God-speed. This is a wide world, affording room for experiments; and it is a. world of such fearful misery that there is little need to forbid anyone who from any motive may feel inclined to lend it a helping hand. We may even recognise some to be for Christ who believe themselves to be against Him. But, where the opposition is radical and final, we are hardly justified either by reason or the facts of the case in expecting very much from such a movement.
No doubt there is in the natural heart a love of man for man, which, if blown up by a favourable wind, may now and then do wonders; and the kindness of those who make no profession of religion sometimes puts Christians to shame. But, on the other hand, the force, which the philanthropic spirit has to overcome, is one of the mightiest in nature. It is the force of selfishness-that universally diffused instinct which makes the individual seek his own interest and happiness whatever comes of others, which makes the strong domineer over the weak and the many tyrannize over the few. This force lodges in every human breast; it pervades communities as well as individuals; it is embodied in customs and laws; it evolves new forms of wrong in every age; and many would say that it rules the world. This is the force which philanthropy has to overcome. It is not easily dislodged. It will not be conquered by fine words. There is needed, to overcome it, a change which only God can work by communicating to us His own nature, which is love.
'Is there a reason in nature for these hard hearts? ' 0 Lear,
That a reason out of nature must turn them soft seems clear.
In the teaching of Christ man is so dignified by his connection with God and by his immortal destiny, that everyone who really believes this creed must feel himself condemned if he treats his brother ill. But strip man, as Agnosticism does, of all the greatness and mystery with which Christianity invests him - cease to believe that he comes from God, that he is akin to beings greater than himself who care for him, and that his soul is of infinite worth because it has before it an unending development-and how long will it be possible to cherish for him the reverence which wins him consideration and help? The brevity of man's existence gives him, according to the present teaching of Agnosticism, a pathetic claim to instant help; but who knows whether in a society given over to unbelief the argument might not tell the other way, the selfish heart reasoning that sufferings which must end so soon do not matter?
It was in the generation preceding the French Revolution that atheistic philanthropy took its rise. The prophets of the time were predicting an age of peace and brotherhood, when selfish passion should disappear and cruelty and wrong no more vex the world. But, when their teaching had done its work, its fruit appeared in the Revolution itself, whose unspeakable inhumanities afforded our race such glances into the dark depths of its own nature as can never be forgotten. It is painful to recall that Rousseau himself, the most eloquent and, in some respects, the noblest apostle of the new faith, while preaching universal brotherhood, sent his own children one by one, as they were born, to the Foundling Hospital, to save himself the trouble and expense of their support. The Revolution did much destructive work for which the hour had come; but it was a gigantic proof that the love necessary for the work of reconstruction must be sought in a superhuman source.**
We are living at present in a state of society in which there is an after-glow of Christian sentiment even in minds that have ceased to name the name of Christ, which develops beautiful manifestations; but those who know human nature will demand very strictly where Agnosticism is to get the light and footnote starts here the glow which will keep back the on-rushing force of dark and selfish passion, when Christianity is removed. There is a remnant of Christianity in many who think they have got quit of it; but it remains to be seen how long this will last when cut off from its source. A sheet of ice holding on to the edges of a pool may maintain its position even after the water on whose surface it has been formed has been drawn off; but it will not maintain it long, and it will not bear much weight. The facts with which philanthropy has to deal are excessively disagreeable to face, and the temptations to spare oneself and enjoy the world are insistent. Not long ago, when the bitter cry of outcast London grew so piercing as to attract footnote continues here universal attention, the heart of the West End was stirred, and the sons and daughters of fashion left their frivolities to go " slumming," as it was called, in the East End. But already, I am told, this is nearly all over; and the work of relieving the wretched is left, for the most part, to the humble followers of Christ, who were at it before. If strict inquiry were made, I imagine it would be found that there are very few philanthropic institutions of any dimensions in our midst that would not go down if they were deprived of the support of those who give not only for the sake of man, but for the sake of the Saviour who has redeemed them.
III.
The actual forms in which the philanthropy of Christ manifested itself were mainly two.
One of these was the giving of alms to the poor. This was, it is evident, a constant habit of His, so much so, that when, on the night of the betrayal, He said to Judas, who had the bag, "That thou doest do quickly," the rest of the disciples thought that the message the betrayer had received was to visit and relieve with a gift of money someone in distress. How the bag was filled we do not know very well. Jesus may have put into it savings of His own which He had laid by, when working as a carpenter, in view of the life He had in prospect. The Twelve may have done the same; and the holy women who followed Him contributed to it. But there is no reason to think that it was ever very full, but the contrary. When Jesus gave alms, it was the poor giving to the poor; yet He kept up the practice to the very end.
