Labor Issues
In this as in everything else,
Russell and his associates interpreted current events as fulfilled or
fulfilling prophecy. He said that he had been doing that since 1875 which seems
perfectly plausible.[1] Russell’s
interpretation of social and labor movements derived entirely from Adventist
and Millenarian belief. During the Worchester Conference in 1872, organized to
examine date specific predictions including Barbour’s, the Paris Commune was
presented as a Last-Times event.
If one looked to social unrest as a
sign of Christ’s impending judgment, they were easy to find. A riot or
insurrection occurred in the United States nearly every year since 1850. Some
were anti-immigrant, some had underlying religious elements, some were over
restrictions on liquor and beer sales; many were over labor and social
injustices. Most often historians write about difficulties between large
employers such as the railroads or meat packers, but the problems extended to
small business and farm employment. A correspondent for The Restitution
sermonized: “How about the profession of honesty which withholds from your poor
neighbor, year after year, the ten, fifteen or twenty dollars due him for
labor, under the flimsy plea of hard times, when the price of your tea, coffee
and tobacco for one year would more than pay the debt.”[2]
Wages and working conditions were
deplorable. Shop girls turned to prostitution to supplement wages that did not
cover their basic needs. The forty-hour work week was a distant dream, worker
safety was nonexistent. Labor grievances often turned violent. In April 1859,
striking brickyard workers in St. Louis, Missouri, armed themselves and fired
on police. Two officers and some of the strikers were wounded. The mob
reassembled the next day, and the Army was called in to quell the strike. A
pattern of labor violence was established, and it escalated until labor unrest
was seen as an element of Last Time events. Russell and his associates saw the
Railroad Insurrection of 1877 in that light.
Relation to secular society
They
viewed world conditions through the lens of prophecy. It is not an uncommon
phenomenon for someone to see the era in which they live as worse than other
ages. Writers have quoted Hesiod, Socrates, and Aristotle as believing
similarly. However, those quotations are of recent manufacture. As unethical as
this is, they did so to support the view point that the current age is worse
than past ages. Greeks looked backwards to a Golden Age. New Testament
Christians and believers through successive ages look forward to a restored
paradise. The New Testament view is that the last days are crisis years. So
Russell and his associates looked to contemporary events for proof they were
living at the end of the age.
Their
response to what they saw can be parsed into three areas: Christian
behavior; behavior of non-believers; and
world affairs.
Christian Behavior
Christians
were to be holy and take the Gospel message to their neighbors. They were to
maintain a correct relationship to the state. Russell discussed a Christian’s
relationship to governments in 1886. Writing in The Plan of the Ages he
said:
Man’s
extremity will become God's opportunity,[3]
and “the desire of all nations shall come” – the Kingdom of God, in power and
great glory. (Hag. 2:7) Knowing this to be the purpose of God, neither Jesus
nor the apostles interfered with earthly rulers in any way. On the contrary,
they taught the Church to submit to these powers, even though they often
suffered under their abuse of power. They taught the Church to obey the laws,
and to respect those in authority because of their office, even if they were
not personally worthy of esteem; to pay their appointed taxes, and, except
where they conflicted with God's laws (Acts 4:19; 5:29), to offer no resistance
to any established law. (Rom. 13:1-7; Matt. 22:21) The Lord Jesus and the
apostles and the early Church were all law-abiding, though they were separate
from, and took no share in, the governments of this world.
Though
the powers that be, the governments of this world, were ordained or arranged
for by God, that mankind might gain a needed experience under them, yet the Church,
the consecrated ones who aspire to office in the coming Kingdom of God, should
neither covet the honors and the emoluments of office in the kingdoms of this
world, nor should they oppose these powers. They are fellow citizens and heirs
of the heavenly kingdom (Eph. 2:19), and as such should claim only such rights
and privileges under the kingdoms of this world as are accorded to aliens.
Their mission is not to help the world to improve its present condition, nor to
have anything to do with its affairs at present. To attempt to do so would be
but a waste of effort; for the world's course and its termination are both
clearly defined in the Scriptures and are fully under the control of him who in
his own time will give us the kingdom. The influence of the true Church is now
and always has been small – so small as to count practically nothing
politically; but however great it might appear, we should follow the example and
teaching of our Lord and the apostles. Knowing that the purpose of God is to
let the world fully test its own ability to govern itself, the true Church
should not, while in it, be of the world. The saints may influence the world
only by their separateness from it, by letting their light shine; and thus
through their lives the spirit of truth reproves
the world. Thus – as peaceable, orderly obeyers and commenders of every
righteous law, reprovers of lawlessness and sin, and pointers forward to the
promised Kingdom of God and the blessings to be expected under it, and not by
the method commonly adopted of mingling in politics and scheming with the world
for power, and thus being drawn into wars and sins and the general degradation –
in glorious chastity should the prospective Bride of the Prince of Peace be a
power for good, as her Lord's representative in the world.
