Robin Hood, Humanism, and Marxism

I grew up with Robin Hood, not the 12th Century one, but the television version. I was taught at an early age, even without having our own television much of the time, that Robin Hood was the epitome of "goodness". He is well known for stealing from the rich and giving to the poor. As an adult, it gradually soaked in that Karl Marx was the 19th Century version of Robin Hood although he never stole by force, he was the motivation for others to do so. Howard Pyle may have converted more to Marxism than Marx himself by propagating the notion of "fairness".

Marxism is attractive for many because of the unfairness of extant systems. For Robin Hood, the system was feudalism which consisted of societal classes: Lords, vassals, and fiefs. Lords were the nobility. Supporting them and the king were vassals who owned the land and supported the causes of the king and lords. The lowest class were the fiefs who worked the vassals' land and paid them a fee in support of the knights. In turn, the knights fought for the king. With the class division, the feudal system was by nature unfair. Many republics were formed in Europe as a result of repudiation of the feudal system. Unfair taxation caused animosity from the fiefs, and rightfully so!

The perception of unfairness drives rebellion. Today we have socialism as the remedy for unfairness. We must place the blame where blame is due - the institutional corroboration toward an unfair economic system. The Church corroborated in this unfair system. Religion -  Christianity and Judaism became part of the rebellion because they were part of the institution.

Robin Hood came to the rescue, in legend, to the poor. King Richard the Lionhearted openly persecuted the Jews as has been the case throughout history. Why? Firstly, it was because Christians blamed them for Christ's crucifixion. However, like Judas, they were merely the tools ordained for this dastardly deed. Jews and Gentiles were why Jesus died. Like Adam and Eve, Christians forsook their own guiltiness by blaming the Jews! The other reason Jews were persecuted is because of their prosperity. Although usury is a sin, Jews did well with their finances. Usury originally was making interest off any financial transaction. As such, Christians pictured Jews as sinners who made great wealth on the backs of the poor.

King Richard fought the French, and led the Crusades. While he was gone, his brother - later King John, financed the war with France and the Crusades with taxation. The fiefs suffered most. Much of the money was raised by taxing the knights to "buy out" of military service by paying a scutage - a tax only those with money could afford. Naturally, the money for the scutage came from the poor!

The system was rotten. The class structure of England and most European Countries had vestiges of feudalism even at the time of Marx. With industry, the capitalists were the vassals. The Lords got rich from their fiances. Crony capitalism became the feudal system of the 1800s. With the Industrial Revolution commencing about 1760, the agrarian feudal system was gradually replaced with feudal capitalism. The rich became richer, and the poor poorer.

In King Richard's day, vast sums of money were spent on one lavish castle. Although castle-building had declined since King Henry II this one castle at Château Gaillard in France was extravagant. The pecuniary left England for a foreign country since Richard ruled Normandy at the time. As such, nationalism was one of the motivators for Robin Hood, and later Marx. In the Third Reich, Hitler's brand of socialism was nationalistic much as in the time of Robin Hood.

An unfair system caused dissension. Feudalism, and its perceived offspring capitalism, was the designated evils. Judaism and Christianity, as part of the system, were dual evils. This was especially true because the church became wealthy at the expense of the poor. Even the Crusades were a military adventure of the Popish Church. Thus, Christianity was part of the evil system, and were accomplices to class division.

Socialism, as did Robin Hood, used class warfare as a way to level the playing field. As a child, when I saw Robin Hood stealing from the rich and giving to the poor, I was enthralled at this sense of fairness. I never considered that even honest Christians were defrauded, along with those with ill-gotten gain. Pyle was just too smooth with his writings for me to even notice the inequity of stealing! Today, most people are too enthralled with the sense of fairness to recognize the unfairness in socialism; that system which is essentially the manifesto of Robin Hood!

Pyle was not a Marxist. Robin Hood and socialism are a result of humanism. People "work out their own salvation" by doing good things for mankind - not to magnify and obey God but to feel good about themselves. I recently wrote about the rich young man who confronted Jesus. (http://kentuckyherrin.blogspot.com/2017/10/secular-humanism.html). He did good things for mankind but nothing for God. Humanism is doing good for the fellow man without serving Jesus; it's stealing his actions without crediting Him.

It is a noble thing to want to better others. However, stealing is wrong for whatever reason. Jesus could have taught socialism. Instead he taught charity. There is a big difference. Christians must be charitable to be righteous but it must be of their own conviction and sacrifice. Forced "charity" deprives the Christian of being charitable!

Robin Hood took from the rich and gave to the poor. That seemed to be a noble deed for us kids but it was entirely wrong! Robin Hood was not charitable; he was a thief! Likewise, socialism is not charitable, it is legalized theft!

