PROPHET OF THE CHRISTIAN SOCIAL MANIFESTO:
JOSEPH HUSSLEIN, S.J.
PROPHET OF THE CHRISTIAN SOCIAL MANIFESTO: JOSEPH HUSSLEIN, S.J. HIS LIFE, WORK, & SOCIAL THOUGHT by
Stephen A. Werner
Marquette Studies in Theology No. 24 Andrew Tallon, Series Editor Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Dat Werner, Stephen A., 1956Prophet of the Christian social manifesto : Joseph Husslein, S.J., his life, work & social thought / by Stephen A. Werner. p. cm. — (Marquette studies in theology ; 24) Includes bibliographical references and index. ISBN 0-87462-648-X (pbk. : alk. paper) 1. Husslein, Joseph Casper, 1873- 2. Sociology, Christian (Catholic)--United States—History of doctrines—19th century. 3. Sociology, Christian (Catholic)—United States—History of doctrines—20th century. I. Title. II. Series. BX1753 .W37 2001 261.8'092—dc21 00-012264
This book was made possible in part by a grant from the Marchetti Fund at Saint Louis University. All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording or otherwise, without prior permission of the publisher.
Contents Introduction ........................................................................ 7 The Significance of Joseph Husslein, S.J. Chapter 1........................................................................... 10 The Life of Joseph Husslein, S.J. Chapter 2........................................................................... 21 The Shapers of Husslein Chapter 3........................................................................... 39 Husslein’s The Church And Labor Chapter 4........................................................................... 64 Major Themes of Husslein’s Social Thought—Democratic Industry: An Alternative to Socialism and Capitalism Chapter 5........................................................................... 95 Husslein’s “A Catholic Social Platform” Chapter 6......................................................................... 129 Husslein’s Other Work Conclusion ...................................................................... 155 Appendix ......................................................................... 159 Husslein’s “A University in Print” Bibliography .................................................................... 167 Index ............................................................................... 186
Introduction: The Significance of Joseph Husslein, S.J. Joseph Husslein lived at his desk. He spent most of his waking hours with his pencils, carbon paper, and typewriter. Yet this quiet man, with no close friends, was driven by a vision that only the teachings of Christ could bring justice to humanity. From behind his desk, as he labored to explain, promote, and develop Christian teaching, Joseph Husslein tried to change the world. Husslein saw the teachings of Christ as the only solution to the world’s problems. As a Jesuit priest in the 1900s, he believed the Roman Catholic Church to be the true interpreter of the Christian message. Gifted with a German penchant for work, Husslein struggled by writing, editing, and organizing to spread the message of Roman Catholicism as the only antidote to the world’s injustice1. Husslein lived at the convergence of several important developments for Roman Catholics. First, Pope Leo XIII made social justice a Catholic issue. In his 1891 encyclical letter, Rerum novarum, Leo XIII provided the catalyst, foundation, and approval for the development of modern Catholic social teaching. Prior to Rerum novarum social justice had been a peripheral issue for the Catholic Church. Second, in the United States the Catholic population grew tremendously due to immigration. Many immigrants suffered under the social and economic injustices of the time. The American Church took up social issues in a sincere desire to help these Catholic immigrants and to keep them from leaving the Church to join socialist and radical groups. Third, in the early 1900s the Church emerged from its status as a beleaguered “un-American” minority. In particular, support for the First World War proved the patriotism of American Catholics. As anti-Catholic nativism waned Catholic thinkers felt freer to criticize American institutions. Husslein began his work just at the moment when American Catholic social thinking became possible. Husslein was not alone in this effort2. His contemporaries included John A. Ryan, Peter Dietz, Frederick Kenkel and his fellow Jesuits on the staff at America. The fame of John Ryan eclipsed the others, including Joseph Husslein. Yet Husslein’s social teaching was unique.
8
Stephen A. Werner
Alone among Catholic social thinkers he used the bible extensively. Far more than his contemporaries he tried to deal with not only the spirit of Rerum novarum, and the later encyclical Quadragesimo anno (1931) of Pope Pius XI, but also with how to apply the content of these documents to social problems. Like Catholic social thinkers writers of his time, he attacked socialism. However, Husslein also vigorously attacked the abuses of capitalism. The Christian Social Manifesto, (1931) gives Husslein’s fully developed social critique of the injustice and “irreligion” he saw in America. Contemporaries of Husslein described him as a pioneer in American Catholic social thought. In particular, among American Catholic writers Husslein pioneered the use of scripture in attacking social injustice. Husslein attempted to develop a social ethics based on biblical, largely Old Testament, principles. Husslein also used historical arguments to show the Catholic Church as the defender of the worker and to develop a medieval guild model for modern worker cooperatives. Two of his books, Bible and Labor (1924) and The Christian Social Manifesto (1931) still provide insightful reading. Lastly, Husslein, with his imaginative and colorful literary style, popularized Catholic social teaching. Husslein also stands apart by the sheer volume of the social writing. With twelve books and over 500 hundred articles he produced the largest body of American Catholic social writings in his time. Yet Husslein’s efforts to promote Catholicism as the leaven for the world went beyond his social writing. He undertook three other projects. First, Husslein organized “A University in Print.” He edited over two hundred books on Catholic thought and culture.3 This project contributed significantly to American Catholic literature in the 1930s and 1940s. Husslein moved into the vanguard of the American Catholic literary revival of this period. A particular important work in the project was Husslein’s editing of Social Wellsprings (1940-1942) providing readable English translations of the social encyclicals of Leo XIII and Pius XI. Second, as part of the widespread movement among American Catholic universities in the early 1900s, Husslein established the School of Social Service at Saint Louis University in 1930 to promote Catholic social teaching and to train professional social workers. Third, Husslein wrote another nine books and dozens of articles on religious devotion. These works are excellent examples of the better Catholic spiritual literature of the period.
Introduction ~ The Significance of Joseph Husslein, S.J.
9
Despite the important role Husslein played, he has been all but forgotten.4 The lack of a detailed study of Husslein leaves the picture of American Catholicism, and in particular American Catholic social ethics, incomplete. Husslein rejected the notion that Christians should withdraw from the world. Rather, he believed that only the true religion of Christianity could save the world. And so he labored from sunup to long after dark to spread his vision of a just world.
Notes 1
Tome (107) described Husslein’s stance: “While there is never a question of a utopian society on earth, there is hope of a stable social order, but not without a return to the principles of justice and charity, as continually announced by the Holy See since the time of Pope Leo XIII.” 2 For general works on American Catholic social thought in the early 1900s see Abell, American Catholicism and Social Action: A Search for Social Justice, 1865-1950; Curran, American Catholic Social Ethics: Twentieth Century Approaches; and Roohan, American Catholics and the Social Question 1865-1900. 3 Husslein, “A University in Print” Jesuit Bulletin 15: 1-2, 8; Faherty, Better the Dream 298-300. 4 Husslein received international recognition for his work. His “A Catholic Social Platform” was published and widely distributed in England. A number of his books were reviewed in England and Ireland. Two were translated and published in Europe. He received a papal commendation for his book The Christian Social Manifesto. Lastly, many books in his “A University in Print” were distributed in English-speaking countries around the world. A number of short articles described the life and work of Husslein: “Husslein, Joseph Caspar,” New Catholic Encyclopedia; Matthew Hoehn, ed., Catholic Authors: Contemporary Biographical Sketches: 1930-1947, 344-45; “Rev. Joseph A. [sic] Husslein,” The News-Letter—Missouri Province 17 (February 1953): 139-41; George G. Higgins, “Joseph Caspar Husslein, S.J.: Pioneer Social Scholar,” Social Order 3 (February 1953): 51-53; Walter Romig, ed., The Book of Catholic Authors: (First Series) The only large scale treatment of Husslein was Tome’s thesis. Only a preliminary study, it provided a summary of Husslein’s social thought based only on Husslein’s books. Tome, 2-3, stated, “The purpose of the thesis is to establish what social topics Father Husslein wrote about, when he wrote about them, and, in general, how he treated them.” The only recent writing on Husslein has been Peter McDonough, Men Astutely Trained: A History of the Jesuits in the American Century. This book incorporated a previous article discussing Husslein by McDonough: “Metamorphoses of the Jesuits: Sexual Identity, Gender Roles, and Hierarchy in Catholicism.” However, McDonough did not accurately interpret Husslein’s writings. Many books written in the 1930s, 1940s, and 1950s on social issues cited Husslein. Archival material exists at the Jesuit Archives at 4517 West Pine, St. Louis, Mo.; at the files of the Central Bureau of the Central-Verein at 3717 Westminster Place, St. Louis, Mo.; and in the Archives of Saint Louis University.
10
Stephen A. Werner
Chapter 1 The Life of Joseph Husslein, S.J. Husslein waged a life-long battle against what he viewed as threats to a just social order: materialism, socialism, communism, and laissez faire capitalism. Husslein sought to develop and apply Catholic social teaching and to promote the Catholic faith as an alternative. Husslein devoted his life to this struggle which he saw as his mission and calling. Although Husslein was a modern figure—dying in 1952—his birth in 1873 was only eight years after the American Civil War and three years after Vatican I.
