considered as an evil, and essentially contrary to Christian perfection. We may, consequently, and without any fear of exaggeration, affirm that most of the great schisms and conflicts by which the Catholic Church has been torn, were simply economic conflicts.1)

1 [A careful and impartial glance at history will suffice to prove that the motives which compelled the Church to reject the various heresiarchs from the communion of the faithful, were never of an economic order. Such measures were invariably called forth by open rebellion against authority and the decisions of the Councils, and grave errors in matters of dogma, doctrine and discipline, tending to disturb the order of the Church and to give rise to serious scandals and thus imperil the unity of the faith. Moreover, the heresiarchs were condemned not merely for professing these errors and for refusing to retract them, but because they sought, by every means, to spread their heresies among the poor and ignorant, who were more easily led away, or among princes, sovereigns and other persons in power, whose protection they tried to win by flattering and abetting their worst passions.-Trans.]

73

CHAPTER IV.

ATTITUDE OF CATHOLICISM AND PROTESTANTISM WITH REGARD TO THE SOCIAL QUESTION.

Poor Relief considered as a Debitum Legale and the Teachings of the ChurchContemporary Catholic Socialism and its Natural Origins-Economic Individualism in the Lutheran Doctrines-Economic Tendencies of Luther and Melancthon Contrary to Socialism-Luther and the Peasants who Rebelled against the Abuses of the Large Property System-Social Action of Luther-Social Action of the Church during the Middle Ages-Ecclesiastical Tenures-The Church and the Poor during the Middle Ages-The Forcible Introduction of Protestantism and the Development of Pauperism --Influence of the Social Doctrines of Christianity on the Early Writers of the Present Century-Christian Ideal of Right-Catholic Socialism and Evangelical Socialism--Causes of the Greater Importance of Catholic Socialism--The Catholic Clergy and Socialistic Agitations-The Protestant Clergy and Economic Individualism-A Brief Sketch of Evangelical Socialism-Evangelical Socialism in England-The Extreme Left of Anglican Evangelical Socialism-The Followers of Henry George-The Rev. Stewart D. Headlam-The Guild of St. Matthew-Theories of the Rev. E. Symes-Evangelical Socialism in the United States of AmericaAmerican Followers of Henry George-Evangelical Socialistic Movement in Switzerland and France-Congress of Lyons-M. Charles GideSchool of Solidarity-Evangelical Socialists in Germany-Their Activity— The Rev. A. Stöcker-Rudolph Todt-Anti-semitism and Socialism-Democratic Sovereignty-The Tradition of Frederick II.-Democratic AntiParliamentarism-Harmony existing between Evangelical and Catholic Socialists-Impossibility of any Action in Common-Greater Importance of Catholic Socialism-Difficulty of an Agreement among the Protestant Churches on the Subject of the Social Question.

YET

ET, even when, through social necessity, the Church was obliged to defend the system of individual property against the radical tendencies of the monks of the minor orders, she considered the assistance of the poor as a debitum legale. "We must not," observes Roscher, "consider the assistance of the poor practised by the Church as of purely spontaneous origin. Saint Thomas Aquinas calls it debitum

legale; the rich were obliged to give to the poor, but this obligation was not of a political character, it was purely religious."1 Amidst the splendours of the court of Louis XIV., Bossuet, in his emphatic manner, very justly declared that "the Church in her early constitution had been founded for the poor alone, and they are the true citizens of that fortunate city, which the Scriptures call the City of God ".2

If we consider the teachings of the Gospel, the communistic origins of the Church, the socialistic tendencies of the early fathers, and the traditions of Canon Law, we cannot wonder that at the present day Socialism should count no small number of its adherents among Catholic writers.

The Lutheran Reformation, on the contrary, was in reality a religious reform in favour of the interests of the wealthy classes in Germany. Luther, that bourgeois pontiff, not only held views which were as the antipodes of all the communistic theories of the fathers of the Church, who considered property as an evil become necessary in consequence of the fall of man, but he also professed most restrictive ideas on property.

In the beginning of the sixteenth century the wealthy middle-class was already most powerful in Germany, yet, notwithstanding this, it was, together with the lesser nobility, excluded from political power, which was concentrated in the hands of the Elector Princes, and it submitted but reluctantly to a merely nominal representation in the State Assemblies. In this rivalry between feudal aristocracy on the one hand, and the wealthy bourgeoisie, with the lesser nobles, on the other, the higher nobility used every means to weaken the power of the rich industrialists. Thus, for instance, in 1522, trade was burdened with heavy taxes, and a prohibition was laid on all commercial associations, disposing of capital exceeding fifty thousand florins.

