The Middle Ages were therefore a period when the production of wealth was looked upon as a salutary and honourable vocation. The wonderful artistic monuments of that era, which have survived the intervening centuries of decay and vandalism, are a striking testimony to the perfection of production in a civilisation in which work was considered to be but a form of prayer, and the manufacturer was prompted to be, not a drudge, but an artist.
In the Middle Ages, however, as we have said before, man did not exist for the sake of production, but production for the sake of man; and wise consumption was regarded as at least as important as extended production. The high estimation in which wealth was held resulted in the elaboration of a highly developed code of regulation as to the manner in which it should be enjoyed. We do not wish to weary the reader with a repetition of that which we have already fully discussed; it is enough to call attention to the fact that the golden mean of conduct was the observance of liberality, as distinguished, on the one hand, from avarice, or a too high estimation of material goods, and, on the other hand, from prodigality, or an undue disregard for their value. Social virtue consisted in attaching to wealth its proper value.
Far more important than its teaching either on production or consumption was the teaching of the mediæval Church on distribution, which it insisted must be regulated on a basis of strict justice. It is in this department of economic study that the teaching of the mediævals appears in most marked contrast to the teaching of the present day, and it is therefore in this department that the study of its doctrines is most valuable. As we said above, the modern world has become convinced by bitter experience of the impracticability of mere selfishness as the governing factor in distribution; and the economic thought of the time is concentrated upon devising some new system of society which shall be ruled by justice. On the one hand, we see socialists of various schools attempting to construct a Utopia in which each man shall be rewarded, not in accordance with his opportunities of growing rich at the expense of his fellow-man, but according to the services he performs; while, on the other hand, we find the Christian economists striving to induce a harassed and bewildered world to revert to an older and nobler social ethic.
It is no part of our present purpose to estimate the relative merits of these two solutions for our admittedly diseased society. Nor is it our purpose to attempt to demonstrate how far the system of economic teaching which we have sketched in the foregoing pages is applicable at the present day. We must, however, in this connection draw attention to one important consideration, namely, that the mediæval economic teaching was expressly designed to influence the only constant element in human society at every stage of economic development. Methods of production may improve, hand may give place to machine industry, and mechanical inventions may revolutionise all our conceptions of transport and communication; but there is one element in economic activity that remains a fixed and immutable factor throughout the ages, and that element is man. The desires and the conscience of man remain the same, whatever the mechanical environment with which he is encompassed. One reason which suggests the view that the mediæval teaching is still perfectly applicable to economic life is that it was designed to operate upon the only factor of economic activity that has not changed since the Middle Ages—namely, the desires and conscience of man.
It is important also to draw attention to the fact that the acceptance of the economic teaching of the mediæval theologians does not necessarily imply acceptance of their teaching on other matters. There is at the present day a growing body of thinking men in every country who are full of admiration for the ethical teaching of Christianity, but are unable or unwilling to believe in the Christian religion. The fact of such unbelief or doubt is no reason for refusing to adopt the Christian code of social justice, which is founded upon reason rather than upon revelation, and which has its roots in Greek philosophy and Roman law rather than in the Bible and the writings of the Fathers. It has been said that Christianity is the only religion which combines religion and ethics in one system of teaching; but although Christian religious and ethical teaching are combined in the teaching of the Catholic Church, they are not inseparable. Those who are willing to discuss the adoption of the Socialist ethic, which is not combined with any spiritual dogmas, should not refuse to consider the Christian ethic, which might equally be adopted without subscribing to the Christian dogma.
As we said above, it is no part of our intention to estimate the relative merits of the solutions of our social evils proposed by socialists and by Catholic economists. One thing, however, we feel bound to emphasise, and that is that these two solutions are not identical. It is a favourite device of socialists, especially in Catholic countries, to contend that their programme is nothing more than a restatement of the economic ideals of the Catholic Church as exhibited in the writings of the mediæval scholastics. We hope that the foregoing pages are sufficient to demonstrate the incorrectness of this assertion. Three main principles appear more or less clearly in all modern socialistic thought: first, that private ownership of the means of production is unjustifiable; second, that all value comes from labour; and, third, that all unearned income is unjust. These three great principles may or may not be sound; but it is quite certain that not one of them was held by the mediæval theologians. In the section on property we have shown that Aquinas, following the Fathers and the tradition of the early Church, was an uncompromising advocate of private property, and that he drew no distinction between the means of production and any other kind of wealth; in the section on just price we have shown that labour was regarded by the mediævals as but a single one of the elements which entered into the determination of value; and in the section on usury we have shown that many forms of unearned income were not only tolerated, but approved by the scholastics.