Early Life and Education Joseph Caspar Husslein was born on June 10, 1873, in Milwaukee, Wisconsin, the only son of George Husslein (1836-1915), who was born in Bavaria, and Sophia (Waldburger) Husslein (1835-1925), who was born in Baden, Germany. Baptized at St. Mary’s Church in Milwaukee, he attended its parish grade school from 1879 to 1885.1 An anecdote is reported about his enrollment at the school: His mother, who spoke no English, introduced him to the priest with the remark, ‘This boy does not talk English.’ ‘Oh, yes I do,’ came the quick answer. Reared in a neighborhood where only German was spoken in the home and school, Joseph, without his parents’ knowledge, learned English from his playmates after school. (News-Letter 139)
From 1885 to 1891 Husslein attended Marquette College in Milwaukee (later Marquette University), a Jesuit school which had opened six years earlier. The curriculum, combining what would now be high school and college, required seven years for a bachelor of arts degree. The years were referred to as: Third Academic, Second Academic, First Academic, Humanities, Poetry, Rhetoric, and Philosophy (Hamilton 19-22). Husslein graduated in 1891 with an A.B. On 14 August 1891, he entered the Society of Jesus at St. Stanislaus Seminary in Florissant, Missouri.2 After a two year Novitiate (1891-1893) and a one year Juniorate (1893-1894) at St. Stanislaus, he attended Saint Louis University from 1894 to 1897, receiving an M.A. in philosophy in 1897.
1~ The Life of Joseph Husslein, S.J.
11
From 1897 to 1899 he taught Latin, Greek, English, history, and math at Saint Louis University and from 1899 to 1902 he taught Latin, Greek, English, public speaking, and history at St. Stanislaus. His language skills included Latin, Greek, French, and German (Jesuit Archives, Tome 6). Husslein’s early training was primarily literary. In his early years he envisioned himself a poet. While I wrote abundantly in those days, both prose and verse, my keenest interest was centered in poetry. It was not choice but a sense of duty that later switched me into a different avocation, but the old love was never lost. (Romig 132, Tome 6)
This literary emphasis gave a fluid and readable style to Husslein’s writing that would be crucial in his later efforts to promote Catholic teaching. In 1902 Husslein returned to Saint Louis University to complete his theological studies. He was ordained in St. Louis on 28 June 1905 by Archbishop Glennon at St. Francis Xavier (College) Church. Husslein returned to St. Stanislaus for Tertianship from 1906 to 1907.3 From 1907 to 1908 he taught English at the Juniorate at Jesuit Normal School in Brooklyn, New York, until it was closed. He was then transferred to St. Ignatius College in Cleveland, Ohio (later John Carroll University), where he taught Latin, Greek, English, history, and math. In 1910 his first work was published—a play: Athol; or, Near the Throne: A Drama of the Days of Antoninus Pius, Emperor of Rome. The play attracted a theatrical agency which offered to produce another work in New York. Husslein always experimented with ways to reach a wider audience (News-Letter 140, Holubowicz 281).4 Joseph Husslein became interested in socialism while proofreading two books by John J. Ming, S.J.: The Characteristics and the Religion of Modern Socialism, and The Morality of Modern Socialism.5 Father Ming (1838-1910), a Swiss immigrant, needed help revising the English text of his books. Ming showed Husslein his collection of books on socialism and socialist literature. This sparked Husslein’s interest. Husslein later recalled: I was requested to give stylistic aid in the publication of two important books dealing with Socialism in its relation to religion and morality. This brought me into contact with a well-selected library of the most authoritative books written by Socialist leaders throughout the world. . . . I could not possibly therefore, be
12
Stephen A. Werner mistaken in the complete grasp I was gaining of this subject. I realized no les s the thorough, inveterate and inextinguishable hatred of Christian faith, Christian culture and of all religion that underlay the doctrines of Socialism. But worst of all was the systematic deception practised upon the masses, upon individuals and organized bodies under the guise of innocence and public mindedness. On the other hand, I realized no less how little informed both Catholic clergy and people were on this subject at the time. I therefore considered it a sacred duty to give what light and counsel I could in this critical situation. (Romig 132-33)
At this pivotal moment Husslein dedicated his life to attacking socialism and to promoting the Catholic answer to social problems.
First Writings: America, First Books In 1909 John J. Wynne, S.J., (1859-1948) started the journal America which published five articles by Husslein in its first year. In 1911 Husslein moved to New York to become an Associate Editor and Secretary of America, holding these positions until 1927. He contributed over four hundred signed articles and book reviews to America and countless unsigned articles. Husslein beginning writing for America at a time when the journal contained ads for learning new languages by listening to Edison cylinders and ads for Nazareth College in Kentucky claiming its location was “free from malarial influences.” Husslein’s work at America profoundly impacted his entire career (Tome 36-37, 105-106).6 Husslein worked out his social thought in series of articles which were later compiled and revised as books. Rather than writing as an abstract theoretician, Husslein developed the style of a journalist and popularizer, and produced intelligent and readable articles. Also, he was forced to apply papal teaching to current concrete social problems. This gave a timeliness to his writings. In 1911, America Press published Husslein’s first pamphlet, The Pastor and Socialism: A Paper Read Before The Ecclesiastical Round Table of the Priests of the Ohio Valley. A copy was mailed to every pastor in the United States and Canada. Husslein wrote dozens of pamphlets in his career—some were even printed in Braille. Husslein described his pamphlet writing as one of his most gratifying works. He was particularly pleased that one of his pamphlets was found among the belongings of the Irish ascetic, Matt Talbot (Romig 135-36). (Few
1~ The Life of Joseph Husslein, S.J.
13
people today appreciate the importance and widespread use of pamphlets in the early part of this century.) A year later, Husslein’s first book, The Church and Social Problems, was published by America Press (Tome 37-48).7 This work, based on articles in America in 1911 and 1912, refuted socialism and presented a Catholic solution to social problems. The book took particular aim at Christian socialists. All the major themes Husslein would develop in his later social writings were in this book. It was well received and encouraged him to write other books. No student of social problems from the anti-socialist point of view can afford to fail to read Father Husslein’s latest book. Few critics of Socialism have a better fund of information or are more sure of their facts than Father Husslein, and his treatment of a subject is always so comprehensive that he leaves little to the imagination. As a result, the present volume is a most valuable handbook for the man who wishes to know the reasons why Socialism is antagonistic to the principles of Christianity and good citizenship.8
Husslein wrote the article “Syndicalism” for The Catholic Encyclopedia. In 1917 Benziger published his second book: The Catholic’s Work in the World: A Practical Solution of Religious and Social Problems of To-day.9 It was translated into German. The book, a handbook for organizing Catholics, was inspired by socialist organizational literature (Tome 48-53, CW 66). Husslein proposed to bring converts into the Church with a, “Win My Chum Week.” The book stressed the importance of Catholic literature. Husslein also wrote What Luther Taught with John C. Reville, S.J., which was translated into Portuguese. While working for America Husslein taught social economics at Fordham University from 1916 to 1921 and from 1927 to 1929. He received his Ph.D. from Fordham in 1919 in sociology. P. J. Kenedy & Sons published his dissertation, The World Problem: Capital, Labor, and the Church.10 It is said “The World Problem,” by Rev. Joseph Husslein, S.J., was probably the last book the late Ex-President Theodore Roosevelt read. Just before his death he wrote of reading it with interest.11
In this book Husslein gave specific suggestions on monopolistic prices, the role of the state, strikes, unemployment, women workers, and cooperatives. This book, Husslein’s most specific application of pa-
14
Stephen A. Werner
pal social teaching to concrete issues, reflected his years of writing on current social problems for America. In addition to writing, editing, and teaching, Husslein lectured extensively. For example, he addressed the National Convention of the Brotherhood of Locomotive Engineers, speaking on the Catholic Church and labor organizations. Husslein wrote little on World War I. America remained neutral on the war until the United States joined the war (Talbot 62-67). Being of German descent, Husslein was in an awkward position. In his few references to the war he described it as the disastrous culmination of the evils of modern society which had broken away from the safe moorings of the Catholic Church. However, Husslein recognized that the efforts of war mobilization demonstrated the possibilities of cooperation for the common good. In 1919 P. J. Kenedy & Sons published Husslein’s Democratic Industry (Tome 66-72). This book gave the definitive American treatment of the then current theory that the problems of workers could be solved by a return to the ideals of the medieval guilds (Ryan, Social Reconstruction 179). Interest in the Middle Ages as a golden age flourished amid the disillusionment with modern society that followed World War I. Husslein proposed, “Democratic Industry”: cooperatives where workers either owned or controlled production. The year 1920 proved especially busy for Husslein. P. J. Kenedy & Sons published Evolution and Social Progress (Tome 72-82). This work attacked evolutionary theories, especially those of Ernst Heinrich Haeckel, a famous German zoologist. Husslein feared that evolutionary theories denied God’s creation of the earth. Furthermore, socialists used such theories to promote materialistic evolution, denying divine causality and free will. “Men believe in God or in materialistic evolution. There is no other alternative” (ESP vii). About this time, Husslein began a column in Our Sunday Visitor. Also in 1920 Husslein co-authored The Church and Labor with John A. Ryan (Tome 82-85). This work, published by The Macmillan Company and prepared for The Department of Social Action of the National Catholic Welfare Council, compiled writings on social issues of Ryan, Leo XIII, Pius X, Benedict XV; Cardinals Gibbons, Manning, O’Connell, Bourne; and five episcopal documents. Husslein provided chapters on social action, Frederic Ozanam, and Bishop Ketteler. Other than some pamphlet writing, this was Husslein’s and Ryan’s only effort at collaboration. The final chapter of The Church and Labor was Husslein’s “A Catholic Social Platform” which was also included in a textbook of
1~ The Life of Joseph Husslein, S.J.