The
Church of God should give its entire attention and effort to preaching the
Kingdom of God, and to the advancement of the interests of that Kingdom
according to the plan laid down in the Scriptures. If this is faithfully done, there
will be no time nor [sic] disposition to dabble in the politics of present
governments. The Lord had no time for it; the apostles had no time for it; nor
have any of the saints who are following their example.
The
early Church, shortly after the death of the apostles, fell a prey [sic] to
this very temptation. The preaching of the coming Kingdom of God, which would
displace all earthly kingdoms, and of the crucified Christ as the heir of that Kingdom,
was unpopular, and brought with it persecution, scorn and contempt. But some
thought to improve on God's plan, and, instead of suffering, to get the Church
into a position of favor with the world. By a combination with earthly powers
they succeeded. As a result Papacy was developed, and in time became the
mistress and queen of nations. – Rev. 17:3-5; 18:7.
By
this policy everything was changed: instead of suffering, came honor; instead
of humility, came pride; instead of truth, came error; and instead of being
persecuted, she became the persecutor of all who condemned her new and illegal
honors.[4]
[Analysis
here]
Social Conditions
In the early 1880s most Watch
Tower comments on social issues reflected events in the United States. Writing
in the May 1882 issue of Zion’s Watch Tower, J. C. Sunderlin used social
conditions as proof that they were living in the Last Days. Many American intellectuals
adopted Darwinism without understanding it. They suggested that evolution meant
improvement; the world was improving, and so were the people living in it. Sunderlin
disagreed:
The
wise (of this world) say the world is growing better and better. Let us look at
that for a moment ... . We will ask the questions, and you can answer
them for yourselves. Can men leave their buildings open now more safely than
formerly? Are there less locks and safes sold? Is there less murder and
bloodshed than usual? Are there fewer prisons and convicts, less theft and arson?
Are the instruments of war fewer and less formidable, are there less revolvers
sold? [sic] Do men, by their actions, show that they love each other
better than formerly? Do they legislate to benefit the poor more? Do capitalists
make it easier for the laborer? Do they love the laborer (or his labor) and
give him a nice, large slice from the loaf? Does the laborer love the
capitalist, and do they work for each other’s interest? Are the churches purer
and better and less worldly, plainer and more simple, and true and good, so
that the worldly man is rebuked by their good works and has he confidence more
than formerly in church members? Are there no grasping monopolies; if so, are
there less of them, and are they working for the general good of mankind?
There is much here that is undeniable,
though American intellectuals, including clergy continued to parrot the idea of
social progress into the 20th Century, often to their embarrassment.
One of these was Ephraim Llewellyn Eaton, a Methodist clergyman. Eaton and
Russell debated in 1903, and Eaton did not fare well. He published a book in
1911 to defend his beliefs, writing:
Before
the birth of Christ the world was a military camp, and wars were waged for
conquest and reprisal. The Christian spirit has so far permeated the world that
it would not to-day tolerate another war for either of these causes. Japan yielded
to the Christian moral sense of the world when she relinquished her demand for
indemnity of Russia; and America wrote the parable of the Good Samaritan into
the law of nations when it espoused the cause of Cuba. If there shall be any
war in the future, its only cause can be fear, distrust, or misunderstanding;
and Christianity is rapidly making it impossible for one nation to fear,
distrust or misunderstand another.
Japan did not “yield to the
Christian moral sense of the world.” It yielded to political influence. Justifying
the Spanish American War as writing Jesus parable into international law seems disingenuous.
In any event, the events of 1914 proved Eaton wrong. The entire philosophy of
social improvement either by religion or evolution was and is false.
He was correct. Locks and safes had
proliferated. Many were exhibited at the World’s Columbian Exhibition in 1876.
