316 ART. III.-The Theory of Christian Socialism. (1) Du Rôle Social des Idées Chrétiennes. Par PAUL RIBOT. Two vols. Paris: E. Plon, 1880. Deuxième édition. (2) Die Socialpolitik der Kirche: Geschichte der socialen Fntwicklung im christlichen Abendlande. Von J. ALBERTUS. Regensburg, 1881. (3) Die christlich sociale Bewegung in England. Von LuJo BRENTANO. Leipzig, 1883. (4) Questions Sociales et Ouvrières. Conseil des Etudes: Euvre des Cercles Catholiques d'Ouvriers. (5) Christian Socialism. By a Radical Parson. (Politics for No attempt will be made in this paper to offer anything like a new theory of Christian socialism. Our intention is simply to collect into one point of view the main principles underlying the various efforts made from time to time for the purpose of obviating social discrepancies, or adjusting existing social arrangements on a distinctly Christian basis. Such an abstract of the leading ideas of Christian socialism, illustrated by modern examples of Christian socialism at home and abroad, without pretending to be a strictly scientific theory, may yet at the same time present a tolerably accurate view, of the general tendencies of Christian socialism; and, as such, may stimulate inquiry and quicken interest in the religious aspect of a movement of undoubted European notoriety. We use the word 'theory' in its primitive signification of @sopia, viewing; not in the sense in which the late Professor Jevons calls his treatise, The Theory of Political Economy,' but rather in the sense in which a celebrated living German economist, Von Scheel, calls his own valuable contribution to the study of modern socialism, The Theory of the Social Question.' This will enable us to touch upon some of the most conspicuous methods which have been of late suggested for the adaptation of the theory (which, making allowance for historical development and expansion, may be said to be conterminous with Christianity and coeval with the Christian Church) to the needs of the age. Both the importance recently assumed by socialism, and the atheistic proclivities of its principal exponents, render such an inquiry desirable, if not imperative. To bring the two facts into juxtaposition, we may quote, in the first place, from the January number of To-Day,' which is the accredited organ of 'Scientific Socialism' in England, the following remarkable passage, closing a general survey of the Revolution of Today.' effort In five years we reach the date of 1889. Two hundred years before saw the middle-class monarchical revolution of 1689 in England; a century later came the first outbreak of the great French Revolution of 1789. That year 1889 will be celebrated by the workers in every industrial city throughout the civilized world, as the time for a new and strenuous to conquer for the mass of mankind complete control over steam, electricity, and the other forces of nature, which the progress of science is placing at the command of the race. The development of these forces, and the influence which they exert on the peoples of the world, constitute the real revolution of To-day. It is for us to take full account of their action, to educate our countrymen around us to a knowledge of their growth, and to organize, without rest and without haste, that certain victory of the people which shall be the real revolution of To-morrow. We might give pages of extracts from the Socialist papers of the Continent, all joyously re-echoing this sentiment of eager hopefulness and undoubting faith in the speedy triumph of social democracy. In fact the progress of the movement in this country is hailed everywhere as the harbinger of a new era; for England, being regarded as the citadel of capitalism, the victory of socialism, it is thought, cannot be far off when the most powerful stronghold of individualism begins to show signs of yielding. The same number of To-Day' contains another article under the title of Christianity and Capitalism; the Two Curses of our Time,' in which we are clearly given to understand that the extinction of the one necessitates the disappearance of the other; and that although socialism has nothing to do with religion or irreligion,' yet in a socialist state a monopoly of creed can no more be tolerated than a monopoly in land. In this curious conjunction of scientific socialism and fervid atheism, we see a complete change of front in the tactics of the revolutionary party. The New Testament is no longer appealed to as a text-book of democracy, and Christ is no longer hailed as the bon sans culotte,' or true friend of the people, which was the fashion in times gone by. On the contrary, we are told that the cross once a symbol of suffering, is now a symbol of slavery.' Thus the most outspoken champions of the Socialist movement are bitterly opposed to the Christian faith (which, in their opinion, keeps the masses in bondage), whilst the efforts of Christian socialism are denounced by them as a religious move dictated by sinister motives. In view of this change in the mutual relations of socialism proper and Christianity, it becomes a serious question whether it is possible to establish any theory whatever of Christian socialism; and the first step taken by its representatives now is to make good its right for existence. Thus Le Play, at once one of the most noble-minded and the most tolerant Christian socialists, says somewhere that the general complexion of European thought leaves no room for doubt that religion (and by this he means Christianity) remains the first requisite of humanity, and that nations living under a liberal régime like ours must be brought back to it, not only by Divine grace, but also from a desire of their own well-being. There can be but little doubt of the existence of this general wish in the present day. A large body of thinking men watch with alarm the threatened collision between the forces of individualism and socialism, and, without pretending to be thorough-going advocates or antagonists of the one or the other, they feel the need of a stronger spiritual force to control both in such a manner as to avert the impending social war. They naturally turn to Christianity as the parent of a moderate individualism; for Christianity first secured to each unit of the ancient society its personal freedom, and the Christian idea of society is that of an aggregate of responsible individuals. They also turn to the same spiritual system for the power of repressing the excesses of individualism by its no less accentuated enforcement of social duty as opposed to selfish isolation, since the doctrine of European altruism is one of the noblest offshoots