And how did Jesus end this misery?

The disparity in standard of living between the top quarter of London’s population and the bulk of its citizens was stark. Few members of the aristocracy resided permanently in the capital, but came to London when the stench and heat of the city had subsided in the autumn, and when the courts and Parliament held their sessions. However, the merchants whose wealth rivaled that of the aristocrats were permanent fixtures on the metropolitan landscape.

London also hosted a growing middle or “professional class,” comprising court officials and lawyers; Ebenezer Scrooge would be placed in this class as a usurer, banker, or property owner. Finally, the working classes composed about three-quarters of the population. These included shopkeepers, prostitutes, and children who labored in factories; a financial contribution from each family member was necessary for survival. Dickens learned this firsthand as a young boy who worked to support his family while his parents languished in debtors’ prison.

Children growing up in London during the Hungry Forties—a depression coupled with poor harvests—were steeped in these disparities. The skyline was a sea of profitable smokestacks puffing clouds of sooty grit that covered rooftops and the cheeks of young chimney sweeps. Coal was the energy source du jour, and the resulting London fog often hid the real picture. The streets were covered in rainwater, the contents of chamber pots, and animal waste. Rats abounded. Small, often emaciated children sold flowers and matches, while the wealthy class’s horse-drawn carriages swept past, throwing grime and muck on those too poor to afford transportation. Despite the horrid conditions, the birth rate rose as mortality rates fell: more children now lived than died. And as the population grew, so did the price of food.

via The Darker Side of A Christmas Carol | Christianity Today | A Magazine of Evangelical Conviction.

And how did this end?

It didn’t end by new laws.  All the social legislation (“child labor” laws, etc) followed the growth of prosperity.  Then those laws “worked” as long as one used protectionism to keep the people in poorer countries that hadn’t arrived yet.

And there probably should have been more almsgiving, more charity, more sharing and all the rest.  (Though, again, it would not surprise me if they outdid us.) But charity didn’t change the circumstances described above.  And more charity would not have ended it either.  It would have helped people survive it, but it couldn’t have produced wealth.

How did the world of poverty, that Charles Dickens wrote about, end?

It ended by people working hard and trading.  It ended by greedheads trying to get better off within some ethical constraints.  Those constraints were probably not as respected as they should have been.  (Though again I doubt we are in a place to judge them.)  But they changed the world.  They built up wealth and spread it out.  They made the world that we take for granted.

If you want to see what happens when people try to make a better world, go visit the mass graves of the great wars.  If you want to know why we all have flush toilets and affordable food, just look around you.  Keep serving, keep praying, keep witnessing, and keep working at it.

2 thoughts on “And how did Jesus end this misery?

  1. Paul Baxter

    What makes you think it EVER ended? Are there no poor in London now? Was there an intervening period when everything was rosy?

    Reply

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *