Imagini ale paginilor
PDF
ePub

of these, there has been hitherto nothing else but failure in the various attempts of the Protestant Church to reconcile social disharmonies in "the typical country of class antagonisms.'

[ocr errors]

Last of all, as throughout the whole course of its history the over-readiness of Protestantism to lean on the arm of secular authority has proportionately diminished its spiritual influence, so, too, it has been unfortunately the peculiar characteristic of the Protestant clergy in Germany to be subservient to the governing classes and domineering towards the "common people." Hence the synthesis of Junker und Pfaffen (squires, and parsons), in popular phraseology, as an evidence of this tendency in the past. Hence, too, the reluctance of the people now to accept the mediatorial office of the Church as the arbitrator between themselves and those whom they have learned to consider the Church's patrons.

[ocr errors]

CHAPTER VIII.

LATEST PHASE OF CHRISTIAN SOCIALISM ABROAD

AND AT HOME.

IN a preceding chapter we have described the Christian Socialism of the Catholic party inaugurated by Bishop Ketteler in Germany. We must now introduce our readers to a similar contemporaneous movement, calling itself sometimes "Catholic Socialism" in France and Belgium. And we turn to France in the first place, as, indeed, it might claim the right of being called the birthplace of modern Christian Socialism.

For the Duke of Saint-Simon, as the author of the "Nouveau Christianisme," has been called the father of Christian Socialism; but, without disputing his prior claims to the title, we must turn to forms more recent and more positively religious than his in our survey of the movement in France. From the very first, and still more so of late years, peculiar circumstances have produced two tendencies, if not two schools, of Christian Socialism in that country. One of them is connected with the reactionary movements which followed upon the two great social Revolutions in 1793 and 1848 respectively; the other, assuming the form of Liberal Catholicism, is mainly influenced by the social reformatory movements between the two Revolutions in 1830

and 1848, having for its object the endeavour to adapt itself to the exigencies of modern society, and adopting corresponding methods of social improvement.

Both, however, are at one in their remonstrance against existing social evils, as the result of political changes and arrangements founded on the Deistic philosophy of the eighteenth, or the materialistic creeds of the nineteenth century. Both look to the revival of Christian beliefs and the "rehabilitation" of Church influence as the only possible means of saving society. There are differences of opinion as to the methods of treatment, though there is perfect agreement as to the nature of the social disease. Ultramontanes and Liberal Catholics alike ascribe the disorders from which society is suffering to the combined effects of the first French Revolution, and the almost contemporaneous revolution of industry through the use of steam and machinery. The Revolution, they say, in removing every restraint to individual freedom, introduced the principle of unlimited competition. But the latter enables the capitalist or manufacturer, who is in possession of all the implements of labour and production to grow rich at the expense of the wage-earning classes. The latter depend on him for employment, so that, though legally—on the principle of free contractmaking their bargain with the employer of labour on equal terms, they practically become in course of time, and by force of circumstances, mere appendages of the machine at which they work. Thus the Revolution, whilst upholding perfect equality before the law, has established a great inequality of social condition, which gives a keen edge to the antagonisms between the men and their masters, the former demanding a larger share in the distribution of wealth, the latter either systematically resisting or reluctantly admitting their claims.

This strife of conflicting interests is aggravated by the evil consequences of over-production and hazardous speculation, since the effects of every monetary crisis are felt more acutely by the least prosperous portion of the community, and resented as an additional social injustice. All this, it is asserted, must sooner or later lead to a pitched battle between the large majority of the people on the verge of pauperism, and a rapidly diminishing minority who happen to be the sole owners of all the factors of industry excepting manual labour—a civil war threatening the very existence of our modern civilization, as was shown in the short episode of the Commune established in Paris seventeen years ago.

Society thus being in danger, nothing can save it but the revival of Christian sentiment, which would restore a profound sense of social duty and devotion in all classes, counteracting the corroding influences of materialistic egotism, and instilling the spirit of love and order in the heart of society, as a means of reforming it from within, on the basis of mutual toleration and cooperation, exemplified in the constitution of the Christian Church.

These are the leading principles of the two sections of French Christian Socialism. Their differences are in the application, one side leaning more towards the unconditional surrender to Church authority for compassing these social aims, the other inclined more towards a philosophical application of the principles of equal rights and reciprocal duties laid down in the New Testament. De Maistre, Lamennais, Lacordaire, on the one hand, Bonald, Le Play, and le Comte de Mun on the other, represent in the order we have placed them-though not in chronological sequence—the ascending and descending scale from and to the Ultramontane standpoint of Chris

tian Socialism. It corresponds with, as it was affected by, a similar contemporaneous oscillation between the policy of reaction and revolution in the public mind of France.

What are the distinguishing characteristics will best be seen from a short comparative view of the more liberal system of social reform by Le Play, and the more pronounced ecclesiastical programme of le Comte de Mun.

Le Play, although by his own confession a disciple of Bonald-"the most important politician of French Ultramontanism"-is by no means a blind follower of his master's teaching, except in his negative criticism of the "principles of 1789." In this respect both may be said to take for their motto De Maistre's paradox: "Si la contre-révolution n'est pas divine, elle est nulle." In other respects Le Play, as a layman and scientist, is unhampered by religious prejudices in his social inquiries. In fact, up to the close of his career—that is, not until shortly before his death (April 15, 1882)—when he wrote a letter full of filial devotion to the Pope, Le Play's orthodoxy was by no means regarded as above suspicion. His works, though received with grateful recognition of the services they had rendered to religion, were subjected to severe scrutiny by the spirited champions of a less tolerant Catholicism than his own. Perhaps the pithy epithet applied to him by Sainte Beuve defines most accurately his religious standpoint: Un Bonald rajeuni, progressif, et scientifique."

[ocr errors]

What entitles him to the name of Christian Socialist is the importance he assigns to religion in any possible scheme for the regeneration of society, and French society in particular. "Social science," he says, "leads its true observers constantly back to the principles of

« ÎnapoiContinuă »