of Christianity. Again, one of the peculiar characteristics of modern socialists is their unblushing confession of purely materialistic views of life. This inspires both philosophers and economists with fear for the maintenance of our modern culture in view of the threatened incursion of these Huns and Vandals of the Europe of the future.' But Christianity is a spiritual system and, as such, emphatically teaching ideal views of life. As of old it was said of Christianity, in its relation to the rude invaders of Europe, that it conquered the conquerors; so, according to our theory, the heroes of the faith are again to become the saviours of society. A temporary divergence, if not divorce, between faith and reason has brought about that anti-theological bias of which Herbert Spencer speaks as the serious cause of modern misapprehensions of theology and mistakes in sociology. It may send the extreme section of socialistic radicalism into the dead sea of atheism; but the bulk of the party, that is the main body of the working population influenced by socialistic ideas, will not finally break with earlier traditions; whilst the more thoughtful leaders among them will remember that nothing but a powerful spiritual principle, which takes hold of the entire man, is capable of producing a thorough revolution, politically, socially, and morally, such as the realization of the social ideal implies, and that Christianity contains the principle in question. Still, not a few who see in this a raison d'être for Christian socialism in the abstract, have their doubts as to the possibility of working it out practically with the available materials and instruments. Christian Ministers, especially of the Established Church, it is said, have allowed themselves to be degraded into a branch of the civil service. They are now a 'spiritual police,' paid for preaching contentment to empty stomachs, and administering spiritual narcotics' to restless spirits who would otherwise turn the world upside down. Hence the alienation of the masses and the scornful contempt of religion in their leaders. Let the 'Black Dragoons,' they say, be disbanded; and let the priests of humanity assume their spiritual functions.* In answer to such charges, Christian socialists admit that much of the alienation of the working classes from the Christian Church is owing to the unfriendly attitude of religious officialism, which is too apt to assume the role of protecting property and privilege, whilst showing little sympathy with popular demands. But, they add, such an attitude is contrary to, rather than consonant with, the spirit of that gospel which, in its original publication, was the good news' to the poor. They are at pains to show that the general tendency of Christianity in the social development of modern Europe has been in favour of checking inequality. If, in addition to this, it can be also shown that at this very moment the representatives of the Christian Church throughout civilized Europe are calling attention to the great social crisis of the hour, whilst methods for solving the social problem are being discussed in every ecclesiastical assembly and the organs of every religious organization, small or great, it must follow that whatever may be said against distorted forms of religion and a wrong application of Christian principles here and there, such charges are untrue when preferred against the social theory of the Christianity of Christ, and unjust as criticisms on the social influence of the Christian Church In *See 'Saul of Mitre Court,' by J. W. Overton, p. 38, and passim. France, and of late in England, positivism has inade great, and in some cases successful, efforts towards gaining the masses by means of sympathetic attention to popular demands. Man is but a reed, weakest in all nature, but a reed which thinks. It needs not that the whole Universe should arm to crush him. A vapour, a drop of water is enough to kill him. But were the Universe to crush him, man would still be more noble than that which slays him, because he knows that he dies, and that the Universe has the better of him. The Universe knows nothing of this. All our dignity therefore consists in thought. By this must we raise ourselves, not by space or duration which we cannot fill. Then let us make it our study to think well, and this is the starting-point of morals. The greatness of man is great in that he knows he is wretched. A tree does not know that it is wretched. It is therefore little to know ourselves little, and it is great to know ourselves little. Thus his very infirmities prove man's greatness. They are the infirmities of a great lord, of a discrowned king. We must pass over much that is full of interest, on 'Justice, Habits, and Prejudices,' on 'The Weakness, Unrest, and Defects of Man,' in which are deep thoughts and pregnant sentences implicitly containing volumes, to dwell for a moment on a passage concerning 'Self-love,' as an instance of Pascal's dexterity as a controversialist. He is showing that a true appreciation of self would prevent anger at those who think ill of us, 'Since it is but just that men should know us as we are, and despise us if we are despicable.' This is in the exact spirit of Thomas à Kempis, who says— Son, take it not to heart if some think ill of thee, and say of thee what thou dost not gladly hear. Thou oughtest to think worse things of thyself, and to believe that no one is weaker than thyself. When Pascal has laid down this general truth and pointed out how often we wish others to have an erroneously favourable opinion of us, he suddenly localizes, so to speak, and narrows the controversy in the most unexpected manner. One proof of this fills me with dismay. The Catholic religion does not oblige us to tell out our sins indiscriminately to all, it allows us to remain hidden from men in general, but she excepts one alone to whom she commands us to open the very depths of our heart, and to show ourselves to him as we are. There is but this one man in the world whom she orders us to undeceive; she binds him to an inviolable secresy so that this knowledge is to him as though it were not. We can imagine nothing more charitable and more tender. Yet such is the corruption of man, that he finds even this law harsh, and it is one of the main reasons which has set a large portion of Europe in revolt against the Church. How unjust and unreasonable is the human heart which finds it hard to be obliged to do in regard to one man what in some degree it were just to do to all men. For is it just that we should deceive them? Thus suddenly, and as an argumentum ad hominem, he |