Page:Catholic Encyclopedia, volume 3.djvu/661

 CHARITY

599

CHARITY

widows. They became quite numerous in the Neth- erlands and Germany, but failed to retain their early spirit, especially in the matter of respect for ecclesias- tical authority." By the end of the sixteenth century their career hail practically ceased. Among the other communities worthy of mention are: that of St. Anthony of Vienne. which arose in the second half of the eleventh century to minister to those afflicted with the disease known as St. Anthony's fire, and whose period of usefulness lasted about two centuries ; the Alexian Brothers, originally a lay association whose chief work was to bury the dead, but which Boon undertook other charitable functions; they were formed into a religious congregation in 1458, and still exist in charge of hospitals; the Trinitarians, and the congregation founded by Raymund of Pennafort and Peter Nolasco, both of which appeared about the be- ginning of the thirteenth century, and in the course of the next five hundred years relieved an immense amount of physical and mental wretchedness by ran- soming captive s, particularly from the Mohammedans; finally, the "Fratres Pontlfices (Bridge Builders), who during the last four centuries of the Middle Ages made bridges and roads, erected inns for poor and sick travellers, and protected merchants and other wayfarers against the thievery and violence of high- waymen. Their diffusion was rapid and general throughout Europe, and their services to the social and commercial life of the period wire incalculable. To the modern mind an organization bound by a religious \ ow tu tin- avocation of bridge-building may seem fan- tastic, but it wasmerelya particular illustration of the general fact that in the Agesof Faith the Church was able to create an institution for the relief of every social need. (See Bridge-Building Brotherhood.)

A very important agency in the charitable activity of tic later Middle Ages was that of pious foundations or endowments. They consisted of lands or other rev- enue-producing property, the income of which was to be expended for the benefit of the poor. In return for this charity the beneficiaries were expected to pray for the donor, or for the repose of his soul. Here we see the same conception of charity as an instrument of equality between rich and poor, which was enun- ciated by St. Paul and exemplified in the primitive oblations. Many of the foundations required that requiem Masses should be celebrated for the bene- factor. The greater number were connected with monasteries and hospitals, although some were en- trusted to the parish churches and, in the cities, to tin- civil magistrates. Besides their hospitals, the free cities gradually undertook other works of charity, until in the fifteenth century they either directly or indirectly discharged the greater part of the task of relieving the poor, the helpless, and the stranger. The guilds, which played such an important and varied role in the life of the cities, were not merely associations having charge of trade and industry; they were often mutual benefit societies which cared for all needy members and for the dependent families of needy ami deceased members. As a result of the charitable activity of Church, municipality, guild. and other associations like the Catenderii in Germany and the HumUiati in Italy, there was practically no unrelieved poverty in the cities during the later Mid- dle Ages. The spectre of the modern proletariat, wretched, debased, with no definite place in the social organism, and no definitely recognized claims upon any social group or institution, had no counterpart in the municipal life of that time.

From the fact that in the cities the care of the poor

bad for the most part been taken over by municipal

us in the fifteenth century, and that the parish

system of relief had ceased before tl ml of the

eleventh, it is not to be inferred that the charitable activity and influence of the Church were restricted to the religious orders and religious associations. The

whole structure of municipal charity was built up under her inspiration, encouragement, and direction. All through the Middle Ages the diocesan clergy con- tinued to collect and distribute the means of charita- ble relief. In the cities tiny supplied the needs of those persons who had been overlooked by the monas- teries, hospitals, and guilds. In the country the theory of feudal responsibility for all dependents caused the charity of the diocesan clergy to be con- fined to travellers and strangers. Moreover, Rat- zinger maintains that in England the system of parish relief continued in full vigour and efficiency up to the time of the Reformation (op. cit ., p. 421 sq.). Pro- lessor Ashley contends that it had disappeared before the twelfth century, but his conclusion is based on the presumption of similarity of conditions in England and on the Continent rather than upon positive argu- ments (English Economic History, II, 309 sq.). Then, there was the beneficent influence of the Church upon social and political institutions. Her prohibi- tion of usury, which was also under the ban of the civil law, was a great boon to the poor and all the economically weak. For in those days money was nearly always borrowed to meet temporary and per- sonal needs, and not as now for use as capital. While the theological proof that interest-taking was unlaw- ful may not have been any better understood by the mass of the medieval population than by many of its modern critics, the doctrine itself, reinforced by the ecclesiastical and civil legislation, effectively taught men that gains ought to Be the fruit of labour not of exploitation, and on the whole protected the eco- nomically weak against the economically strong (cf. Ashley, op. cit., II, 434 sq.). When the increased need for loans threatened to place large numbers of the people at the mercy of the Jewish usurers, the Monies Pietatis were established, mostly by the Fran- ciscans, from which money could lie borrowed on pay- ment of a sum sufficient to cover risks and the cost of maintenance. Finally, the ( Ihurcb successfully incul- cated what Dr. Cunningham has called, "a keen sense of personal responsibility in the employment of secu- lar power of every kind" (Western Civilization, II, 104). King, prince, and feudal lord held their office from God, and were responsible to Him for the people committed to their charge. 1 lie poor, the weak, and the helpless were, in theory, and to a considerable de- gree in practice, objects of their special care. While the cultivators of the land remained, until the latter part of the Middle Ages, unfree, "bound to the soil ", they enjoyed security of tenure, and could claim the protection ami support of tin- lord. The mutual duties and rights of lord and serf were in a high de- gree personal, and not reducible to any mere cash- nexus. The principles of charity expounded dur- ing the last three centuries remained the same as those

found in the Scripture and in the Christian teaching of every age from the beginning. (Inly tiny were

presented more precisely and systematically. Thus

St. Thomas, whose treatment of the matter m:i\ be taken as typical, declares that charity towards the neighbour should have as its motive tin- love of Cod, ami that almsgiving may be made meritorious of eternal rewards and expiatory of the temporal pun- ishment due to sin. lie insists that fraternal charit y

ought to be free. -p. nit a in'.. i is, fr..m the heart. When

he speaks of it as a duty In- has in mind moral duty,

not the constraint oi ext< mal la\* (cf. Summa Theo-

logica. I II I. nil of Q, JCCtii). While he maintained

that the contemplative hie is in itself of higher moral ami supernatural worth than the active life, inasmuch as it is more directly coii. i rned with love oi God, he also pointed out that a life of activity and labour may

become strictly obligatory, ami hence more merit. .ii ous than a life ,.f contemplation lor example, in order to gain a livelihood, escape the moral dangers of

idleness, or give alms to the needy (II [I,Q.clxxxii,aa.