We do not lose sight of the fact that socialism is not a mere economic system, but a philosophy, and that it is founded on a philosophical basis which conflicts with the very foundations of Christianity. We are only concerned with it here in its character of an economic system, and all we have attempted to show is that, as an economic system, it finds no support in the teaching of the scholastic writers. We do not pretend to suggest which of these two systems is more likely to bring salvation to the modern world; we simply wish to emphasise that they are two systems, and not one. One's inability to distinguish between Christ and Barabbas should not lead one to conclude that they are really the same person.
INDEX
Abelard, 14.
Acts of the Apostles, 168.
communism in, 44, 46.
Adam, 140.
and Eve, slavery the result of their sin, 92.
Administrative occupations, position in artes possessivae, 143.
Ægidius Romanus, 98, 197, 225.
Agriculture, position in artes possessivae, 142, 143.
its encouragement recommended, 143.
Albertus Magnus, 16, 82, 176, 186, 197.
Albigenses, the, belief in communism, 66.
Alcuin, 14.
Alexander of Hales, 176, 185.
Alexander III., Pope, 187.
attitude to usury, 174.
Alfric, see Colloquy of Archbishop, The.
Almsgiving, as justice, not charity, 69.
duty of, 80.
enforcement by the State, 85.
summary of mediæval teaching on, 84.
the early Church on, 52.
Ambition, a virtue, 79.
Ambrosius de Vignate, 191, 208.
Ananias, 46, 52.
Ancients, loss of economic teaching of, 15.
Angelus de Periglis de Perusio, 209, 210.
Antoine, 87, 172, 223.
Antoninus of Florence, 9, 68, 79, 110, 122, 181, 196.
Ape of Aristotle, the, see Albertus Magnus.
Apostles, the, attitude to manual labour, 223.
attitude to private property and communism, 48.
attitude to usury, 168.
Apostles, the, fornication expressly forbidden by, 168.
teaching regarding slavery, 89.
Apostoli, the, belief in communism, 66.
Aquinas, see Thomas Aquinas.
Aragon, personal rent charges permitted in, 205.
Architecture, see Manufacture.
Archivio Giuridico, 225.
Ardant, 69.
Aristotle, 14, 16, 36, 97, 98, 142, 146, 169, 215, 219.
as source for Thomas Aquinas, 62.
attitude of Thomas Aquinas to his opinion, 94 et seq.
Cossa on his influence, 17.
his principles maintained through Thomas Aquinas, 19.
his theory of slavery opposed to that of St. Augustine, 93.
influence on controversies of the schools, 17.
influence on mediæval thought, 16.
renewed study of, 16.
Arnold, 203.
Artes pecuniativae, 142.
Artes possessivae, 142.
encouragement recommended by Aquinas, 143.
Arnobius, 45.
Ashley, Sir W.H., 3, 6, 7, 18, 21, 23, 27, 29, 30, 33, 40, 76,
105, 113, 126, 134, 146, 149, 175, 185, 186, 187, 188,
190, 191, 195, 196, 197, 198, 202, 203, 205, 206, 207,
211, 212.
Augustinians, the, 195.
Ausmo, Nicholas de, 156.
Avarice, an offence against liberality, 79.
a sin towards the individual himself and the community, 78.
relativity of, 75.
Avarice, the necessary basis of trade, 145.
Ayenbite of Inwit, The, 151.
Baldus, 187, 208.
[Greek: banousia], a sin, 77, 78.
Barabbas, 231.
Bartlett, Dr. V., 56, 90.
Bartolus, 187.
Baudrillard, 76.
Beauvais, Vincent de, 7, 16.
Bégards, the, belief in communism, 66.
Benedict XIV., Pope, an encyclical of, 183.
Benigni, 61.
Bergier, 45.
Bernardine of Siena, 112, 181.
Biel, 99, 100, 104, 106, 107, 108, 112, 118, 121, 124, 145, 150,
156, 180, 185, 205, 208, 211, 221.
Bimetallism, Oresme's support of, 219.
Blanqui, 146.
Bohemia, communistic teaching in, 86.
Böhm-Bawerk, 174, 200, 203, 211.
Bottomry, contract of, 211.
Brant, Sebastian, 137.
Brants, V.L.J.L., 9, 10, 13, 19, 21, 66, 101, 111, 112, 114, 121,
122, 123, 142, 159, 181, 208, 215, 216, 217, 218, 225.
Breslau, refusal to pay rent in, 204.
Brunetto Latini, 123.
Building, see Manufacture.
Buridan, 70, 72, 76, 77, 78, 109, 110, 143, 180, 191, 198, 217.