The official report said:
Viewing the best American safes, with
their massive casework, heavy bolts, and ingenious lock-construction, we find a
wonderful contrast with the American safe of fifty years ago. What was then
called a safe was little more than a box with a hollow frame of heavy
sheet-iron, between the outer and inner walls of which was deposited either
(so-called) asbestos, plaster, or some other preparation deemed sufficient for
protection in an ordinary fire. It was commonly made with corner- and
edge-bands, which were riveted with ordinary rivets, and the whole outer
surface of the safe, except the bottom, laid at regular intervals with
cast-iron knobs, to add to the appearance of weight and strength. The locks were of the plainest character; and it is believed
an expert burglar of the present day could enter them with very ordinary tools
in a very few minutes. One of these “safes” is
occasionally brought to light at public sale, where they are so little esteemed
for their powers of protection as to make their price not greatly above that of
a wooden box of similar dimensions.[5]
The proliferation of more secure locks and safe testify
to an increase in burglary, not to an increase in Christian morality. Neither
was that of arson. Sunderlin would have read many reports of arson and other
crimes. A single example will do, since we’re not writing a history of American
social troubles. One of the New York papers from the era reported: ““Wednesday,
the grand jury presented nine indictments, viz.: Assault with intent to ravish
[ie: rape], one; burglary, first degree, one; burglary, second degree, one; burglary,
third degree, three; arson, second degree, one; maltreatment of a girl under
ten years of age, one.”[6]
Sunderlin included gun issues as a
sign of the last days and proof that the world was not improving. This was the
era of wild-west gunfights. They are overblown by media presentations and
cowboy movies which owe more to 19th Century dime novels than accurate
history. But they did happen. On October 26, 1881, a few months before
Sunderlin wrote, Tombstone, Arizona Territory, walked into history over events
at the O. K. Corral. But we think this is not what Sunderlin had in mind. Gun violence,
especially with a pistol, was much closer to home. In a speech dated to October
20, 1880, Emery A. Storrs [1835-1885], a noted Republican politician and
orator, touched on the gang and political violence in New York City, blaming it
on corrupt Democrat operatives:
All
parties represent some interest. What does that party represent? Not the manufacturing
interest. They have sought the destruction of it since 1832. It is not the
financial interests of the country. They would overturn our entire system. Is
it the educational interest? [Laughter.] That’s a solemn question. I grieve to
see it treated with so much levity. [Laughter.] Is it the moral interest? As
representatives of great moral ideas, how does the average Democratic
procession in the City of New York look? [Prolonged laughter.] I am constrained
to think they don't represent any interest. [A Voice – The whiskey interest.”]
My friend is mistaken; that’s not an interest. That is a calamity. They
represent every single one of the calamities. They represent a stuffed
ballot-box; they represent the assassination of revenue officers.[7]
New York gangs were part of the
Democrat machine in the 1880s and full of violence. This is history, not a
modern political statement, though similarities to contemporary issues found in
Sunderlin’s remarks are self-evident. Civil War Reconstruction, really the
military occupation of former Confederate States, ended in 1877. Violence erupted
in the South. Democrats were free to reassert political dominance and abuse and
marginalize former slaves. At the end of the Reconstruction Era the South was
in the hands of Republican voters most of whom were former slaves. Democrats
did not end that, couldn’t not end that, without turning to violence. In
Alabama, ninety thousand Republican votes were cast in 1872; there were almost
none in 1878. Emery Storrs pointed to the cause: “Terrorism did it, fraud did
it, the false count and the no-count did it, the flaming cabin did it, the shot-gun did it.” In 1872 there were 41,000, Republican
voters in Arkansas, and in 1878 they cast 115 votes. Storrs said: “The shot-gun, terrorism, fraud, violence,
did it.” In 1872 Republicans in
Mississippi, Republicans cast 82,000 votes, but in 1878 they cast 1,168. Storrs
said: “The shot-gun reduced it; the bludgeon reduced
it; the gentle ministrations of the White Leaguers and the Ku-Klux reduced it.
His remarks were partisan, made in a political year, but they are accurate.[8]
[1] C. T. Russell: God's Chosen People - Part II, Overland
Monthly, March 1910, page 323.
[2] J. I . Wince: Christian Conduct and Conversation, The
Restitution, May 21, 1879.
[3] The expression “Man’s extremity will become God’s
opportunity” traces back to at least 1629 and is found in Adam’s Works published
that year. Defoe used it, and in a 1798 George Whitfield described the
phrase as “an old saying.” [An Extract of a Letter from a Gentleman in Ireland;
to Mr. William Thompson, London, page 8.] It was still in common usage in
the late 19th Century.
[4] C. T. Russell: The Plan of the Ages, Millennial
Dawn, volume 1, Tower Publishing, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, 1886, pages
266-268.
[5] F.
A. Walker: United States Centennial Commission, International Exhibition, 1878.
Reports and Awards – Group XV. , J. B. Lippencott, Philadelphia, 1877, page 4.
[6] Circuit Court and Oyer and Terminer, The Saratoga,
New York, Sentinel, October 7, 1880.
[7] The Great Republican Speeches of the Campaign of
1880, Staten Island Publishing Company, Stapleton, New York, 1881, pages 38ff.
