"I am the way, the truth and the Life." -John, 14:6.

The clear meaning of the propositions quoted, stripped of all theological traditions, is that it is possible for the individual to so develop the life "in himself," which is possessed by all "sons of God," that he shall be able to control directly or indirectly all of the material things necessary for the proper development of his Life for this or any other world.

Otherwise it is not true that the Life is more greater, more powerful-than the meat as the body is more-greater, more powerful-than the raiment.

A few strong individuals like the Nazarene Himself may be able to develop this conquering Life "in himself" with but little or no help from his fellowmen; but without social coöperation on a large plan the development of this psychic power in the mass of mankind must be delayed indefinitely. Hence, the necessity for the sociological phase of this ideal of Jesus.

This phase is clearly brought out in the teachings of Jesus concerning the Kingdom of Heaven, or, according to the later translations, the Kingdom of the Heavens.

The Book of Matthew is distinctly the exponent of the Messianic Kingdom. The term "Kingdom of the Heavens " occurs in it thirty-three times, and nowhere else in the New Testament. "The Kingdom of God" also occurs five times in Matthew, and many times in other parts of the New Testament, but with a less definite signification, sometimes meaning the same thing as the "Kingdom of the Heavens," but usually having either a narrower meaning, as where it refers to the church or "Ecclesia," as a body, or a broader meaning as a state of blessedness or ethical and spiritual condition resulting from divine rule.

The prophecies alleged to refer to this Kingdom may have some weight on this point:

"And the government shall be upon his shoulder."-Isaiah, 9:6.

"And the stone that smote the image became a great mountain and filled the whole earth."-Daniel, 2:35.

"For the earth shall be full of the knowledge of the Lord."-Isaiah, 11:9.

"And the rebuke of his people shall he take away from off all the earth."Isaiah, 25:8.

"The kingdoms of this world are become the kingdoms of our Lord and of His Christ."-Revelations, 11:16.

But the testimony of Jesus Himself as reported by Luke is conclusive:

"The Kingdom of God is among you.' -Luke, 17:21.

"Among" instead of "within" is a marginal reading and is preferred by the later translations. That this is the preferable rendering is clear from the fact that Jesus was addressing the Pharisees who were then attacking Him, and who, according to His own statement else where could not be said to accommodate much of the Kingdom of God at that time as they were full of "dead men's bones."

When Jesus said in John, 18:36, "My Kingdom is not of this world," He referred to quality and source of power and not to location, as is clear from the last clause of the verse: But now is my kingdom not from hence."

66

Having determined that the "Kingdom of the Heavens" always and the "Kingdom of God" sometimes, depending upon the connection, refers to a condition of human society on this earth, it remains to show what relation this Kingdom has to the economic life of the people.

The first fundamental principle of this Kingdom was announced in connection with the psychological teaching quoted above as from Matthew, 6:26, and shows the necessary connection between the psychology and sociology of the Kingdom by insisting upon the organization and establishment of a social and economic polity among those seeking to use their psychic power to conquer material conditions in these words:

"But seek ye first the Kingdom of God and His righteousness and all these things shall be added unto you."-Matthew, 6:33.

But that this was a social and not merely an individual exhortation is evident from the expression, "For after all these (material things) do the Gentiles seek." As if he had said, "You Jews who have had the law of Moses to teach you how to provide for the material wants of all should be able to conduct your

'earth."

With this reasonable interpretation we find the Mosaic principle of land tenure approved in the matter of providing homes for all.

The application of this principle, howthe common ownership of land in which ever, is enlarged to include reasonably all of the then disinherited, together with the land, should inherit all the earth as the few rich who were then monopolizing a common brotherhood property, regulated only as to equitable possession, instead of the private ownership by allotment under the Mosaic law, which, although better than land monopoly, resulted in much contention about titles and landmarks.

Jesus approves the Mosaic prohibition against taking interest in this same con

nection:

"Lend, hoping nothing again."-Luke, 6:35.

But here again He transcends the Mosaic ideal by advising the lender not to exact or expect the return of the principal.

He approves gratuitous lending to the needy, as provided in the Mosaic law:

"From him that would borrow of thee turn thou not away."-Matthew, 5:42.

Again He goes beyond the Mosaic law by leaving out all limitations as to the circumstances of the borrower, while the ancient law applied only in cases of

distress.

He approves the principle of cancellation of debts in the prayer:

"Forgive us our debts as we forgive our debtors."-Matthew, 6:12.

All Bible scholars agree that "debts" here include financial obligations, and there is a strong suspicion that the ritual version which uses "trespasses," which word is not found in either of the two forms of the prayer, was influenced by the Mammon worship that filled the debtors' prisons of the times in which it was made.

His cleansing of the temple near the close of His career, which was one of the chief causes of his crucifixion, was an additional approval of the Mosaic principle of commercial equality and the climax of His condemnation of Mammon worship.

This was not an act of religious reformation, as such, but of commercial reformation. He did not call the moneychangers and salesmen blasphemers. He called them "thieves."

The cause of His severe accusation deserves notice. The priests and moneylenders had made a tax which was levied in the time of Moses for a special occasion (Exodus, 30:13), a permanent institution, making it a temple tax which the two or three millions who attended the three great annual feasts at Jerusalem must pay before they could worship. Jesus condemned this tax as illegal. (Matthew, 24:27).