15
moral theology by Charles Coppens published in 1920. This platform summarized Husslein’s social principles.
Professor of Social Work at Fordham University and Saint Louis University Joseph Husslein helped found Fordham University’s School of Philanthropy and Social Science.12 Husslein was also active in the Department of Social Action of the National Catholic Welfare Conference and was one of the founders and vice-presidents of the Catholic Conference on Industrial Problems (also associated with National Catholic Welfare Conference). Lastly, Husslein was a member of the Catholic Association for International Peace (Tome 50, Higgins 53). Husslein continued writing. In 1921 Matre & Company published Work, Wealth and Wages: A brief but suggestive exposition of the Christian principles underlying the great social problems of the day. It discusses, to this end, the questions of wages, of labor unions, of strikes and the class struggle, of woman labor and its proper safeguards, of Socialism, capitalism and industrial democracy. (WWW vii)
This pithy book summarized earlier books and used principles of the American bishops’ 1919 pastoral “Social Reconstruction” (Tome 85-87). Macmillan published Bible and Labor in 1924 as the fourth book of the Department of Social Action of the National Catholic Welfare Conference (Tome 87-89). This book analyzed the Old Testament’s treatment of social issues. Husslein’s first devotional book, The Little Flower and the Blessed Sacrament, was published in 1925 by Benziger to commemorate the Twenty-Seventh International Eucharistic Congress in Chicago in 1926. In this pocket-sized book, distributed at the Congress, Husslein detailed the writings of Thérèse of Lisieux on the Eucharist. Husslein wrote, The Reign of Christ: The Immortal King of Ages, published by P. J. Kenedy & Sons in 1928, in response to Pius XI’s encyclical on Christ the King, Quas primas (1925). This book discussed the theology of the Kingship of Christ, tracing its Old Testament roots, through the New Testament, to contemporary devotions. In 1929 The Mass of the Apostles; the Eucharist: Its Nature, Earliest History and Present Application was published by P. J. Kenedy & Sons.
16
Stephen A. Werner
This work traced the history of the Eucharist from its Old Testament sources, through the New Testament and the writings of the fathers, to the decrees of Pius X. In contact with the liturgical movement of his time, Husslein wrote this book to educate Catholics on the roots of the Eucharist. To reach a wider audience, Husslein even wrote a movie script on the Eucharist entitled The Hidden God; the Eucharist in Scripture, History and the Church’s Teaching Throughout the Ages; Synopsis of the Screen Portrayal, which was published in 1927 by National Film Producers of New York. (No evidence exists that this silent movie was produced.) The script emphasized scriptural and patristic development of the Eucharist. In 1929 Husslein’s Jesuit superiors transferred him to the Department of Sociology at Saint Louis University. There he taught sociology, social work, and social economics. In 1930 Husslein founded the School of Social Service at Saint Louis University. He served as director and dean of the school until 1941. Husslein belonged to the interfaith Social Justice Commission of St. Louis. In 1934 the St. Louis Sociology Society elected Husslein as president. He lectured frequently at such forums as the St. Louis Conference on Social Work and the Jewish Lecture Series in 1930-31. He gave the baccalaureate sermon for Marquette University in 1934.
Editing “A University in Print” Husslein felt the need for quality Catholic literature for the average person. In 1931 he organized “A University in Print” by editing three series of books published by the Bruce Publishing Company of Milwaukee: the Science and Culture Series begun in 1931, the Religion and Culture Series begun in 1934, and Science and Culture Texts begun in 1933. Some 213 books were published in biography, history, literature, education, social science, natural science, art, architecture, psychology, philosophy, scripture and religion: It was one of the first well-planned efforts at developing the Catholic Market. The first book was A Cheerful Ascetic by Father James J. Daly, S.J., of the Department of English of the University of Detroit. The reception of this work augured well for the entire series. Christopher Hollis’ two books, Thomas More and Erasmus, Shane Leslie’s The Oxford Movement, Hilaire Belloc’s The Question and the Answer, Martin C. D’Arcy’s Pain and the Providence of God, and Donald Attwater’s The Catholic Eastern Churches soon gave the Science and Culture Series an international flavor. (Faherty, Better the Dream 299)
1~ The Life of Joseph Husslein, S.J.
17
Husslein began this work at the age of 58 and continued it during his 60s and 70s. Husslein wrote five books in the series. In 1931 Bruce Publishing released The Christian Social Manifesto: An Interpretative Study of the Encyclicals Rerum Novarum and Quadragesimo Anno of Pope Leo XIII and Pope Pius XI. This work systematically examined Rerum novarum as supplemented by Quadragesimo anno: A comprehensive understanding of the authoritative Leonine Encyclical calls for a wealth of historic information and an extensive knowledge of Christian social tradition, which even the mature student is not often likely to possess. It abounds in brief statements filled with historic allusions; in condensed sentences like finely cut jewels that reflect the light from many facets; in stirring appeals and earnest warnings that sound the very depths of human thought and sentiment. Much of all this is necessarily lost to the average reader unless he is provided with careful and minute guidance such as the present volume offers him. (CSM vii)
The Christian Social Manifesto represented the culmination of Husslein’s social thought. In this work his forceful and prophetic critique of American capitalism reached its sharpest point. Husslein traveled to Rome in 1931 for the promulgation of Quadragesimo anno. The trip was arranged by the National Catholic Welfare Conference. Pius XI praised The Christian Social Manifesto in a letter written by Cardinal Pacelli, the Papal Secretary of State, who became Pius XII in 1939. This, Husslein’s best book, has been described as one of the most important books of Catholic sociology (Melvin Williams 40, 343). It provided a comprehensive presentation of Husslein’s social theory and its foundation on Rerum novarum. Husslein based The Christian Social Manifesto on his radio broadcasts. He made frequent use of radio in the 1930s, 1940s, and 1950s. The National Catholic Welfare Conference news service distributed transcripts of these broadcasts. Bruce Publishing released The Spirit World About Us in 1934. This work provided a biblically-based defense of angels, archangels, and spirits. It defended the existence of the spiritual world against attacks from rationalistic and materialistic thinkers. Husslein saw materialism as the ultimate cause of social problems. In 1936 Husslein signed, Organized Social Justice: An Economic Program for the United States Applying Pius XI’s Great Encyclical on Social Life. John A. Ryan, William J. Kerby, and Dorothy Day were
18
Stephen A. Werner
also among the 133 leading American Catholic social thinkers who signed it (D. O’Brien 64-66). Heroines of Christ was published by Bruce in 1939. Husslein edited this collection of stories on fourteen women saints such as Joan of Arc and Thérèse of Lisieux who had been beatified and/or canonized in recent years. In the midst of his editing, Joseph Husslein professed his final vows as a Jesuit in St. Louis, Missouri on 2 February 1939.13 In 1941 he resigned as director of the School of Social Service at Saint Louis University and also celebrated his golden jubilee: the fiftieth anniversary of his entry into the Jesuits. In 1940 Bruce published the first volume of Social Wellsprings: readable English translations of fourteen documents of Leo XIII on social issues, each with a short commentary by Husslein.14 A second volume, published in 1942 by Bruce, presented “Eighteen Encyclicals of Social Reconstruction by Pope Pius XI.” Social Wellsprings was well received—over twenty contemporary reviews. In 1945 The Golden Years: A Story of the Holy Family by a Wife, Mother, and Apostle of Christian Charity, a romanticized vision of the early years of Jesus, co-authored by Husslein, was published by Bruce. Also in 1945 Husslein became involved in a controversy over the publication of A Padre Views South America, by Peter Masten Dunne, S.J. The book “was severely criticized by certain persons in Rome.”15 Husslein defended the work, claiming the critics had not even read it. Early that year he had been recommended for work on the Confraternity Version of the New Testament because of his writing skill. Husslein refused the offer.16
Final Years Husslein’s provincial recommended that Husslein take on an assistant. Husslein declined, stating that he was in excellent health and doing more work than ever before.17 Husslein made a serious mistake. With no one prepared to take over the work, “A University in Print” would die with Husslein. Husslein, a quiet and reserved person, had no close friends. In his later years he rarely ventured outside the Jesuit residence. He did, however, spend a week in August each year in Milwaukee, Wisconsin, meeting with his publisher. Father Husslein lived a simple and pious life. He took his vow of poverty seriously; he wore the same cassocks for many years even when frayed at the sleeves. In 1951 he celebrated his diamond jubilee, the sixtieth anniversary of his entry into the Jesuits.
