ranean and far inland, the impediments to a broader social intercourse, hitherto raised by local speech, local custom, local religion, and local habits of thought, were swept away. Throughout the vast world thus gathered under a single government the rights of citizenship were conferred upon large and increasing numbers without regard to descent, and sometimes without reference to property. In contrast with the older tribal and national narrowness, how stimulating it is to hear Paul the apostle, in a far-off province of the Roman Empire, stay the hand of authority by uttering the magic formula: "I am a Roman citizen!" § 125. But this great circle of communities waxed and waned like the oriental peoples. In the later, as in the earlier, civilization the abuses of cleavage eventually outweighed its benefits; and the pressure of militant invaders became irresistible. The soil was gathered up in the hands of a landowning class (13); and since all available territory in Europe, Asia, and Africa had been conquered and occupied, there was no further opportunity for colonizing unappropriated lands with poor men. The continents were, in fact, full of savage and barbarian tribes, many of whom were themselves restlessly in search of new homes; and the declining military power of Rome was unequal to the farther extension of her empire. It is true that the territory embraced in classic civilization was not fully settled nor improved. The population was no more overcrowded with reference to the standing room and natural resources afforded by the land than the population of modern countries. But, like modern countries, and like ancient Israel and her neighbors, the classic world held its unused soil at a price. Whoever wanted to invest capital in projects of any kind had first to pay into private hands either a lump sum, or an annual rent, for bare location; and then submit to annual public taxation. The public revenue system, having come down from the earlier, nomadic period of social development, was ill adjusted to the needs of settled society. The man who held land out of use at a price was taxed little or nothing; and was thus encouraged to speculate in unused natural opportunities. The man who wished to invest capital in planting the ground, or in putting up dwelling houses and stores, was discouraged by the same policy. If a heavy tax had been resting upon land values, it would have been impossible for luxurious Roman senators and Athenian aristocrats to hold land out of use; while the expenses confronting the investment of capital would have been greatly reduced. But no such change was made, nor even thought of. The multiplying population stived and sweltered, without secure means of a livelihood, without property, and consequently without patriotism. In the last half of the second century before Christ, the Gracchi met death at the hands of the upper classes in a poor but sincere attempt to remedy the economic situation; and they stand for perhaps the greatest wisdom that classic civilization ever brought to bear upon the social problem. "Soldiers of Italy!' cried Tiberius Gracchus, "You are called lords of the earth; but you do not possess a single clod to call your own!" In the age of the Gracchi, indeed, the Roman army had already entered upon that course of deterioration which was at last to prove fatal to Rome herself. The sup ply of patriotic soldiers-men with spirit to defend their country was running short; and the ranks were being filled up with slaves, poverty stricken freemen, and barbarians. The latter element grew more and more in numbers, until at last Rome defended herself against the barbarians by hiring barbarians to fight her battles against their own brothers. What wonder is it that the barbarians at length overwhelmed the classic world in a mighty flood, and subverted the second great civilization in the world's history? At this period all the moral evils with which the prophets of Israel had contended were prevalent. Everywhere the multiplying lower class was partly in personal bondage and partly free. But the upper class monopo lized the earth; and whether the members of the lower class were free in form or not, they were nowhere free in fact. They lived in a world which was itself the property of a class; and their immediate bodily needs forced them to compete with each other for the economic favor of that class. Between the upper and nether millstones of taxation and monopoly, the lower classes were in misery. Their labor produced wealth of all kinds; but they consumed little of their own products. As in oriental civilization and in present day society, this appropriated labor was more and more diverted from the production of capital and useful wealth to the production of luxury for the upper class. Labor is diverted from capital to luxury in the proportion that it becomes unprofitable to invest new capital in business. And as luxury and poverty increase, the evil personal conduct growing directly out of these conditions also increases. The sins of poverty and the sins of wealth come hand in hand. It is as idle to charge the decline and fall of classic civilization to individual moral decay as to charge the like in the case of oriental civilization, or to say that the evils of the primitive struggle for existence were due to the lack of gentleness and good will. Many people, however, are still of the ancient persuasion. "The collapse of the Roman power through loss of moral virility," says Professor Peabody, "is the most solemn proof which history provides that righteousness alone exalteth a people" (14). But if our contention is worth anything, the decline of Rome was itself the cause, not the effect, of evil conduct. If Rome collapsed because of the unrighteousness of her people, it follows that she must previously have risen as a consequence of righteousness. But if we are to speak scientifically of personal conduct as connected with social progress and social decline, we must criticise our categories more carefully, and revise our definitions. § 126. In this declining civilization, with its internal and external troubles, a new institution gradually arose the Christian Church. Christianity took its rise on the soil of the oriental world in a territory then ruled by Rome the little country of Judea, which was all that remained of the old national kingdom of Israel. Striking its roots into the soil of the Jewish faith, and centering about the person of Jesus the prophet of Nazareth, the new religion presently spread throughout the classic world. § 127. At the opening of the Christian era both upper and lower classes among the Jews were anxiously expecting the king long foretold by the prophets. He was to be the Messiah, the annointed, or chosen, of Yahweh. Upon his advent was to be established the great Messianic kingdom the kingdom of God, or of Heaven. The Messiah was to be the earthly king; but the real King was to be Yahweh, god of all. The glorious times of David and Solomon were to return with added glory. Jerusalem was to take the place of Rome and of old Babylon as the imperial city of the world. All men were to be subject to the Jews, and to serve Yahweh, the King of heaven and earth. Disease, war, and famine were to be abolished. Rich Jews were to become richer; while the lower classes anticipated an era of "righteousness" and "justice" wherein their oppressions and hardships were to cease (15). § 128. A careful study of the books of the gospel seems to show that the message of Jesus resolves itself under three general heads: 1: The Proclamation of the Kingdom. 2: The Characterization of the King. § 129. By the proclamation of the kingdom Jesus connected his preaching with the current hopes of his race. This was the earliest element of his message. According to the most primitive gospel records, Jesus began his public ministry with the words: "The time is fulfilled; and the kingdom of God is at hand. Repent; and believe the good news" (Mark 1:15). According to the Matthew-account his preaching opened with the same thought: "Repent, for the kingdom of heaven is at hand" (Matthew 4:17). These phrases, "kingdom of God" and "kingdom of heaven," are practically synonymous; and they occur frequently in the reports of the words of Jesus. § 130.- In taking up the second element of this message the characterization of the Divine King-we must once more turn back the pages of history. It is a commonplace that the predominant conception of deity in the literature of the Old Testament represents a much harsher and more violent being than the predominant conception in the books of the New Testament. The older literature, indeed, frequently reflects the most violent ideas of deity. But in the later literature we are conscious of entering a different atmosphere. In the New Testament we find the universal God of love. Now, the newer conception has become the common property of mankind through the personality of Jesus; and in order to begin to estimate this element of his preaching it is necessary to do something more than study Jesus himself. We have learned that in the earlier stages of social evolution it is the heads of families, the leaders of the "fathers' houses," who alone constitute the legal element in the community. This is a general sociological truth. The supremacy of fatherhood in politics obtained throughout the entire oriental civilization. It was the law at first in classic civilization; and it also obtained at first among the ancestors of our own western peoples. The conception of fatherhood is at first closely associated with the idea of protection against enemies. It was the fathers in early days that were the chief warriors and defenders of society. When they went to war on behalf of their families and homes they went in their paternal character. They loved their kindred after a fashion; but their love was rough as compared with what we now understand by the word; and it could hardly be extended to include strangers. We have seen that the ancient gods were developed out of dead chiefs and clan leaders; and it is not at all remarkable, therefore, that the gods of early men should be |