There have been good men who have seen so much peril in this form of philanthropy that they have pronounced against it altogether; but the example of Jesus supports it. There can be no doubt, however, that it requires caution and consideration. To give to the professional beggar generally does more harm than good, and too facile yielding to his importunities is to be accounted a vice rather than a virtue.*** But there are deserving poor. They are known to those whose work lies among them; and the wealthy might with advantage make these workers their almoners. But it is not difficult to find them out, if we are willing to go on our own feet into the abodes of poverty. To many, indeed, this is an unexplored world, though it is at their doors. But it is not difficult to discover. Once enter it with a loving heart, and progress is easy. You will find in it honest men, on whom illness or temporary want of work has fallen, and whom a gift may help honourably over the time of need. You will find the aged, who have fought the battle manfully, but now can fight no more; and surely it is an honour to have a few of these dependent on our bounty. Among the poorest there are princes of God, who at a future stage of existence may be in a position to patronise us.****
The other form of His philanthropy was healing. Because He healed by miracle we naturally think of it as easily done; but perhaps it was more an effort than we suppose. On one occasion, when a woman touched Him and was healed, without wishing Him to know, He did know, because, it is said, He perceived that virtue had gone out of Him. And there are other indications that these cures must have cost Him an expenditure of nervous sympathy and emotion which imparts a deep pathos to the saying of St. Matthew, " Himself took our infirmities and bare our sicknesses." But, in any case, the work of healing was a congenial one in which His loving nature rejoiced; and He was never more at home than in a crowd composed of persons suffering from every kind of disease and infirmity of body and mind, amongst whom He moved benignly, touching one here into health, speaking to another the word of power, and letting glances of kindness and good cheer fall on all. The joy radiated far and wide, when the father returned to his home to be no longer its burden but its bread-winner, the son to be no more a care but a pride, the mother to resume the place and the work from which illness had dislodged her. The best help to the poor and needy is that which enables them to help themselves; and this was the kind of help which Jesus gave by His miracles.
We of course do not possess miraculous powers; but in their place- we have others, which may be put to the like uses and are capable of working wonders as far beyond what could be achieved in His day through natural causes as His miracles are beyond us.
We possess, for instance, the power of science. There is no form of philanthropy perhaps more Christ-like than that which puts at the disposal of the poor and the ignorant first-rate medical skill. Our infirmaries and dispensaries are the continuation of Christ's healing activity. Medical missionaries carry to the heathen a commission singularly like that with which Jesus sent forth the apostles. The Church is beginning to employ trained nurses in mission work. And in every part of the country there are medical men who are daily rendering to the poorest the best efforts of their art, for which they receive little or no remuneration, but which they give with even greater inward delight than they feel in working for their best-paying patients, because they are serving Christ in His members.
There is also the power of politics. Of this the early Christians had no control; they had no influence whatever in the State. But this power is now in the hands of all. The work of a Wilberforce or a Shaftesbury shows what use can be made of it in putting an end to wrong and misery. It enables us to ascend the stream and cut great evils off at their sources. Christian men are only learning how to use it yet; some are even shy of touching it, as if it were unholy. But they will yet prize it as one of the most powerful instruments put by Providence into their hands for doing good. We shall not always be content with a philanthropy that picks up the victims as they fly broken from the wheel of oppression; we will stop the wheel itself.*****
These are only specimens of the powers with which Christian philanthropy is arming itself; and the strange word of Christ is coming true, "Verily, verily, I say unto you, he that believeth on Me, the works that I do shall he do also; and greater works shall he do because I go unto My Father."
IV.
There is nothing more certain than that our Lord left this part of His work as an example to His followers. In the distribution of alms from the common bag He associated the Twelve with Himself, giving the bag in charge to one of them. To one who wished to join the company of those who followed Him He said, " Go and sell all that thou hast and give to the poor, and thou shalt have treasure in heaven, and come and follow Me; " and in other cases He may have imposed the same condition of discipleship. He associated the Twelve with Himself in like manner in the work of healing. " Heal the sick," He said, as He sent them forth, "cleanses the lepers, raise the dead, cast out devils: freely ye have received, freely give."
But the most impressive evidence of all is His great description of the last judgment, where the King says to those on His right hand, " Come, ye blessed of My Father, inherit the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world: for I was an hungered, and ye gave Me meat; I was thirsty, and ye gave Me drink; I was a stranger, and ye took Me in; naked, and ye clothed Me; I was sick, and ye visited Me; I was in prison, and ye came unto Me; " but to those on His left hand, " Depart from Me, ye cursed, into everlasting fire, prepared for the devil and his angels : for I was an hungered, and ye gave Me no meat; I was thirsty, and ye gave Me no drink; I was a stranger, and ye took Me not in; naked, and ye clothed Me not; sick, and in prison, and ye visited Me not."