1~ The Life of Joseph Husslein, S.J.
19
Husslein’s last book, Channels of Devotion, published in 1953, after his death, described contemporary Catholic devotions. In the last months of his life, Husslein completed History of Early Man, a Catholic interpretation of human origins, which was not published. (No manuscript copy exists) Joseph Husslein died of a stroke on 19 October 1952. (He had a first stroke some months earlier.) He collapsed in the recreation room of the Jesuit residence. Helped to his feet, he walked to an automobile which took him to St. Mary’s Hospital in neighboring Clayton, Missouri. He was anointed, and two hours later, at 9:15 P.M., he died. The Jesuit Community Superior, Fr. William J. Fitzgerald, S.J (1878-1965) celebrated the requiem mass. Husslein was buried at St. Stanislaus Seminary in Florissant, Missouri. In 1972, when the seminary was sold, the remains of Father Husslein and others were removed to Calvary Cemetery in St. Louis, Missouri. In his lifetime Husslein, “a tireless worker, who often pours over proofs far into the night,”18 wrote twenty-one books, numerous pamphlets, over five hundred signed articles in such major Catholic publications as America, The Homilectic and Pastoral Review, The Ecclesiastical Review, and Our Sunday Visitor, and countless unsigned articles. Several of Husslein’s books went through numerous reprints. Over a hundred reviews, including several European reviews, were written on his books. Some of Husslein’s writings were distributed internationally and Husslein received international recognition for his work. His books found there way into the hands of a President and two Popes. Transcripts of Husslein’s radio broadcasts were distributed nationally by the National Catholic Welfare Conference. Husslein organized “A University in Print,” for which he edited over two hundred books and organized the School of Social Service at Saint Louis University.19 With fervent zeal, Joseph Husslein had labored all his life to promote the true religion and social principles he believed essential for a just society.
Notes 1
For details on the life of Husslein see Higgins 51-53; News-Letter 139-41; “Husslein,” New Catholic Encyclopedia; Hoehn 344-45; Romig 131-138; Tome; Jesuit Archives. 2 The Jesuit formation program began with a two year Novitiate of spiritual training which included a thirty day retreat on the Spiritual Exercises of St. Ignatius of Loyola. At the end of the Novitiate members took simple vows of poverty, chastity, obedience. The Juniorate followed: two years study of Greek and Latin classics. Next came three years of philosophical studies. Regency, two years of
20
Stephen A. Werner
practical experience, such as teaching, then, four years of theological training followed. Another year of spiritual formation followed, Tertianship, in which members repeated the thirty day retreat on the Spiritual Exercises. The final stage was professed vows which included the vow of obedience to the Pope in regard to accepting missions (“Jesuits,” New Catholic Encyclopedia). Husslein’s Jesuit formation greatly affected his writings and life’s work. 3 Sources give conflicting accounts of the places and dates of Husslein’s assignments between 1905 and 1911. This study follows records in the Jesuit Archives. 4 Holubowicz, who later shortened his name to Holub, gave an enthusiastic account of this play which may be a bit exaggerated. 5 Ming was born in 1838 in Switzerland. He entered the Jesuits in 1856 and came to the United States in 1872. He taught theology, sociology, and philosophy at St. Francis Seminary near Milwaukee, Wisconsin; Spring Hill College in Mobile, Alabama; Canisius College in Buffalo, New York; Campion College at Praire du Chien, Wisconsin; and at Saint Louis University. Ming wrote on economic and social issues. His writings were among the first Catholic scholarship in sociology. See “Ming, John Joseph,” New Catholic Encyclopedia; Husslein, “Rev. John J. Ming.” 6 Tome called Husslein “primarily a journalist” whose literary style was superior to that of his contemporaries. He stated that Husslein was not an original researcher but rather an essayist. 7 In this study Husslein’s more important books will be abbreviated as follows: The Church and Social Problems, CSP; The Catholic’s Work in the World, CW; The World Problem, WP; Democratic Industry, DI; Evolution and Social Progress, ESP; Work, Wealth and Wages, WWW; The Bible and Labor, BL; The Christian Social Manifesto, CSM; Social Wellsprings, SW. 8 Ad for CSP in America 9 (5 July 1913): ii, quoting Common Cause) 9 Tome suggested an alternate title: A Call to Arms for the Catholic Laity. 10 See Tome 53-66. Tome 54, states that Husslein calculated he spent 384 hours researching his dissertation. 11 Central-Blatt and Social Justice 12 (January 1920): 319. 12 Husslein also participated in meetings that founded the Loyola School of Sociology in Chicago (Fox 142-43, 255). 13 Husslein did not complete extensive theological studies. He could only be recommended for final vows based on his achievements. Thus, he took final vows late in life. 14 Roohan 441, described these books as excellent. 15 Husslein to his provincial [Joseph P. Zuercher, S.J.], 9 November 1945, Jesuit Archives. 16 James A. Kleist, S.J. to his provincial [Joseph P. Zuercher, S.J.], 28 August 1945, Jesuit Archives. 17 Husslein to his provincial [Joseph P. Zuercher, S.J.], 9 November 1945, Jesuit Archives. 18 Saint Louis University Press Release, dated 8 August 1941, in Jesuit Archives. 19 McDonough, Men Astutely Trained 57, has inaccurately stated that few Catholics read Husslein’s books and articles.
2 ~ The Shapers of Husslein
21
Chapter 2 The Shapers of Husslein Social Wellsprings: Rerum Novarum and Quadragesimo Anno In his two volume Social Wellsprings Husslein published the social encyclicals of Leo XIII and Pius XI. Husslein believed these documents to be the expression of God’s word on how to build a just social order. Two papal encyclicals proved to be the most important influences on Husslein’s social thought: Leo XIII’s Rerum novarum (1891) and Pius XI’s Quadragesimo anno (1931).1 These writings provided the fundamental premise for Husslein’s work and the principles for Husslein’s social writing. Rerum novarum responded to the horrendous social problems of European industrialization in the late 1800s and the increasing influence of socialism among workers. It stated the Roman Catholic position on “the Social Question”: the condition of workers and the relationships between capital and labor. Leo XIII condemned laissez faire capitalism (called “liberal capitalism”) and socialism. Husslein built his social thought on the fundamental premise of Rerum novarum that the Roman Catholic Church had the answers to social problems: We approach the subject with confidence, and in the exercise of the rights which belong to Us. For no practical solution of this question (i.e., the alleviation of the condition of the masses) will ever be found without the assistance of religion and the Church. It is We who are the chief guardian of religion, and the chief dispenser of what belongs to the Church, and we must not by silence neglect the duty which lies upon Us. . . . It is the Church that proclaims from the Gospel those teachings by which the conflict can be brought to an end, or at least made far less bitter. The Church uses her efforts not only to enlighten the mind, but to direct by her precepts the life and conduct of men. The Church improves and ameliorates the condition of the workingman by numerous useful organizations. She, moreover, does her best to enlist the services of all ranks in discussing and endeavouring to meet, in the most practical way, the claims of the working classes; and she acts on the decided view that for these
22
Stephen A. Werner purposes recourse should be had, in due measure and degree, to the help of the law and of State authority. (RN 13)
Rather than promoting class warfare the Church drew together the classes by insisting on the duties of justice. Thus religion teaches the labouring man and the workman to carry out honestly and well all equitable agreements freely made, never to injure capital, nor to outrage the person of an employer; never to employ violence in representing his own cause, nor to engage in riot and disorder; and to have nothing to do with men of evil principles, who work upon the people with artful promises, and raise foolish hopes which usually end in disaster and in repentance when too late. Religion teaches the rich man and the employer that their work people are not their slaves; that they must respect in every man his dignity as a man and as a Christian; that labour is nothing to be ashamed of, . . . and that it is shameful and inhuman to treat men like chattels to make money by, or to look upon them merely as so much muscle or physical power. Thus, again, religion teaches that, as among the workmen’s concerns are religion herself, and things spiritual and mental, the employer is bound to see that his employee has time for the duties of piety; that he be not exposed to corrupting influences and dangerous occasions; and that he be not led away to neglect his home and family or to squander his wages. Furthermore, the employer must never tax his workpeople beyond their strength, nor employ them in work unsuited to their sex or age. The employer’s great and principal obligation is to give to every one that which is just. (RN 16-17)
When Husslein and Leo XIII spoke of religion as the answer to the social question they understood “true religion” as Roman Catholicism. In checking the spread of “the pest of socialism” (Quod apostolici 3) Leo XIII rejected socialist claims of providing the ultimate solution to social problems, by providing a Catholic alternative. Husslein, attempting to prove the comprehensiveness of Leo XIII’s solution, stated: “It is not wrong to say that Catholicism itself is the supreme social message to the world” (“Saving the World” 471). Husslein described all legitimate aspirations of workers as “suppressed Catholicism.”2
