Page:The New International Encyclopædia 1st ed. v. 05.djvu/270

* COMMUNICATIO IDIOMATUM. 222 COMMUNISM. peculiar properties to the other, so that they become similar, each having as a derived prop- erty what the other has as origiual. Consult 'J'honiasius. Die Christliche Doffnieiiffescliichtc, ii. (Erlangen, 1ST4-76). See Christoloc.y. COMMUNION (Lat. commiinio, participa- tion, from coinmiinis. common). In ecclesiasti- cal language, that relation, involving mutual claims and duties, in which tho.se stand who are united by uniformity of belief in one religious body or church. To exclude from this relation and its involved rights is to excommunicnie. The most visible symbol of this relation being the partaking together of the Lord's Supper, that rite is often called the Communion. See Lord's Supper ; and, for communion table, Alt.vr. COMMUNION IN BOTH KINDS. A term of theolog. implying that, in the celebration of (he Lord's Supper, comuumicants partake of both (he bread and the wine. It is universally ac- knowledged that in the Primitive Church both the bread and the cup were distriliuted to all W'ho communed. Sects which, like the Mani- eh^ans, discarded the wine, were condemned as irregular. Earlv popes commanded the use of both kinds (e.g.'Celasius I., 492-496). As, how- ever, there was frequent occasion to carry the consecrated elements from the church to sick persons at their homes, it became customary, for convenience, to dip the bread in the wine, admin- istering, in this way, both in one. At len;rth it was thought more convenient to omit the wine. In the thirteenth century. Robert Pidleyn. of Oxford, approved the custom of giving to the laity the bread only, in order, as was said, to avoid the danger of spilling the wine. This view was adopted by the scholastic theologians, who taught that Christ was wholly present in the sacrament under either form, and that, conse- quently, one form was sulficient for a valid ob- servance of it. Thomas Aquinas and Bonaven- tura, especially, advocated the administration of the comnuuiion under one form only. As this view predominated in the course of time, it be- came the practice of the Church in the ^'est to withhold the cup from the laity. Against this the heretics of tlie iliddle Ages, as the Wal- denses, and especially the Hussite sect of Ca- lixtines (I'traquists). protested. The Protestant churches, also, were united in regarding the commiuiion in both kinds as essential to the right observance of the ordinance. The prac- tice of the Roman Catholic Church was con- firmed and made binding by the Council of Trent in 1563. It is defended on the ground that the cup is not necessary to the com- pleteness of the sacrament. Since the whole Christ, as to His body, soul, and divinity, is not only in each species, bit in every particle of both, he who receives the consecrated bread re- ceives the whole Christ. But while this law is uniformly enforced in the Western Roman Catho- lic Church, those portions of the Eastern churches that acknowledge the supremacy of the Pope are allowed to retain both forms; and the same toleration has been offered to Protestants in order to facilitate their return into the unity of the Church under the Roman See. See Lord's Supper. COMMUNISM (Fr. rommunisme. from com- muii. joint, common, from Lat. communis, com- mon). - system of society in which private property is abolished and all goods are held in common, the needs of each individual being sui)plied from public sources. It is unfortunate tluit no clear distinction is made between com- munism and socialism. The socialists are carry- ing on a political agitation which may or may not lead to communism. Communists usually in theory, always in practice, have withdrawn from the general life into separate coiumunities and then followed their plans. It is probably correct to say that communism is the radical wing of socialism. Conimunism should not be confused with the so-called French Communists of 1871, who were seeking political changes in the com- iiiunes. A great deal of unwarranted reproach has been ])ut upon conununism either through ignorance or because of vagaries attached to many plans for its realization. It is really a reaction against the evils which have, hitherto, at least, always accompanied private property. In reality, too, it is older than the present system. All histor- ical nations, so far as known, at one time held their land in common, the individual having only the use of a portion of it for a certain period. A survival still exists in the Russian -l.')')-. Cultivated land seems first to have be- come i)rivate property, the meadows and forests remaining common. In ancient Greece the evils of private property called forth many suggestions of another .system. These were ridiculed in the popular comedies of the day. The most famous of the proposed sys- tems is that made by Plato, in the licpnhlic. Private property and private families are the chief influences tending to exalt the welfare of the individual over that of the State. Dispense with these, put men and women on equal footing, and let fitness be the test for positions. Let the children be educated by the State. Plato never conceived of a democracy. He could not conceive of a State without slaves; these formed the sub- stratum of his Republic. Plato, however, appre- ciated that his plan was ideal and would not be realized. His scheme went contrary to the spirit of the times and aroused only discussion. The proposal for the abolition of the private family seems to coincide with the ideas of other writers. Turning from speculative Greece to Rome, we find no such ideal proposals. Individ- ualism ^•as too strongly intrenched. In the East, however, there was a different spirit. In Palestine, the Essenes and Thera- jieutse held property in common, and .Tosephus (Antiq. xi.. 8. 3) says that one joining the Essenes had to surrender his private property. ^luch is said about the communism of tlie early Christians. A certain degree of it existed, but it seems to have been purely voluntary, many Christians retaining their private property. In any case, the institution did not long endure. The ascetic tendencies which often manifested themselves in communistic forms among hereti- cal and orthodox sects were introduced into the West from the East. The ilanichseans believed that matter was evil. Before an inquisition at Turin in 1030 a heretic declared: "We hold all our goods in conunon with all men." Other heretical sects, the Catharists (eleventh century) and the Ajiostles (thirteenth century), held simi- lar views. The Brothers and Sisters of (he Free Spirit held that, before the Fall, men were like God, that Paradise must be reintroduced with