Franz von Sickingen, whose name has been popularised by

1 Roscher, Geschichte, p. 6.

On

2 Bossuet, Sermon sur l'éminent dignité des pauvres, 1er point. the economic and social ideas of Bossuet consult the Abbé Lebarq, Histoire critique de la prédiction de Bossuet. Paris: Desclée and De Brouwer, 1890.

Ferdinand Lassalle in a celebrated drama, was the hero of the lesser nobility.

As to the wealthy bourgeoisie, by exercising pressure on Charles V., they succeeded in obtaining the revocation of the laws which until then had formed an insurmountable obstacle to the development of capital.

In the meantime, the poverty-stricken rural population rose up against their despoilers; they burnt down the castles of the nobles, and swore that they would leave nothing to be seen upon the land but the cabins of the poor. The rich middle-class seemed at first to side with them, and at Strasburg, Nuremberg, and Ulm the peasants were encouraged, aided, and provided for. However, the bourgeoisie soon grew alarmed at the spreading of the insurrection, and made common cause with the nobles in smothering the revolt in the rural districts. Luther, who was then at the apex of his power, condemned the rising in the name of religion, and proclaimed the servitude of the people as holy and legitimate.1 "You seek," wrote he, "to free your persons and your goods. You desire the power and the goods of this earth. You will suffer no wrong. The Gospel, on the contrary, has no care for such things, and makes exterior life consist in suffering, supporting injustice, the cross, patience, and contempt of life, as of all the things of this world. To suffer! To suffer! The cross! The cross! Behold what Christ teaches!"2 Were not these teachings, given in the name of the faith to a famishing people in revolt against the tyranny and avidity of the ruling aristocracy, fatal to the future of the peasant masses, whose very sufferings were thus legitimised in the name of the religion that should have come to their aid?

Luther did not consider the claims of the peasants as in the least unjust; indeed, he admitted that they were "not

1 See Loria, Teoria economica della costituzione politica, p. 74. Ranke, Deutsche Geschichte im Zeitalter der Reformation, vol. i., pp. 206 and 321; vol. ii., pp. 31 and 149; vol. iii., pp. 375 and 377- Leipzig, 6th edition, 1881.

2 Janet, Histoire de la science politique, vol. ii., p. 6. The Catholic author Thonissen, in his Socialisme depuis l'antiquité, is mistaken in attributing to Luther socialistic and revolutionary principles.

contrary to natural law or to equity". But, unconscious apostle of bourgeois interests, he immediately added: "No one is judge in his own cause, and the faults committed by authority cannot excuse rebellion. Every man is not called upon to chastise the guilty. And here the authority of the Scriptures lends its support. Let every spirit be subject to the superior powers. Ile that taketh the sword shall perish by the sword."1

Luther, the enemy of all economic assertion of rights on the part of the labouring classes, strove to despoil the clergy for the benefit of the lay middle-class element. Ecclesiastical property was secularised, convents were abolished, the Church was stripped of the immense patrimony she possessed; "finally," writes a Liberal author, "the source from which alms flowed to the indigent was destroyed, and the assistance of the poor ceased entirely to form part of the attributes of the Church "2

Melanchthon held ideas no less restrictive, economically speaking, than those of Luther; indeed, he rose to a greater degree of violence than Luther ever did against the communistic theories of the Anabaptists. According to Melanchthon, property exists by divine right, and cannot be modified jure imperatoris, as St. Augustine had taught. To deny or limit the right of individual property would be contrary to the morality and teachings of Jesus Christ and of the apostles; for private property, whatever may be its abuses, is not only not contrary to the laws of nature, but not even to the precepts of the Gospel. 3

1 Janet, Histoire de la science politique, vol. ii., p. 6. See also Roscher, Geschichte, etc., p. 68 and following. Ibach ("Der Socialismus in Zeitalter der Reformation," in the Frankfurter Zeitgemässe Broschüren, Frankfort, 1880) tries to discern some analogy between modern Socialism and the Lutheran Reformation. On the political and economic ideas of Luther see the lecture by F. I. Stahl, Der Protestantismus als politisches Princip., p. 122. Berlin, 1853.

2 Mazzola, L'assicurazione degli operai nella scienza e nella legislazione germanica, p. 33. Rome: Botta, 1886.

3 Melanchthon, Opera, Bretschneider edition, vol. iii.; Epistola i, iii., February, 1531, p. 28. See also Janet, Histoire de la science politique, vol. ii., pp. 13 and 14.