2 ~ The Shapers of Husslein
23
Suppressed Catholicism is the spirit struggling for liberation beneath the crackling, breaking, bursting shell of an un-natural and un-Christian social order. It is the pre-Reformation spirit of social freedom, which the Church can prevent from degenerating into lawlessness or injustice once it has achieved its liberation. (WP 3)
Rejecting Marxist explanations of labor’s struggle, Husslein credited the Catholic Church with everything positive in the labor movement. He attributed the popularity of socialism to its “camouflage” Catholicism.3 Leo XIII attacked the Marxist assumption that economic relations determined social relations. For Leo XIII, people had to change first— in accord with religion and morality; only then could social problems be solved (CSM 118, 138; McGovern 96-97). Husslein concisely stated this idea: The difficulty with Socialism, Bolshevism, and all similar “isms” of our day is that they are not radical enough. They leave untouched all the roots of evil in man’s nature, and so can lead to no true social betterment, but must bring about a condition worse than the former. (CSM 76)4
For both Leo XIII and Husslein materialism—as a denial of moral imperatives beyond the material realm—had caused all social problems. The materialism of capitalists denied the just aspirations of workers. Materialistic philosophy undermined society by denying the role of religion in bringing justice. Throughout his writings, Husslein attacked materialistic philosophy and saw manifestations of it in radical feminism, evolutionary theories, atheism, and laissez faire capitalism. Let us be surely convinced that it is not Economic Determinism or the Materialistic Conception of History that decides our fate, as in another age it was with equal fatuity believed that the stars alone decided it. No, under God, our future rests with us. Not economic conditions have created our moral system, as Socialists must hold, but instead, the lack of true morality has created our intolerable and unjustifiable economic conditions. (CSM 70)
Rerum novarum condemned laissez-faire capitalism, arguing for a government role in protecting workers. Rerum novarum described the duties of the state. The poor had a special claim to state aid in
24
Stephen A. Werner
protecting their rights as the richer classes were able to protect themselves. From Rerum novarum onward the Catholic position in social ethics has sought a middle way or via media between socialism and extreme capitalism.5 The principles of Rerum novarum can be summarized under these themes: private property, family rights (part of property argument), role of Church on social issues, rejection of radical equality, necessity of work, class conflict not natural, duties of workers, duties of owners, use of goods and money, duties of the state, preferential treatment of poor, Sunday rest, living wages, labor unions and private societies, and good associations. Quadragesimo anno also influenced Husslein. Pius XI affirmed many of the implications that Husslein had drawn out of the teaching of Leo XIII. Time after time, as he applied Leo XIII’s Rerum novarum, Husslein anticipated what would be later stated by Pius XI. In particular, Quadragesimo anno called for corporate societies based on the principles of medieval guilds (McGovern 103-104). Pius XI promulgated Quadragesimo Anno in 1931 during the depths of the worldwide depression. The encyclical, the work of Oswald von Nell-Breuning, S.J., commemorated the fortieth anniversary of Rerum novarum and reaffirmed the main themes of Rerum novarum.6 Pius XI started with the fundamental premise of Leo XIII: We lay down the principle long since clearly established by Leo XIII that it is Our right and Our duty to deal authoritatively with social and economic problems. . . . But she [the Church] never can relinquish her God-given task of interposing her authority, not indeed in technical matters, for which she has neither the equipment nor the mission, but in all those that have a bearing on moral conduct. For the deposit of truth entrusted to Us by God, and Our weighty office of declaring, interpreting, and urging in season and out of season the entire moral law, demand that both social and economic questions be brought within Our supreme jurisdiction, in so far as they refer to moral issues. (QA 41)
Pius XI presented a stronger critique of liberal capitalism than Rerum novarum: Free competition, however, though within certain limits just and productive of good results, cannot be the ruling principle of the economic world. This has been abundantly proved by the consequences that have followed from the free rein given to these dangerous individualistic ideals. (QA 30)
2 ~ The Shapers of Husslein
25
Pius XI also discussed the inadequacies of socialism and rejected mitigated or moderate socialism, i.e., socialism without atheism and violence (QA 88, 91-122; McGovern 103-105).7 As in Rerum novarum, Pius XI sought a middle ground between liberal capitalism and socialism. The encyclical detailed the duties of the state in promoting the common good. Quadragesimo anno called for a living wage for workers. Also Quadragesimo anno called for building a corporate society, an approach known as “corporatism” or “corporativism” (QA 81-96, 29-38).8 Pius XI insisted on rebuilding the social order through a return to moral living and Christian values The principles of Quadragesimo anno can be summarized as: duties of the state; role of Church on social issues; private property; use of goods, money, and property; family rights; value of labor; living wages; duties of owners; the common good; reform of the social order and morals; the principle of subsidiarity; new kinds of labor organizations; inadequate economic systems, liberal capitalism and socialism; labor unions and private societies. In his The Christian Social Manifesto, Husslein provided the definitive interpretation and application of Rerum novarum and Quadragesimo anno for American Catholics.
Roman Catholics in America In the late 1800s and early 1900s the American Catholic Church struggled to find its voice to speak for the suffering masses who labored in the factories, mines, and railyards.9 The experience of these struggles had a great influence on Husslein. Husslein began his social writing in 1911 when the newly confident American Catholic Church began to criticize the American situation and develop its own social teaching based on Rerum novarum. Leo XIII’s encyclical had lain dormant for the previous 20 years.10 If it had not been for the heroic efforts of such fearless teachers as Monsignor Ryan, Father Joseph Husslein and a few others, the encyclical might well have been forgotten even in the college social science courses. (Murray 45)
Immigration, industrialism, and socialism created the problems that Husslein addressed. Due to immigration, the Catholic Church in America mushroomed from approximately 663,000 in 1840 to over sixteen million by 1910. Many Catholic immigrants suffered under existing social and eco-
26
Stephen A. Werner
nomic conditions. American Catholic thinkers and leaders took up social issues in a sincere desire to help and in fear of losing these Catholics to anti-religious, radical groups. American industry expanded rapidly after the Civil War due to technological innovations, and changes in finances. Vast numbers of poor immigrants provided cheap labor for industry, often working and living in unhealthy, dangerous, and inhumane conditions. Wages were low, hours were long, and holidays were few. Many children worked in the factories. As a result of these social conditions socialism grew rapidly. By about 1900 socialism “ceased to be the exclusive possession of doctrinaire Marxian immigrants and took on the form of a nationally orientated political movement of great potential strength” (Abell, American 140). In 1901 socialist groups under Eugene V. Debs, Victor L. Berger, and Morris Hill quit formed the American Socialist Party. The American Socialist Party achieved some political success; over a thousand local officials, two congressmen and several mayors, including the mayor of Milwaukee, Wisconsin (Husslein’s home town), were elected. Radical socialists formed the Industrial Workers of the World (IWW or “Wobblies”). The Wobblies believed in direct action to create unions organized according to industries. Left-wing Protestant ministers founded the Christian Socialist Fellowship in 1906. The Catholic Socialist Society formed in 1909, although few priests found common ground with socialists. The rise of socialism threatened American Catholics: The American Socialist movement of the first decade and a half of this century looked awesome on the social horizon. As this integral view of man and society threatened to capture the allegiances of American workingmen it provoked repercussions. American trade unionism, still a lusty youngster, feared it would be held subservient if the politically conscious working class ideology of Marxian Socialism won the day. American Catholicism, zealous and jealous in the charge of the supernatural faith of its members, feared the encroachment of a counter-poised comprehensive ideology, even as it rejected its fundamental philosophical orientation and its materialistic implications. The offensive in social reform must be sharpened and Catholic activity must become more widely operative. Ecclesiastical opposition to the doctrines of Socialism were implemented by lay activity. Catholicism insisted that trade unionism was a legitimate association for workingmen in the industrial arena. It must not be made a channel for anti-religious forces.
