The Catholic bulletin. [volume] (St. Paul, Minn.) 1911-1995, 1914-03-07
REPLIES TO, Mr.. HILLQUIT's At
TACK ON THE CHURCH IN THE
MARCH ISSUE OF "EVERY-
BoDY'S MAGAZINE"

MARCH ISSUE OF "EVERY-
BoDYs MAGAZINE"
The following letter was written by
the Reverend John A. Ryan, d. D., of
st. Paul Seminary, to very promi-
nent Socialist who courteously asked
how he would reply to Mr.. Hillquit's
attack on the Church in the March
number of "Everybody's Magazine"
The name of the person to whom it
was written is withheld.
st. Paul Seminary,
st. Paul, Mimi,
Feb. %, 1914.
My Dear Sir:
| wish | had time to answer ade-
quately the assertions in Mr.. Hillquits
diatribe against the Church on pages
377 and 378 of the March number of
! "Everybody's Magazine" AS things
are, I can only indicate in the briefest
way some lines of reply, and perhaps
refer you to some sources of informa-
ton and argument on the subject.
With the exception of the refer
ences to the Christians at Jerusalem,
and the Fathers denunciation of the
rich, the first eleven sentences of his
statement are false. They have no
support in the authentic documents
which record the history of that Pc
Rod. What they represent is the in
depreciation given to history by Kaut-
sky and others who wish to justify
their apriori theory of economic de-
terminism. Now I have not time to
prove these statements of mine, but
l may observe that the burden of
proof is evidently upon the man who
makes assertions such as those of Mr..
Hillquit. No historian of any author
ity subscribes to any such interpre-
tation of the Church history of the
first three centuries. Why, then,
should a defender of the Church be
required to refute these purely gratu-
itous statements?
In the April number of the maya
zine Mr.. Hillquit will say, in reply
to my statement that the authentic
documents of that period do not bear
out the theory of Kautsky regarding
the origin and development of Chris
tianity, that there are no contempt
rary historical documents. Substan-
TALLY the same position is taken by
Untermann and others. How, then,
can Hillquit make these assertions
concerning the early history of the
Church, if there exist no records of
is making history out of his inner
consciousness to square with his april
orr theory of social causation. AS a
matter of fact, contemporary docu-
ments do exist In proof of this state
ment, l would refer to the rational.
list, Adolph Harnack. A brief discus
sion of this subject will be found in
Ming's Religion of Modern Social
ism," Chapter vi.
With regard to Hillquit's reference
to the Fathers, would say that it is
considerably exaggerated. l am send
ing you a little work of mine on this
phase of the subject, entitled, cal
legged Socialism of the Church Fa-
TIERS"
Hillquit's statements about the Mid.
die Ages contain a certain amount of
truth, combined with suppression
of truth and suggestion of untruth
which renders the entire passage ex-
tremely misleading. He ignores en-.
tirely the anti-usury legislation of the
Church in that period, the beneicent
action of the guilds, the abolition OF
slavery, and the gradual progress from
serfdom to system of dual owner
ship of land,-all of which movements
were actively fostered by the Church
He does not seem to know that the
industrial arrangements of the later
Middle Ages brought to the laboring
people a greater share of contempt
rary wealth than they have ever en-
joyed before or since. Mr.. H. M
Hyndman, the English Socialist, who
is scholar, and who apparently takes
his history from the realm of facts
paints in his Historical Basis Of So
cialism,'' PIP. IA, Is and elsewhere
quite a different picture from that OF
Mr.. Hillquit / would refer you fur
Their to Ashley's English Economic
History" especially the last chapter
of each of the two volumes, for a
thorough discussion of the attitude OF
the medieval Church to the Industrial
relations and problems of the time.
Professor Ashley is not Catholic
Neither does he draw his statements
regarding facts from his imagination
or his prejudices.
The third section of Hillquit's ar
raignment, that referring to modern
times, is a characteristic mixture OF
irrelevant truths, half truths and
falsehoods. The assertions that the
Church can be relied upon to take
the employers side in every impor
tant labor struggle" and that "the
Catholic Church cares little for moral
ity per se,' are, of course, ridiculously
untrue. They are refuted by hun
dred instances that I could readily
set down, had l the time. If the
Church, as Hillquit intimates in his
closing sentence, is actuated only by
the desire to check liberating move
ments, then it must be guided always
by sordid and pecuniary motives. On
that assumption the bishops and