Jesus could have ended poverty with one thought. However, he said this:

Mark 14:7 For ye have the poor with you always, and whensoever ye will ye may do them good: but me ye have not always.

Rather than end poverty which he could have easily done, Jesus called on his disciples to be charitable. He told them to be charitable, and never even suggested that the government institute it. Charity is a function of the church. If the Roman Church had given, rather than taken, Robin Hood would have been out of a job. Likewise, if Christians are charitable, Marx would had been little more than a common thief! Charity is not giving - it is love (1 Corinthians 13:3). Giving is a means of showing love.

As is tithing, if giving is for wrong reasons, it is lacking in love.  Giving because it is required by taxation has nothing to do with charity. In fact, it creates animosity, and provokes people to be uncharitable. As in the days of Robin Hood, the church and the government are competing for the same tithe. It is the church's job to be charitable, and the king's to protect us. We're all familiar with the command - do not steal. However, if we do, restitution must be made:

Ezekiel 33:15 (ESV) If the wicked restores the pledge, gives back what he has taken by robbery, and walks in the statutes of life, not doing injustice, he shall surely live; he shall not die.

Anti-poverty programs are stealing from one class to provide for the other without regard to ability and need. Socialism is driven by that initiative: From each according to his ability, to each according to his needs. ("Critique of the Gotha Program "; Karl Marx). Those who are able to work hard are to provide for those who are "needy" without regard for their motivation or lack thereof! Progressives claim to be for the middle class, but it's from us "vassals" who take the hit. Because we are not fiefs, surfs, or in housing projects, the money must come from us. Robin Hood in disguise of the government doesn't have enough Lords from which to steal, so us middle class vassals are the ones robbed.

We are to respect authority and support the government. Jesus paid his taxes, and the money was provided by a miracle. The Pharisees asked Jesus if taxes are to be paid. (Matthew 22). He admonished them to give to Caesar what is his, and to God what belongs to Him. With that said, God provided the tax money by from the mouth of a fish. Note that Jesus never asked the disciples to pay his due but depended on himself by a miracle. With the same faith, we can pay Uncle Sam!

Caesar abused his tax collection. Even his tax collectors were  thieves. Caesar not only built up he infrastructure but constructed statues of himself. The latter was abuse of taxation. Jesus didn't say that the government must be fair but respected.

Romans 13:1 (ESV) Let every person be subject to the governing authorities. For there is no authority except from God, and those that exist have been instituted by God.

God allowed Rome to be created for his purposes. That was to grow the Church. God allowed Caesar to be Caesar; that was to tend to His "Garden". He didn't expect Caesar to tend it well but allowed him to be in charge. Robin Hood not only was a thief but he lacked respect for authority! Marxism is the same. It propagates the violent overthrow of the government which God has authorized.

You might say, "If the government is overthrown, that must be God's will!" Not so. God allows unrighteous things to happen so that his people are tested or learn from it. The lesson of King Richard is that King John was worse. The lesson of socialism is that "charity" is enforced. Thus, those who prefer charity on their own are victimized. We know from autocratic communistic systems where Robin Hood gradually turns into King Richard. The best example is when the socialists took Russia and became the worst autocratic "Romanovs" that Russia ever had!

Replacing an evil system with a higher evil is foolishness but in the disguise of Robin Hood, socialists continue to steal from us vassals.

Jesus was not a socialist. He was no Robin Hood.

Jesus taught charity but it was love which he commanded. He even gave instructions on to whom to give: (1) orphans, (2) old widows who could not provide for themselves, and the poor Christians. Out of laziness, I'll ask the reader to find the biblical sources for this charity.

However, those who receive must be good stewards of what is given:

Matthew 25:20 (ESV) And he who had received the five talents came forward, bringing five talents more, saying, ‘Master, you delivered to me five talents; here I have made five talents more.’ His master said to him, ‘Well done, good and faithful servant. You have been faithful over a little; I will set you over much. Enter into the joy of your master.’

And it is the wage earner who is to provide. The king does not have that responsibility:

1 Timothy 5:8 (ESV) But if anyone does not provide for his relatives, and especially for members of his household, he has denied the faith and is worse than an unbeliever.  

As such, no one has the "right" to prosperity. It comes from hard work - by the sweat of the brow.  Toiling to have it taken is legalized theft. Charity is giving out of love.  They are not the same!

My thoughts on Robin Hood are much different than when I was a child. I was unwittingly being remolded by deception. Humanistic thought did the remolding until I caught on.  Committing a sin to correct another sin is wrong! Paying through false "charity" is not sufficient for salvation. We must give out of love, and not by force. We must never expect Caesar to do our loving for us. Neither should we allow do-gooder humanists to steal from the able to give to the unmotivated. Marx hated the idea of Christianity. Why should we heed him? Even Robin Hood was playing God.