2 ~ The Shapers of Husslein
27
Catholic participation in trade unions must be active, and moral educational channels in accord with Catholic social teaching were demanded. (T. McDonagh 22-23)
The American Catholic Church, emerging from its immigrant minority status, vehemently attacked socialism. Between 1900 and 1917 the polemic—with book, pamphlet, journal, newspaper, speech, and homily—reached a fever pitch.Catholic organizations such as the Knights of Columbus opposed socialism. Seminaries started social study courses to fight socialism (Doherty 69, 175). Catholic writers argued that socialism destroyed religion and morality, threatened private property, justified violence, promoted class hatred and materialism, and destroyed families. (Many socialists supported the family and criticized capitalism for damaging families [Doherty 73, WP 148]). Socialism threatened the social order by rebelling against the legitimate authority established by God. Probably, Church reform would have been more feeble had it not been that many Catholic leaders felt that reform was an effective way to combat socialism. Indeed, it can be argued that there would have been next to no reform measures coming from Catholic sources had the Church not been fearful of Socialist influence. (Doherty 173)
Socialism provided the raison d’etre for Husslein’s work. Arguing that the Church alone had the answers to social problems, Husslein entered the vanguard of the Catholic attack with The Church and Social Problems. However, three controversies over the George/McGlynn affair, the Knights of Labor, and Americanism clouded the atmosphere for American Catholics trying to apply Catholic teaching to the problems of immigration, industrialism, and socialism. These controversies took place before Husslein’s career yet they set the precedent that it was dangerous for Catholic thinkers to move beyond the pale of church approved social thinking. For figures like Husslein there would be little room for experimentation. Steering a safe course meant avoiding papal disapproval. Thus Husslein based his social writing almost exclusively on the thought of Leo XIII and later Pius XI. The first controversy involved Father Edward McGlynn (1837-1900), a popular priest at Stephen’s Church in New York, who was suspended and excommunicated by Archbishop Michael Corrigan (1839-1902) for supporting Henry George and his theories.11 Henry
28
Stephen A. Werner
George (1839-1897), a journalist, economist, reformer, and social philosopher, theorized on the oppressive poverty of industrialization in his popular Progress and Poverty (1879). George held that the exploiters of labor were not employers or capitalists but landowners whose rents increased without effort on their parts. George promoted the Single Tax theory: government should confiscate the “unearned increment” on property in land rent since increases in value were created by the community. Labor and industry would not be taxed. The “unearned increment” or “economic rent” was the difference between the price of a piece of land and the price of the least productive land in actual use or the difference between the value of the land itself and the value of the land due to the community. The complicated and confusing controversy developed when McGlynn supported Henry George in his failed bid as an independent candidate for mayor of New York in 1886. Eventually McGlynn was cleared and restored to good standing in the Church. Yet the debacle had the effect of stifling creativity in Catholic thinking about social issues and it taught the lesson that it was safer to not give detailed economic proposals but rather lean toward a less specific emphasis on morality, religion, and broad ethical principles. The second controversy involved The Knights of Labor, founded in 1869. The first successful American national labor organization, it reached the height of its influence, from 1879 to 1893, under Terence V. Powderly (1849-1924).12 The organization, with both skilled and unskilled laborers, grew rapidly because of early successes against the railroads. In 1886 the Vatican repeated an earlier condemnation of the Knights of Labor in Quebec on the grounds that the Knights included workers of all faiths or even without faith and that it exposed Catholic members to dangers to their faith. In 1887 James Cardinal Gibbons (1834-1921) defended the Knights in a long memorial to Pope Leo XIII. In 1887 Rome lifted the ban on the Knights in Quebec and in 1888 it ruled that the order would be tolerated. Gibbons’ efforts led to the acceptance of the labor movement and national labor unions by the American Catholic Church and prevented the alienation of the working class (Ellis 106-107). But Gibbons only succeeded because he had won over the papacy. The third controversy developed when Leo XIII condemned a series of beliefs called “Americanism” in his encyclical Testem benevolentiae in 1899.13 Writing in response to French discussions of an inaccurate translation of Walter Elliot’s The Life of Isaac Thomas Hecker, Leo XIII
2 ~ The Shapers of Husslein
29
condemned: the rejection of external spiritual guidance, extolling natural virtues over supernatural virtues, the preference for active virtues, the rejection of religious vows, and new approaches to apologetics in confronting non-Catholics. In the United States Catholics had debated over the basic attitude of the Church toward American culture. Should the Church participate actively in public movements of social and economic reform or should the Church, as suggested by conservatives, shun American culture as too protestant and perilous to the faith? In Testem benevolentiae the Vatican attempted to end this dispute. Leo XIII did not name any particular person or group as guilty of the ideas of “Americanism.” Liberals in the United States, such as Cardinal Gibbons, argued that no one held the Americanist views condemned by Leo XIII. This controversy led to Catholic hesitancy in accepting principles of church/state separation, political democracy, religious tolerance, and free public education (Doherty 23). In addition, the controversy stifled independence, initiative, and dialogue on the relationship of the Church to American culture; and undermined American Catholic self-confidence (D. O’Brien 32, Callahan 75). The controversy left a stigma that prevented American Catholic thinkers from proposing an American or democratic model to solve social problems. This led to the convoluted claim that democracy had its origins in Catholic teaching. Husslein held such views. The Americanism controversy also influenced Husslein’s emphasis on medieval guilds. Rather than an American solution, Husslein turned to a European model, the medieval guild, as the solution to social problems. While these controversies had a stifling effect on Catholic social thought other factors acted as liberating influences on Catholic social thinkers such as Husslein: the decline of nativism, World War I, and the American bishops 1919 pastoral. These moved the Church into active work in social justice. Nativism was a favoring of natural inhabitants (actually earlier immigrants) over later immigrants.14 Of the three major waves of nativism, the first—about 1830—saw an upsurge of anti-Catholic magazines, newspapers, pamphlets, and books. These opposed further Catholic immigration, Catholic schools, and Catholic officeholders. Typical of these was “Foreign Conspiracy Against the Liberties of the United States” (1834), written by Samuel F. B. Morse. Other works accused Catholics of plots against protestants. Some alleged sexual misconduct among the clergy such as the most notorious of
30
Stephen A. Werner
these works, Awful Disclosures of the Hotel Dieu Nunnery of Montreal (1836). In the 1850s the Know-Nothing Party came into being, partly in response to waves of German and Irish Catholic immigration. When asked about their secret organization, members would answer, “I know nothing.” The third wave of prejudice began in 1887 with the formation of the American Protective Association (A.P.A.). Husslein described the nativists in a 1915 article, “Lilliputians at Work.” A petty host, filled with malice, has long been busy striving to overturn the pillars of our national Constitution and to shake its foundations. Small in spirit, cowardly in method, little in all that goes to make a man, nevertheless they have often been potent for evil by their united efforts. For the liberty of our native land they would substitute the tyranny of bigotry; for fraternity, civic hatred; for justice, religious persecution. Though the Church which they assail is raised above their Lilliputian efforts, and the white radiance of its beauty can never be soiled by them, yet its members and institutions may be made to suffer from their fanaticism. (382)
Only with the decline of nativism in the early 1900s did the American Church feel secure enough to attack social and economic conditions without fear of seeming un-American. At this point, the active period of American Catholic social writing of Husslein and his contemporaries took place. The First World War proved a watershed for the American Catholic Church.15 Through their active support of the war, especially by the hierarchy, American Catholics proved their loyalty to the United States and largely freed themselves from the specter of nativism. Furthermore, the war effort brought unity to the notoriously disunited American hierarchy. World War I became “the midwife of American Catholic unity” (McShane 62). By joining in a war, viewed as a progressive attempt to spread democracy and Christian values, the Church moved into the progressive camp. The American government, ill-prepared for war mobilization, eagerly sought the help of American churches. Not to be outdone by the efforts of the Knights of Columbus, the American hierarchy founded the National Catholic War Council, the first American Catholic organization that was supra-diocesan. Such an organization would have been impossible before the war when many Catholics feared that a visible bureaucracy would cause a nativist reaction. In 1919 this organization became the National Catholic Welfare Conference and in 1966 the National Conference of Catholic Bishops.