Are there many Christians who realise that this is the test by which at the final review their Christianity is to be tried? Do the habits of Christendom accord with our Lord's plainest teaching? There are, indeed, a few who follow Him along this path. And, though it is a path of self- denial, they find it one of flowers; for on the way to the homes of the destitute they see the marks of His footsteps, and, in handling the bodies of the bedridden and suffering, their fingers touch His hands and His side. Thus, while losing their life, they find it. But is this a practice of the average Christian? Do his feet know the way to the homes of the blind, the tortured and the friend less? There is a day coming when many of us shall wish that every penny we have given to the poor had been a pound; when those who have begged from us on behalf of the suffering and the ignorant, but of whose importunities we have often complained, will be accounted our best benefactors; and when it will be more valuable to us to remember one hour passed in the garret of the poor than a hundred spent at the tables of the rich. " Inasmuch as ye have done it unto one of the least of these My brethren, ye have done it unto Me."
* A.V., "love of God our Saviour towards man." ** "The practical paradox, that the age in which the claims of humanity were most strongly asserted is also the age in which human nature was reduced to its lowest terms, that the age of tolerance, philanthropy, and enlightenment was also the age of materialism, individualism, and skepticism, is explicable only if we remember that both equally spring out of the negative form taken by the first assertion of human freedom."
"As the individual thus fell back upon himself, throwing off all relations to that which seemed to be external, the specific religious and social ideas of earlier days lost power over him; and their place was taken by the abstract idea of God and the abstract idea of the equality and fraternity of men, ideas which seemed to be higher and nobler because they were more general, but which for that very reason were emptied of all definite meaning, as well as of all vital power to hold in check the lusts and greed's of man's lower nature. Thus the ambitious but vague proclamation of the religion of nature and the rights of man was closely associated with a theory which was reducing man to a mere animal individual, a mere subject of sensations and appetites, incapable either of religion or of morality. For an ethics which is more than a word, and a religion which is more than an aspiration, imply definite relations of men to each other and to God, and all such relations were now rejected as inconsistent with the freedom of the individual. The French Revolution was the practical demonstration that the mere general idea of religion is not a religion, and that the mere general idea of a social unity is not a state; but that such abstractions, inspiring as they may be as weapons of attack upon the old system, leave nothing behind to build up the new one, except the unchained passions of the natural man." - E. CAIRD, Hegel, pp. 19, 20.
*** Compare DORNER, Christliche Sittcnlehlre, p. 469: "There is something holy in poverty. The poor are the altar of the Church. But there is no holiness in beggary."
**** "Those are ripe for charity who arc withered by age or impotency, -especially if maimed in following their calling; for such are industry's martyrs, at least her confessors. Add to these those that with diligence fight against poverty, though neither conquer till death make it a drawn battle. Expect not, but prevent, their craving of thee; for God forbid the heavens should never rain till the earth first opens her mouth, seeing some grounds will sooner burn than chap! The House of Correction is the fittest hospital for those cripples whose legs are lame through their own laziness."--FULLER, The Holy and Profane State.
***** "The obligation of philanthropy is for all ages, but if we consider the particular modes of philanthropy which Christ prescribed to His followers, we shall find that they were suggested by the special conditions of that age. The same spirit of love, which dictated them, working in this age upon the same problems, would find them utterly insufficient. No man who loves his kind can in these days rest content with waiting as a servant upon human misery, when it is in so many cases possible to anticipate and avert it. Prevention is better than cure, and it is now clear to all that a large part of human suffering is preventible by improved social arrangements. Charity will now, id it be genuine fix upon this enterprise as greater, more wisely and permanently beneficial, and therefore more Christian than the other. It will not, indeed, neglect the lower task of relieving and consoling those who, whether through the errors and unskilful arrangements of society or through causes not yet preventible, have actually fallen into calamity. . . . But when it has done all which the New Testament enjoins, it will feel that its task is not half fulfilled. When the sick man has been visited and everything done which skill and assiduity can do to cure him, modern charity will go on to consider the causes of his malady, what noxious influence besetting his life, what contempt of the laws of health in his diet or habits, may have caused it, and then to inquire whether others incur the same dangers and may be warned in time. When the starving man has been relieved, modern charity inquires whether any fault in the social system deprived him of his share of nature's bounty, any unjust advantage taken by the strong over the weak, any rudeness or want of culture in himself wrecking his virtue and "his habits of thrift."-Ecce Homo.
