[183] F. Schaub, “Die kath. Caritas und ihre Gegner,” 1909, p. 45.
[184] See the excellent work by Schaub, p. 14 ff., quoted in the previous Note, where it is stated, that, under present conditions, private charity certainly does not suffice and that, therefore, State relief is necessary; yet the latter is always merely subsidiary, because what is assumed by real Christian charity, i.e. self-sacrifice, and individual care, can only be realised in private relief of the poor; the State, on the other hand, has its efficient compulsory taxation (“caritas coacta”) and its own bureaucratic means of carrying out its work; in any case the State must not monopolise any branch of poor relief, and public and private charity ought to be in close touch. These remarks may serve to assist in the right appreciation of the historical movement described above.
[185] Feuchtwanger, II., p. 194.
[186] Ib., pp. 212, 214.
[187] Cp. ib., p. 214.
[188] Vol. iv., p. 127 ff.
[189] Erl. ed., 31, p. 236. “Verantwortung der auffgelegten Auffrur,” 1533. Above, vol. v., p. 59.
[190] Ib., p. 239 f.
[191] “Opp. lat. exeg.,” 4, pp. 202-204.
[192] Cp. N. Paulus, “Die Wertung der weltlichen Berufe im MA.,” (“Hist. Jahrb.,” 1911, pp. 725-755). “Similar testimony,” Paulus says, p. 740, “dating from the close of the Middle Ages is to be found in abundance.” He lays particular stress on the witness of monks and friars.