2 ~ The Shapers of Husslein
31
For many social thinkers war mobilization proved the possibilities of national efforts to bring relief to social problems. It also demonstrated the important role the Church could play. In the wake of World War I there were many calls for reconstruction of American society. The four American bishops directing the National Catholic War Council issued a document, written by John A. Ryan, stating an American Catholic position.16 The document, “Social Reconstruction,” was launched with a well prepared publicity campaign. Very likely, the campaign impressed on Husslein the effectiveness of using creative approaches to promote the Church’s teaching. The document described three defects in the economy: Enormous inefficiency and waste in the production and distribution of commodities; insufficient incomes for the majority of wage-earners, and unnecessarily large incomes for a small minority of privileged capitalists. (“Social Reconstruction” 237)
It called for specific policies, most of which had been initiated during the war: 1) continuing the United States Employment Service and the National Labor Board; 2) maintaining present wages; 3) placing returning soldiers on farms; 4) removing women workers from dangerous jobs; 5) limiting the number of women in industry; 6) continuing federal housing efforts, but at a reduced level; 7) lowering the cost of living (not through price controls, but through laws against monopolies); 8) encouraging cooperative stores to reduce prices, 9) guaranteeing a minimum wage and social insurance, 10) encouraging the participation of labor in management; 11) providing vocational training; and 12) prohibiting child labor. The document approved plans that Husslein and other Catholic social thinkers proposed such as national employment agencies, and workingmen’s cooperatives. Husslein wrote on the pastoral for it asserted the role of the Church on social issues—something which many Catholics denied.17
Catholic Social Thinkers in the Early 1900s Joseph Husslein was one among several pioneers of the American Catholic social movement.18 Preeminent was John A. Ryan, whose prestige eclipsed the work of others such as Frederick P. Kenkel, William J. Kerby, William J. Engelen, S.J., Peter E. Dietz, and the Jesuit writers of America. Since these writers used few footnotes it is difficult to assess their influence on one another. They were influ-
32
Stephen A. Werner
enced primarily by the themes of Rerum novarum which they developed in similar, but distinct directions. Frederick Kenkel (1863-1952), an important lay leader in American Catholic social thought, grew up in Chicago, studied at Freiburg and later at Quincy College, Quincy, Illinois.19 In 1908 he established the Central Bureau of the Central Verein in St. Louis, Missouri. The Central Verein, founded in 1855, coordinated the activities of German Catholic benevolent associations in America. In the early 1900s as these societies waned due to cultural pressure to Americanize the Central Verein took up social reform, giving a new life to the organization. Joseph Kenkel became the first director of the Central Bureau which published the bilingual journal, Central-Blatt and Social Justice, which in 1940 became the Social Justice Review, published in English. Kenkel expressed his social thought in this journal which he edited until his death. Kenkel attacked socialism and promoted the ideas of the German Jesuit, Heinrich Pesch (1854-1926) author of National Economy, which proposed “solidarism” (Mueller, Mulcahy). Pesch wanted to secure the material welfare for all by shaping the social and economic order along the lines of an organic society such as in the Middle Ages. The Central-Blatt strongly supported unions. It contained articles on unemployment, migrant workers, unemployment insurance, Kolping’s Journeymen’s Societies, and Catholic workingmen’s societies. The journal, with a large rural readership, often addressed the plight of farmers. Kenkel advocated state laws—rather than Federal laws—on child labor, working women, minimum wages, worker safety, and workmen’s compensation Husslein wrote two dozen articles for the Central-Blatt and many articles about Kenkel and the Central Verein.20 He recommended the Central-Blatt but he urged Kenkel to drop German from the journal to broaden its appeal (Gleason 253-54). Husslein attended several Central Verein conventions. John A. Ryan (1869-1945) was the best known American Catholic social thinker of his time. Many saw him as the official Catholic spokesman for progressive social reform.21 He studied at St. Paul Seminary, St. Paul, Minnesota, and at Catholic University of America in Washington, D.C. In 1898 he was ordained a priest. In 1912 he published his doctoral dissertation, published as A Living Wage: Its Ethical and Economic Aspects. Ryan argued that workers should receive a living wage, which in 1906 he estimated at $600 per year. In 1914
2 ~ The Shapers of Husslein
33
he published his debate with the socialist Morris Hillquit, Socialism: Promise or Menace?. Ryan joined the faculty of Catholic University where he taught political science, moral theology, economics, and science. In 1916 he published Distributive Justice. John Ryan drafted the American bishops’ 1919 statement on social reconstruction. In 1924 he wrote The Church and Labor with Husslein. In 1934 he was appointed to the Industrial Appeals Board of the National Recovery Administration. Ryan emphasized the role of the state in solving social problems— calling for legislation on minimum wages, maximum hours, protection for women workers, child labor, protection of workers’ rights in industrial disputes, relief for the unemployed, accident and old age insurance, and adequate housing. Ryan wanted controls on monopolies, progressive taxation, and an end to stock market speculation. He also promoted cooperatives and Occupational Groups. Like his peers, Ryan rejected socialism for its atheism, philosophy, morality, and economics. In later years Ryan distinguished between mitigated socialism, orthodox socialism, and communism. William Kerby (1870-1936), studied at St. Joseph’s College (now Loras College) in Dubuque, Iowa; St. Francis Seminary in Milwaukee, Wisconsin; and at Catholic University.22 Father Thomas Bouquillon (1842-1902) at Catholic University influenced Kerby with the view that moral theology should take account of contemporary social science. After further studies at Bonn, Berlin, and Louvain, Kerby returned to Catholic University in 1897 to teach in one of the first departments of sociology at an American university. Kerby worked for legal remedies to help the underprivileged. He lamented the lack of proper literature and schools for training workers in charity and social movements. He helped form the National Conference of Catholic Charities in 1910, edited the Saint Vincent de Paul Quarterly and American Ecclesiastical Review, organized the National Catholic School of Social Service and the National Conference of Catholic Charities, and wrote numerous books including, The Social Mission of Charity (1921). Kerby pioneered American Catholic sociology and social work. Kerby is regarded by most American Catholic professional sociologists not only as the founder of sociology in the Catholic sense in America but also as the most important Catholic sociologist in the United States. (Melvin Williams 61)
34
Stephen A. Werner
In founding the School of Social Service at Saint Louis University, Husslein participated in this effort begun by Kerby. William J. Engelen (1872-1937) was educated in Germany and held doctorates in theology and philosophy.23 He entered the Jesuits in 1891. In 1899 he came to the United States. He taught at St. John’s College in Toledo, Ohio; Rockhurst College in Kansas City, Missouri; and Saint Louis University. A close associate of Joseph Kenkel, he wrote for Central-Blatt and Social Justice from 1912 to 1932. Like Kenkel, Engelen was influenced by the work of Heinrich Pesch. Engelen desired fundamental changes in society but gave few details. For Engelen true change required an acceptance of morality and religion. In sharp contrast to some, Engelen saw a fundamental incompatibility between Catholicism and American culture. Engelen and Husslein had similar views on the importance of morality and the danger of liberalism. Both held up the Middle Ages as an ideal. However, in his later years, Engelen’s views became excessively romantic. Engelen, jealous of the publicity that Husslein received, lamented in a letter to Kenkel: It is not only Dr. Ryan who ignores us. There is system behind it. And the more they ignore us, or rather neglect to call attention to the Centralblatt, the more they can copy, after some time has elapsed. Have you ever been able to find the time for a comparison of Husslein’s program, which made him famous and the one we published years ago? You have only to read mine backward. (Gleason 192-193)
Born in New York, Peter Dietz (1872-1937) was ordained in 1904 by Cardinal Gibbons, after receiving his education in Germany. He felt called to apply the principles of Rerum novarum to American society. With Ryan and Kerby he worked for labor legislation and for a bishops’ pastoral on labor. Dietz also worked for coordination between Catholic social agencies and for an effective Catholic press. He supported the Central Bureau of the Central Verein, then launched and edited the English section of its Central-Blatt and Social Justice. Through Dietz’s efforts many Catholic societies adopted the Central Verein’s social program.24 He became secretary of the Social Service Commission of the American Federation of Catholic Societies for whom he edited the Bulletin and Newsletter. The Commission called for conservative trade unions, collective bargaining, and better working conditions. In 1905
2 ~ The Shapers of Husslein
35
Dietz set up the American Academy for Christian Democracy for Women in Hot Springs, North Carolina. Dietz fought for unions, having little faith in labor legislation. Dietz became the official Catholic representative to the A. F. of L. convention in St. Louis, Missouri, in 1910. He established the Militia of Christ for Social Service—made up of Catholics in key positions in labor unions—to combat socialism in unions. In addition, he edited the short-lived magazine Social Service and set up an industrial council plan among the building trades in Cincinnati, Ohio. In 1923, Archbishop J. T. McNicholas, under pressure from the Chamber of Commerce, forced Dietz to close his academy which had since moved to Cincinnati. Dietz spent the next twenty-four years in parish work near Milwaukee, Wisconsin. What did Dietz accomplish? As a labor union gadfly, he had connections with important labor leaders. Yet other than a few strike settlements, it remains unclear what Dietz achieved through his connections (Karson 532-33). His publishing efforts were short-lived and he left no significant writings. His labor college lasted only a few years and matriculated less than 100 students: mostly social workers who did not become leaders among American labor. While Dietz worked directly with the labor unions, Husslein had limited contact with unions. Dietz was an activist; Husslein a journalist. Husslein was one of several feature writers on the staff of America who wrote on social issues. John J. Wynne, S.J., (1859-1948) started America in 1909. Wynne edited the weekly for one year and then returned to his position as associate editor and board member of the Catholic Encyclopedia. Wynne also edited one of the first complete American editions of Rerum novarum in his book, The Great Encyclical Letters of Pope Leo XIII. America itself had been ever conscious of socialism as a menace to democratic society and to the Church. This was only natural, since the founder of the magazine, John J. Wynne, S.J., was one of the few Americans who paid early and careful attention to the words of Pope Leo XIII. Volume I of America, whose first issue was on April 17, 1909, contains several articles on socialism, as well as a number of articles on wages, woman labor, taxation, and a coverage of current strikes. (Tome 37)
36
Stephen A. Werner
Although the Jesuits tended toward conservatism in the 1890s, by the present century many Jesuits had moved to a progressive position (Cross 210). The important writers on social issues for America were Paul L. Blakely, S.J., (1880-1943), John LaFarge, S.J., (1880-1963), and Richard Henry Tierney, S.J., (1870-1928). Holding compatible positions, they represented a school of social thought.25 Paul L. Blakely, S.J. attended St. Xavier College in Cincinnati, Ohio, and entered the Jesuit Novitiate in Florissant, Missouri in 1897. Ordained in 1912, he joined the staff of America two years later as the chief editorial writer. It is estimated that he wrote over 1,100 signed articles and over 3,000 unsigned articles on such issues as education, American history, the Federal Constitution, and social problems. Using the encyclicals of Leo XIII, Blakely fought for the right of workers to organize and against abuses in capitalism. In later years he criticized the Roosevelt administration’s policies as a violation of states’ rights. John LaFarge joined the staff during the last years of Husslein’s work there. From 1926 until his death, LaFarge worked as associate editor, executive editor, and editor-in-chief. Born in Newport, Rhode Island, he studied at Harvard College, the University of Innsbruck, Austria, and Woodstock College in Maryland. LaFarge’s most important work was on interracial justice. He lectured and wrote many articles, several pamphlets, and ten books. He helped form the Catholic Interracial Council. In 1938 he went to Europe to draft an encyclical on racism. Pius XI died in 1939 and the encyclical was never issued. Richard Tierney entered the Jesuits in 1892 and studied at the Jesuit Novitiate at Frederick, Maryland, and at Woodstock College, Woodstock, Maryland. At Gonzaga College in Spokane, Washington; Holy Cross College in Worcester, Massachusetts; and Woodstock College he taught philosophy and pedagogy. He published Teachers and Teaching (1914). In 1914 he became editor in chief of America. He guided America in remaining neutral on World War I until the U.S. entered the war. Tierney wrote extensively on social issues. He received three papal commendations for his work. In an exciting time, when numerous social thinkers attempted to apply Catholic teaching to the problems of American society in the early 1900s, Joseph Husslein pulled from the writings of Leo XIII and Pius XI ideas he believed could change the world and bring a more just social order.
