As we saw in the
previous posting on this subject, the agrarian socialist Henry George and
the renegade priest Edward McGlynn seem to have provided the original motive
for a new encyclical on the subject of socialism and why what was originally
known as “the Democratic Religion,” “The New Christianity,” “Neo-Catholicism,”
and many other names was not a very good thing for anyone, especially the
downtrodden workers socialism was presumably intended to help.
 |
| The New Age, Second Series (1907) |
The fact was,
however, although George and McGlynn created quite a stir as a result of George’s
try to become mayor of New York City and McGlynn’s grandstanding with the
Vatican, once they were out of the limelight there was no longer any need for
an encyclical exclusively on “the Land Question.”
There was,
however, a pressing need for something to address the growing problem of the
New Things of socialism, modernism, and the New Age — which not by
coincidence was to receive a few years later the label by which it is known. It was in
1894 that the
magazine The New Age (not to be confused with the Masonic publication of the same name) was founded as a
journal of socialism, liberal Christianity, and esotericism, i.e., the New Things. So influential was the magazine that it gave
its name to the movement (although the esoteric and decadent journal The Yellow Book gave it a run for the money). Before it
ceased publication in 1938, the New Age
contributed to the liberalization and socialization of three generations of
intellectuals.
Thus, it may have
been George’s and McGlynn’s sudden eclipse from fame that persuaded Leo XIII to
expand the planned statement condemning George’s proposal to make the State the
universal landlord into something much more comprehensive — and more
innovative.
The fact was that
ever since the New Christianity and Neo-Catholicism had first appeared, papal
efforts to stem the tide of the new things had not been effective. Since 1832 declarations, condemnations, and
anathemas had been issued to little or no effect. The pope needed a change in tactics.
 |
| Cavour, Sardinian Prime Minister |
It may have been
Leo XIII’s having served in civil government that led him to realize mere
condemnation would never be sufficient to halt the spread of socialism and
modernism. A practical as well as moral alternative
to the new things was essential if they were to be successfully resisted, and
from his personal experience in politics, he knew exactly what was needed.
As governor of
Perugia Leo XIII had promoted widespread capital ownership and had even
established a savings bank, capitalized partly with his personal funds, to enable
the poor to purchase land and businesses on credit. He had also completely reformed the
educational system to make it accessible to the non-wealthy.
Everything had
been confiscated when the Kingdom of Sardinia conquered the Papal States, and
all economic and political power concentrated in the new élite that took over. While
the future pope was governor, however, widespread poverty disappeared, the poor
were educated, the prisons were emptied, and the churches were full.
Leo XIII was
fully aware that Sardinia would never have succeeded had the ordinary people of
the country who revered Pius IX had private property, and thus power. He agreed with American statesman Daniel
Webster that “power naturally and necessarily follows property.”
 |
| Pope Leo XIII |
As pope, Leo XIII
knew that if the new things in both Church and State were to be effectively
resisted, it was essential that as many people as possible become capital
owners. To be free and virtuous, people
must be independent and receive income as a natural right, rather than as
charity or gift, or because the State mandated higher wages or redistributed
wealth.
Consulting with
leading experts in the field, Leo XIII spent nearly five years painstakingly
constructing the moral, legal, and economic argument against socialism, and in
favor of widespread capital ownership. Rerum Novarum is, quite possibly, one of
the most deeply researched and carefully written papal documents of all
time. It cannot be understood taken out
of context, whether religious, philosophical, theological, or even historical. Nor does the encyclical make sense if the
reader confuses principles and doctrines that cannot be changed, with
applications of principles and prudential recommendations that can and must be
changed.
Once it is
realized that Leo XIII’s goal was to present a viable alternative to socialism
and modernism, the argument in Rerum
Novarum is simple and straightforward.
To summarize the first part of the encyclical,
 |
| Crafty Socialist Agitators |
·
“Crafty agitators” are stirring up people to
revolt by changing the meanings of terms such as religion and natural law and
perverting moral judgments.
·
Institutions have degenerated to the point that
economic and political power has become concentrated in the hands of a few,
virtually enslaving ordinary people.
·
Taking advantage of this, the socialists have
sought to destroy the foundation of society and enslave everyone by abolishing
private property.
·
Only by making as many people as possible
capital owners can socialism be defeated.
The reasoning is,
of course, much more involved and complex than these points suggest, but that
is the essence of the argument. The rest
of the encyclical is taken up with prudent suggestions on how the papal program
might be implemented, but the important thing, as Leo XIII was well aware, was
to make as many people as possible into capital owners as soon as possible, or
things would only get worse.
On the other
hand, if the papal program was followed.
As Leo XIII explained,
Many excellent results will follow. First of all, property will become more
equitably divided. There will be great
abundance of the fruits of the earth. Men always work harder and more readily
when they work on that which belongs to them.
A third advantage is that men would cling to the country in which they
were born, for no one would exchange his country for a foreign land if his own
afforded him the means of living a decent and happy life.
#30#
