Page:Catholic Encyclopedia, volume 14.djvu/139

 SOCIOLOGY

115

SOCIOLOGY

Sess. xxii., cap. i. de Sacrificio Missse, in Denz., 938). The condemned propositions of Abelard (1140) might equally well stand for those of the Socinians (cf. Denz., 36S sqq.). The same must be said of the Waldensian heresy: the Profession of Faith drawn up against themhy Innocent III might be taken as a summary of Socinian errors. The formal condemnation of So- cinianism appeared first in the Constitution of Paul IV, "Cumquorundam", 15.5.5 (Denz., 993); this was confirmed in 1603 by Clement VIII, or " Do- minici gregis", but it is to be noted that both of these condemnations appeared before the publication of the "Catechism of Racow" in 1605, hence they do not adequately reflect the formal doctrines of Socinian- ism. At the same time it is to be remarked, that ac- cording to many, this catechism itself does not reflect the doctrines really held by the leaders of the party; it was intended for the laity alone. From the decree it would appear that in 1555 and again in 1603 the Socinians held (a) that there was no Trinity, (b) that Christ was not consubstantial with the Father and the Holy Spirit, (c) that He was not conceived of the Holy Spirit, but begotten by St. Joseph, (d) that His Death and Passion were not undergone to bring about our redemption, (e) that finally the Blessed Virgin was not the Mother of Gofl, neither did she retain her virginity. It would seem from the Cate- chism that the Socinians of 1005 held that Christ was at least miraculously conceived, though in what sense they held this is not clear.

BMiolheca Fratrum Polonorum (Amsterdam, 1636); Bock, Hisl. Antilrinilariorum, Maxime Socinianismi (Konigsberg, 1774-84); Dorneb, Le.hre i>. Person Christi, ii, 751; Fock, Der Socinianismus in der Gesammtentwicklung des Christ. (Kiel, 1845) ; Bonet-Maury, Early Sources of the English Unitarian Church (1884), ix; MosHEiM, Hist. Cent., XVI, Icct. iii, pt. ii, 4. 7; Crell (Socinian, d. 1633), De Deo et ejus altributis; Orcipovius (or Przipcovius). Vita Fausti Socini (1643, 1636); Toulmin, Mem- oirs of the Life, Character and Writings of F. Socinus (London, 1777); Lecler. F. Socin (Geneva, 1884); Bayle. Dictionnaire Historique et Critique (1st. ed., 1696; 2d ed., 1701-11); Neandeh. History of Christian Dogmas, II. 626-700 (a very good account of the Socinian tenets) ; Blunt, Dictionary of Sects, Heresies, Ec- clesiastical Parties and Schools of Thought, Religious^ Thought (1891): Petavius, De theologicis dogmatibus. Lib. XVI, cap. i. (where a full treatment of the Socinian dogmas will be found); Kirsch-Hergenrother, Handbuch der allgemeinen Kirchen- grsrhirhte, 111,333-38.

Hugh Pope.

Sociology. — The claims of sociology (socius, com- panion; Xiyos, science) to a place in the hierarchy of sciences arc subjected to varied controversy. It has been held that there is no distinct problem for a sci- ence of soci''>logy, no feature of human society not already provided for in the accepted social sciences. Again it has been claimed that while the future may hold out prospects for a science such as sociologj', its present condition leaves much to be desired. Fur- thermore, among sociologists themselves discussion and disagreement abound concerning aims, problems, and methods of the science. Beyond this confusion in scientific circles, misunderstanding results from the popular habit of confounding sociology with phil- anthropy, ethics, charity, and relief, social reform, statistics, municipal problems, socialism, sanitation, criminolog)', and politics. It is hardly to be expected that differences of opinion would not occur when scholars endeavour to describe in simple terms the complex social processes; to pack a vast array of his- torical and contemporaneous facts in rigid logical classes, and to mark off for research purposes sec- tions of reality which in fact overlap at a hundred points. Xe\ertheless, efforts to create a science of sociologj' have led to notable results. Minds of a very high order have been attracted to the work; abundant literature of great excellence has been pro- duced; neighbouring sciences have been deeply affected by tlie new \m\nt of view which .Soci^ilogj h.os fostered ; and the teaching of the science h;is attained to undisputed recognition in the universities of the world.

It is the aim of economic science to investigate the forms, relations, and processes that occur among men in their associated efforts to make immediate or mediate provision for their physical wants. The science deals with the phenomena resulting from the production, distribution, and consumption of wealth. The science of politics is concerned with the stable social relations resulting from the efforts of sovereign social units to maintain themselves in integrity in their internal and external relations and to promote human progress. The state is the institution in which these activities centre. Hence, the forms in which sovereignty is clothed, the processes of change which occur among them, and the varying functions of gov- ernment are central problems in this field of investi- gation. The science of religions aims at describing the stable social relations which occur when men col- lectively endeavour to understand the law of their relation to a Supreme Being and to adjust their wor- ship and conduct to His supreme will. The science of law is concerned with those principles, relations, and institutions through which the more important rela- tions between the one and the many are defined, di- rected, and sanctioned by the sovereign state. The science of ethics aims at expounding the i)rinciples and sanctions by which all human conduct, both indi- vidual and soci.al, is adjusted to the supreme end of man; or, in the Christian sense of the term, to the will of God. The science of history, which assumes the law of continuity in human society, endeavours to look out over its whole surface, to discover and de- scribe in a large way the processes of change that have occurred in social relations of whatsoever kind. Each of these social sciences is analytical or descriptive, but in its complete development it should have a norma- tive or directive side. To use the technical phrase, it is teleological. The complete function of each of them should include the setting forth of a purpose for human conduct and should offer direction towards it, which is modified by the relations in which each stands to the others.

Some sociologists endeavour to locate their science as logically antecedent to all of these. According to this view sociology should occupy itself with general phases of the processes of human association and should furnish an introduction to the special social sciences. Others endeavour to locate sociology' as the philosophical synthesis of the results of the special social sciences, in which view it resembles somewhat the philosophy of history. Giddings includes both functions in his description of the science. He says in his ''Principles of .sociology'": "While Sociology in the broadest sense of the word is the comiirehensive science of society, coextensive with the entire field of the special social sciences, in a narrower sense and for the purposes of university study and of general exposition it may be defined as the science of social elements and first principles. . . . Its far-reaching principles are the postulates of special sciences and as such they co-ordinate the whole body of social general- izations and bind them together in a large scientific whole" (p. 33).

There is a general tendency towards the establish- ment of a single dominant interest in social groups. Periods of unstable equilibrium tend to be followed by constnictive epochs in which some one social interest tends to dominate. This is the case when social groups are primitive and isolated .as well as when they are highly organized and progressive. It may be the food interest, the maintenance f>f the group against invasion, the thirst for conquest inc;ir- nate in a leader, or the establishment of the Kingdom of God on earth that serves as the ba.sis of social unity. In any case, the tendency of soci;il groups towards imity is practically universal. In earlier stages of civilization the process is relatively simiile, but to-day, when differences of climate, race, environ-