Not only was the tax illegal, but it was required to be paid in the Hebrew halfshekel, which, on account of the Jews having lost their sovereignty and power to coin money, had become very scarce. (Smith's Bible dictionary-"Shekel ").

The people were compelled to exchange their every-day Roman coin for this Hebrew half-shekel, and from the best that can be known of the circumstances, it is probable that the moneychangers were able to exact ten for one in the exchange, and did so.

Jesus announced the principle of economic equality in the parable of the vineyard workers to the effect that where all are willing to labor as ability may permit and necessity require, their material compensation should be the same, regardless of actual time spent in labor.

Upon this parable Ruskin in his Unto This Last founded his economic ideal, in which he insists that there can be no political economy until Economics is based upon Life as the only true form of wealth.

There are those who argue that these economic principles are practicable under no circumstances; and others who insist that they are practicable under all circumstances.

Both are wrong as regards complete compliance with these principles.

Jesus Himself made the social seeking of the Kingdom of God (not its complete establishment) a condition of the individual's ability to live up to this economic ideal; and even He found it necessary to modify the economic precepts given to His disciples on account of changed social conditions.

After the Sermon on the Mount the principles of the Kingdom were so willingly and widely accepted by the oppressed classes that He spoke of the Kingdom of the Heavens suffering violence; and He sent out His disciples with instructions to provide neither silver nor gold nor brass in their purses, nor scrip for their journey, neither two coats, neither shoes nor yet staves. (Matthew, 10:910.) The same precepts were given to the Seventy as to the Twelve.

These precepts were then practicable because the incipient brotherhood had become so extensive that there were

groups of converts everywhere to receive and provide for the missionaries.

After the crisis in His career, however, following the rejection, He gave instructions of a different sort without retracting any of the social or economic principles set forth in the organic law of the Kingdom:

"But now he that hath a purse let him take it, and likewise his scrip: and he that hath no sword let him sell his garment and buy one."-Luke, 22:35–36.

Here, it seems, the disciples were forced back into the individualistic struggle which was so fierce that not only were they justified in returning to the holding of private property for self-protection, but were even permitted to provide weapons for self-defence.

It should appear from the foregoing that instead of the New Dispensation abrogating the economic principles of the Mosaic system it introduced a still higher ideal of economic and social life,

for Jesus Himself said:

"Think not that I am come to destroy the law or the prophets. I am come, not to destroy, but to fulfill."

In view of this proclamation Christians could as consistently excuse themselves for theft, murder, and every other

crime under ban of the Decalogue, on the ground that they are "not under the law, but under grace," as to justify themselves for defending land monopoly, interest, and other extortions under forms of law.

Excuse may be made for not living up to the economic ideal of Jesus, and for even being forced by circumstances into violation of the economic laws of Moses on the ground that there is no sociological organization representing the Kingdom of the Heavens to enable the individual to live the new economic life; but Peter's

temporary apostasy is moral heroism compared with the chronic infidelity of those who justify the annullment of the economic law of Moses, and brand the economic law of Jesus as an Utopian

I.

of the small but steadily growing band of American cartoonists and illustrators who place moral idealism above all material or personal considerations, and who are willing to make great sacrifices in order that they may be true to their

of their spiritual nature.

Like Gerald Massey the poet, like Maxim Gorky and Jack London, the novelists, he learned to think seriously and fundamentally after he had fallen under the wheel of our much-vaunted

modern

commercialism. Gerald Massey, it will be remembered, when a little sickly boy was forced to labor fourteen hours a day amid the unsanitary environment of the English factories, in a desperate battle to keep the wolf of starvation from the wretched little home. It was seeing and feeling all the bitterness of extreme poverty, and beholding with horrordilated eyes the degradation that companions dire poverty when it exists side by side with wealth swollen to abnormal proportions by injustice, privilege, corruption and indirection, that called forth many of his most powerful and conscience-arresting poems. The knowledge gained by experience and observation of the nation-destroying influence incident to such injustice and inequality, and the great new hope born of the ever-broadening horizon which progressive democracy revealed, gave us such stanzas as this:

"When the heart of one-half the world doth beat
Akin to the brave and the true,
And the tramp of democracy's earth-quaking feet
Goes thrilling the wide world through-
We should not be crouching in darkness and dust,
And dying like slaves in the night;
But big with the might of the inward 'must'
We should battle for freedom and right!
Our fathers are praying for pauper pay,

Our mothers with death's kiss are white;
Our sons are the rich man's serfs by day,
And our daughters his slaves by night."

It takes the lash of adversity, the goad of hunger and want, to awaken most of us to a sensible realization of the fruits of injustice and inequality and the moral responsibility devolving on every man in a free state to think earnestly and funda

mentally on all great political and economic problems and to be eternally vigilant, in order that privilege or class interests may not gain a foothold of vantage and thus injuriously affect the interests of all the people. And in this respect Gordon Nye was no exception to the rule.

II.

He was born on a farm and his early years were spent in the wholesome atmosphere of country life. He attended the free schools until he was fifteen years of age. Then he did any kind of work he could obtain, sometimes selling papers,