A Devotion to Truth and the Discovery Of It

by Wallace Klinck

Ponder the words of Canada’s Wallace Klinck to correspondents on the difference between Christianity and other religions and Social Credit concepts. Moral, ethical behaviour cannot be conducted by a ‘nation’, a ‘nation’s leaders’ a ‘group’, a ‘collective’ - only individuals can think and act in this way.

Wallace Klinck writes: “My understanding that any religious "affiliations" that Douglas may have had would have been more with the Church of England. But I think that his approach to the subject went far deeper than advocacy for any specific religious denomination. Jesus taught us about relationships and the fundamental underlying principles or rules applying to relationships as timeless laws inherent in the very nature of existence. As I understand the matter, Douglas considered this to be of the Canon that governs the Universe. My understanding is that "the Kingdom is within" and that the "Church" or "Body of Christ" is made up of individuals wherever they may be found who are inspired by the Truth which alone can make us Free. I don't think that this body of "Believers" is bounded by any formal human organisations.

If what Jesus taught was Reality Incarnate then no artificial human designations would hold. If one who is so inspired may be found anywhere, then there is no reason to exclude any individual regardless of where he or she may have originated or find themselves situated in the world. Christianity is by definition universal. As Douglas stated, Christian principles are either a part of the very warp and woof of the Universe or they are just another interesting set of ideas. In which case we might well carry our search for truth elsewhere. Obviously, Douglas was convinced of the validity of the Christian position…

If any persons of other faiths are of truly Good Will (of the Spirit and motivated by the Law of Love) then they should instinctively be attracted to the Social Credit message assuming that its principles are indeed part of Reality. Of course being often steeped in cultural traditions and blinded or restrained by such exposure can be an impediment - but should not be for any genuine and open seeker of Truth. "In Whose Service is Perfect Freedom."

Ultimately every individual must seek his own path. I am aware that the formal Churches have observed certain practices and events that no doubt pre-date the Christian era but what do these formalities have to do with the pure message of Love taught by Jesus? Did he not say that the Law would be fulfilled if we love God and each other? Personally, I have never felt comfortable about placing my allegiances with any formal religious organisation established by men and women in the world. I believe that Douglas's thought transcended such limitations or loyalties. I never had the impression that Jesus had any regard for formalities or rituals which might be called ‘vain oblations’. I am not aware that any claim is made that "Christianity" really began with the birth of Christ - rather that what He taught was inherent in the everlasting nature of existence going back to the foundations of the Universe.

Social Crediters, I believe, are not only willing but anxious to dialogue with any other living receptive soul but in doing so they cannot misrepresent, violate or desert the principles which they are convinced are good and true. Others are entirely free to respond as they choose. Social Crediters spread the "word" and let the chips fall as they may. Frankly, having had an exposure to essential Social Credit philosophy and policy,
I cannot understand why any rational person of Good Will could find offence with them inasmuch as they point toward a more Abundant Life for All. Those, however, who are convinced that mankind is irredeemably evil or can only be purified by imposed work - the more the better - will have difficulty with the Social Credit Idea. That is a problem with which they will have to grapple and involves some major battles of the Mind for which they are themselves responsible.

The task of Social Crediters is to break through the wall of misrepresentation and slander propagated in opposition to the ideas of Douglas and Social Credit by those adversaries who hold such puritanical and essentially supremacist views and have traditionally shaped Establishment institutions and false values through their control of the sources of information. Social Credit must involve itself in breaking the Seals which have bound up the Truth (as we perceive it to be).

To another Wallace wrote:

“I assumed the discussion at this point to be within the parameters of the Christian milieu. You will note that… I did not use the word "affiliation" but rather "denomination" and this was used in the context of Christian thought not in the context of a pantheon of all historical religions.

By this I meant that Douglas's concepts of the Christian message transcended advocacy for only formal Catholicism in its variants and Protestantism in its many sects and/or schisms and their various common or conflicting interpretations of the essence of Life. I was making no specific or general endorsements of these or of the various non-Christian "religions", past or present.

Reality stands above the capacity of mere mortals to fully comprehend it. As I understand the matter Jesus brought a message of Love and the manner or quality of relationships which must inevitably follow from the practice of such Love - which latter by definition and spirit must embrace a devotion to Truth and the discovery of it.

Life is an abundant unfolding adventure. This has to do with the heart, mind, soul and spirit of the individual and has nothing to do with institutionalised dogma which must always, because of limited scope and rigidity (one might say variable blindness) fall short in this respect. This is why the individual must be free and why Social Credit places such importance on immanent sovereignty and the discovery of the principles of association.

Jesus' message was not applicable to a collectivity but rather it was individualist. A collectivity is a mere abstraction whereas the individual is actual or real as a conscious physical entity. A collectivity of itself can possess no heart, soul, mind or spirit. Individuals having these attributes can act in co-operative unity, for good or bad, within a "collectivity" but only as discrete uniquely-conscious individuals - which is an entirely different matter.

While the Doctrine of the Incarnation and/or that of Trinitarianism are intrinsic to Christian thought I am not sure whether or not there may have been any historical precedents in this regard. In any event what matters is their validity. The Trinitarian aspect instructs regarding the separation, balancing and dispersion of power and the Incarnation relates to the realisation of the Christian message in our actual lives or organic affairs. Hence Social Credit has been described as "Practical Christianity."

I suspect that in actuality we have no significant differences with regard to these issues. Whether because of the cultural milieu of his time and/or by specific intent there is no denial in my mind that Douglas formed his ideas within the embrace of Christian thought and belief.