according to need the conclusion may be deduced that any or all have a right to live in idleness. On the other hand the principle, that each should receive in strict accordance to the contribution he makes to the resources of society, is very hard upon the helpless and inefficient. Neither statement can be applied generally to society, without serious mischief; while it seems impossible to reconcile these formula when stated in general terms.

The problems presented to the Christian man by life in modern society solvuntur ambulando. The difficulty about Christian principles vanishes if they are regarded not as principles for the organisation of society, but as the basis of personal duty in society; they may furnish us, each and all, with conceptions of what our personal conduct ought to be. The principle of distribution according to need is the basis of the personal Christian duty of alms-giving, and it is for each one of us to interpret his ability conscientiously for himself. The principle of remuneration according to contribution is the basis of the social duty of work. It is incumbent upon each man to see that his work is so diligent and thorough that he is making an adequate contribution for the share he receives from society, and this applies as much to those who are engaged in

organising business or in the pursuit of knowledge as it does to manual labourers. In actual life and personal conduct, there is little difficulty in reconciling the two principles, and it is possible to be strenuous in giving effect to both. What is chiefly needed from the Christian point of view in the present day is the exercise of a spiritual power to awaken individuals to a sense of duty and to inspire them to do it. The Salvation Army has had an extraordinary influence in convincing men of the reality of the spiritual as a factor in human life, because it has dealt with individuals personally; while the laying down of external principles in general terms would be of comparatively little help in the special circumstances of the present day. From the religious point of view the social doctrine of the Encyclicals is excellent ethically, but it is unconvincing and uninspiring; it has not the marks of spiritual authority to which the individual conscience is drawn to respond.

III. THE ALOOFNESS OF ANGLO-SAXON

PEOPLES

While the Roman Church as an effective guide in the solution of political and social difficulties seems to have made little progress during the last decade on the Continent, there is no indication

that the Anglo-Saxon peoples are prepared to reverse the decision which was taken at the Reformation and to accept guidance from Papal authority.1 There are no signs in the political world of a readiness to submit to an external spiritual authority; but this does not mean that these peoples are altogether indifferent about bringing a religious influence to bear on political life; it means that they hold that spiritual influence may be most effectively exercised on the individual personally, that the appeal to the individual conscience is the most direct which can be made, that it is least encumbered by secular forms, and that it bears fruit immediately in action on a larger or smaller scale. Hence it appears probable that whatever progress the Roman Church may make in recovering lost ground, as regards the spread of theological doctrine and habits of worship, there is no weakening in the opposition to accepting the guidance of an external authority in political and social life. The English Reformation was based on this principle, and the deep-seated repugnance to national submission to Rome still rests on the same foundation.

There is a very general tendency to regard the Roman Catholic community with suspicion, and

1 There is a widespread feeling, put by M. Latapie in definite form, that the Papal See may be so far concerned in protecting its own interests as to fail to be an impartial arbiter. Times, 23 June, 1915.

to believe that they have a sense of duty to look primarily at the possibility of fostering the Roman Church, and only secondarily at the good of the community as a whole, whether it is a city or a nation. From the point of view of the Romanist, who believes that the good of the community as a whole can only be attained through submission to the Roman Church, this distinction does not exist; but it is strongly present in the minds of many members of the community, and the conflict is always apt to arise over questions in regard to marriage and to facilities for the religious education of children. Owing to these points of cleavage it becomes difficult to treat society as a homogeneous whole, and the effectiveness of national organisation is endangered. But further than this, these points of difference may be the occasion of deep-seated cleavage. In the Prussian Kingdom the influence of the Papacy was strongly felt among the Poles and the people of the Rhine Provinces, and the Kultur Kampf proved a hindrance to the growth of a national life. In a similar fashion the Papal influence is strong among the Celtic population of Ireland,1 and the fear of the measures which might be adopted in a Dublin Parliament and of partiality in the administration of the laws through clerical intrigue, has

1 Plunkett, Ireland in the New Century, 99.

haunted the people of Ulster in their opposition to Home Rule. It is even possible that a similar cleavage will show itself in some of the United States; and that in these areas, where the French Canadians or the Irish are a dominating majority, alarm may be raised as to the possibility of a complete departure from the American tradition in regard to political and social life. How far these fears and suspicions may be justified is not a point on which it is worth while to express an opinion, but the fact remains that the Roman Church has had, and is likely to continue to have, comparatively little opportunity of bringing religious influence to bear on the political and social life of the Anglo-Saxon peoples.

From many points of view this severance is a matter of great regret, especially as it has prevented Christian opinion in England and America from taking such full account, as it deserves, of the work of Roman Catholic writers. Amid the chaos of opinions which are expressed by different authors in the name of Christianity, or as deducible from Christianity, Roman writers have preserved a remarkably sane and judicial tone; even those readers who do not find them convincing can hardly fail to regard them as impressive; they never allow themselves to forget that the work