"with the movement inaugurated by Kingsley and Maurice of the Church of England and denominated Christian socialism? I do not understand that Mr. Farrar has gone so far in his beliefs and declarations as did these churchmen and their followers, and no ecclesiastical condemnation was visited on them."
"I am well aware," replied Westgate, "of the movement in England of which you speak. I am also well aware that, so far as their religious aspect was concerned, the schemes of Maurice and Kingsley failed utterly, as did the purely economic scheme of Robert Owen who preceded them. Indeed, the only socialistic scheme that has ever survived the test of years is the one put forth by the atheistic school of Germany, the one that is growing like a Upas tree to-day. The whole idea of so-called Christian socialism has been condemned by churchmen abroad in language far more severe than any that I have used. Clergymen over there who have resorted to Fabian tracts as a means for exploiting unchristian doctrines are not those who are doing the Lord's work most effectually in the United Kingdom to-day."
The bishop's eyes snapped. Not with anger, but with interest and eagerness. He dearly loved a controversy such as this, and here, evidently, was a foeman worthy of his steel. He started vigorously to make answer to Westgate and then suddenly checked himself. He realized that this was neither the time nor place to enter into an argument on the subject of social philosophy. He contented himself with asking quietly:
"Are you familiar, Mr. Westgate, with the Encyclical issued by the Lambeth Conference, and with the report made by the Joint Commission on the Relations of Capital and Labor to our last General Convention, and, if so, do you agree with the opinion therein expressed that the Church cannot stand officially for or against socialism?"
"I am entirely familiar," was the reply, "with the
