REV. W. R. INGE, D.D., ON FREEDOM AND DISCIPLINE. 255 



country — and of the conditions imposed by it upon its neighbours. 

 But it is not the ideal of the masses anywhere, and would only 

 be accepted by them after a hard struggle. Wliat we usually 

 call socialism is more like individualism run mad. It is anarchic 

 and antinomian, sentimental and emotional, a sort of completely 

 secularized and materialized primitive Christianity. For it is strong 

 in "love of the brethren," and in discountenancing private 

 ambition. It resents all discipline, except that of the trade 

 unions, which is submitted to for the same reason which makes the 

 German democrat submit to military rule — ^viz., because he has 

 enemies whom he wants to conquer or against whom he wants to 

 protect himself. The aspirations of our age in Great Britain 

 have been for a fuller and freer life for the individual. Nation- 

 alism, is, for the revolution, the real enemy ; and it is the enemy 

 because it logically leads to a hierarchical State-socialism, in 

 which the individual is sacrificed to the State, the form of 

 government which above all he dreads. I will not attempt to 

 judge between these rival tendencies. Personally, I would rather 

 be governed by a strong bureaucracy — honest, economical and 

 eflS-cient — than be a prey to the sectional fanaticisms of trade 

 unionists, syndicalists, and what not. But I believe that an 

 omnipotent socialist government would soon throttle all the life 

 out of the people, and I should dread inexpressibly the perhaps 

 inevitable alliance between the bureaucracy and a priesthood. 



I pass to the concluding section of my enquiry. What can we 

 learn from Christ about the relative merits of Freedom and 

 Discipline ? Fundamentally, He was on the side of Freedom, 

 Tertullian says truly and forcibly : " Dominus noster veritatem 

 se, non consuetudinem cognominavit.'^ He sets Himself decidedly 

 against " the tradition of the elders," wherever it comes in 

 conflict with humility, charity, and spiritual sincerity. He 

 must be held to have maintained the rights of the pure and 

 enlightened conscience, not only against the Jewish hierarchy, 

 but against all consecrated tradition and priestly casuistry, 

 not ]east (by anticipation) against that which came to shelter 

 itself under His own name. He deliberately placed Himself 

 in the prophetic succession, appearing before His contemporaries 

 as " the prophet of Nazareth in Galilee." He was, therefore, 

 in the eyes of the Jews, a lay-teacher, whose credentials were 

 personal inspiration. "The Spirit of the Lord is upon me, 

 because the Lord hath anointed me to speak good tidings." It 

 was the champions of authority who declared war to the knife 



s 