2 ~ The Shapers of Husslein
37
Notes 1
Latin text of Rerum Novarum can be found in Acta Leonis, 11:97-144; Acta sanctae sedis, 23:641-70, and of Quadragesimo anno in Acta apostolicae sedis, 23:177-228, English text of both documents in Husslein’s Social Wellsprings, I:164-204, and II:284-323. Quotes from Rerum novarum and Quadragesimo anno will be from Social Wellsprings Volume I, II and cited with paragraph numbers used by Husslein. Rerum novarum will be abbreviated as RN and Quadragesimo anno as QA. 2 According to Ring (29-30) Husslein borrowed the term “suppressed Catholicism” from the English priest, Charles D. Plater, S.S., (1875-1921), who founded the Catholic Social Guild. See “Plater, Charles Dominic,” New Catholic Encyclopedia. Suppressed Catholicism also referred to sincere employers trying to improve the condition of workers but unable to do so because of competition. 3 "Whatever popularity Socialism may possess is entirely attributable to its camouflage Catholicism” (WP 81). 4 For similar arguments among Protestant writers see Hopkins (75, 76, 234). 5 Husslein stated, “Christian Democracy is the golden mean between the two destructive extremes of Socialistic and capitalistic excesses” (WP, 276). Many Catholics thinkers, such as John A. Ryan, saw Catholic social teaching in the same way. (Curran, American Catholic, 61) However, John Paul II eventually disagreed with the “via media” interpretation of Catholic social thought. “The church’s social doctrine is not a ‘third way’ between liberal capitalism and Marxist collectivism nor even a possible alternative to other solutions less radically opposed to one another: rather, it constitutes a category of its own” (Sollicitudo rei socialis 655). 6 The author of the encyclical wrote a commentary: Oswald von Nell-Breuning, Reorganization of Social Economy. See also Nell-Breuning, “The Drafting of Quadragesimo Anno,” in Curran and McCormick, Readings in Moral Theology No. 5:. 7 Authors such as McGovern, have argued that Pius XI did not condemn all forms of socialism. American interpreters of Quadragesimo anno at the time read it as a blanket condemnation of socialism. 8 Quadragesimo anno called for Occupational Groups (81-87) and called for a “corporative” society (91-96). According to Nell-Breuning, the latter was added by Pius XI to the document and did not integrate well with the rest of the document. Quadragesimo anno did not define or explain how either Occupational Groups or a corporate society were to be achieved. Husslein’s Democratic Industry resembled corporatism, but was not, in fact, corporatism. Husslein also discussed the different approach of Occupational Groups as organizations of employers and employees. 9 For surveys of American Catholic social thought see Roohan; Abell, American; Curran, American; Ellis, 84-162; Dolan, 321-46. 10 Abell stated, “Despite the stimulus given by Leo’s encyclical of 1891, the movement soon languished and all but disappeared, in large part because mounting racial hatreds impaired the Church’s social unity, and, to a lesser degree, because well-to-do Catholics of the ‘better sort’ formed an anti-labor block within the Church. Just as until the late eighties the clergy opposed social reform and hampered the laity, so now for fifteen years or more after the appearance of Rerum Novarum an influential minority of conservative laymen belittled the labor
38
Stephen A. Werner
movement and restrained the clergy who were increasingly eager to apply the Leonine teachings. Though for a time the rapidly growing Socialist movement strengthened the conservative attitude, discerning Catholics realized after 1908 that the Socialist challenge could be met only if the Church supported a really effective program of social reform” (“Reception of Leo XIII’s Labor Encyclical” 494-95). 11 Roohan 332-83; Abell, American 61-89; Curran, American 10-11. 12 The definitive work on the Catholic Church and the Knights is Henry J. Browne, The Catholic Church and the Knights of Labor. 13 McAvoy, Klein, Cross 182-205. 14 The most important work on Nativism is Higham, Strangers in the Land: Patterns of American Nativism, 1860-1925. 15 McShane 57-88, McKeown, Michael Willams. 16 Text in Ryan and Husslein, Church and Labor, 220-239. 17 For example, Husslein, “Popes’ and Bishops’ Labor Program”; “The American Bishops’ Message.” 18 Tome called Husslein a “pioneer,” a term Husslein used for himself. For Husslein as part of a larger movement see Melvin Williams 34, 40, 170, 172, 244, 245 and Miller 19-20. 19 The definitive work on Kenkel and the Central Verein is Philip Gleason, The Conservative Reformers: German-American Catholics and the Social Order, especially, 91-138. 20 Husslein wrote the following several articles on the Central Verein such as: “Ideals of the Central Verein,” “Central Verein and the Pillars of Hercules,” “F. P. Kenkel, the Laetare Medalist.” The Central Bureau was only four blocks from the Jesuit residence at Saint Louis University where Husslein lived. Gleason, 213, has noted that although Husslein was of German descent, he worked toward reform through non-German agencies. The copy of “Hidden in God”, Husslein’s 1927 movie script, in the Central Bureau library in St. Louis, Missouri was autographed by Husslein to Kenkel. 21 Broderick, Gearty, Curran, American 26-19. 22 See “Kerby, William Joseph,” New Catholic Encyclopedia; Abell, American, 145-47, 168, 193-94, 214; and Lescher, “William J. Kerby: A Lost Voice in American Catholic Spirituality.” 23 The only treatment of Engelen’s work is Curran, American 92-129. A brief obituary is in Missouri Province: The News-Letter 14 (December 1937): 95. 24 Fox, Peter E. Dietz, Labor Priest; “Dietz, Peter Ernest,” New Catholic Encyclopedia and Abell, American, 174-87. 25 LaFarge, Talbot, “Wynne, John Joseph”; “LaFarge, John”; “Blakely, Paul Lendrum”; “Tierney, Richard Henry”; New Catholic Encyclopedia.
3 ~ Husslein’s Bible and Labor
39
Chapter 3 Husslein’s Bible and Labor Husslein believed that in Christian teaching lay the solutions to the world’s problems. Husslein attempted to prove this belief by providing an interpretation of history to prove that true religion was responsible for all advances of workers. Since Husslein saw Roman Catholicism as the true religion, all advances in the working conditions of labor since New Testament times were due to the influence of the Church. For Husslein this proved that the Roman Catholic Church had the solutions to social problems. In developing his historical argument Husslein rejected alternate interpretations. Socialists and other critics described the Church as a reactionary institution that had ignored the working class and poor by siding with the ruling class to protect the status quo. Other critics argued that apostolic Christianity had been distorted by later developments in the Church.1 Husslein pulled together the threads of Leo XIII’S views of history to answer these criticisms (Tome 66-67).2 His overriding objective was to prove that the Roman Catholic Church had always cared for workers. In a somewhat biased approach, Husslein selected historical examples that supported his position and ignored those that did not. Husslein’s historical argument was a direct answer to socialist attempts to understand history dialectically. Four parts made up Husslein’s interpretation of history. First, he examined the Bible to show the ancient roots of Catholic social teaching. Second, Husslein traced Christian history to show the Church as the champion of workers. Third, he described the high point of the Church’s effort for workers: the medieval guilds. Lastly, Husslein described the destruction of the guilds as a result of “liberalism” which flowed from the Reformation. Throughout, Husslein showed the Church as responsible for all improvements in the conditions of workers (“Church and Slavery in England,” CSM 141).
Bible and Labor Husslein began his explanation of history with the Bible.3 He approached it from a literary, not exegetical background. With the eye
40
Stephen A. Werner
of a journalist he grasped the biblical concern for social justice. He described the importance of the Bible for Catholic social thought. That we are indeed to look to the inspired writers for light upon social, economic and political questions, where those touch upon the realm of religion and morals, is sufficiently clear. We have, it is true, the teaching of the Church to enlighten us, but this does not exclude direct recourse to the Sacred Scripture. (“Social Study of Prophets” 79)
Husslein was ahead of his time in his use of scripture in Bible and Labor. (The only similar use of scripture was Christianity and the Social Crisis by Walter Rauschenbusch.) Few Catholic social writers used the Bible extensively. John Ryan rarely used scripture (Curran, Directions 78-79). In the wake of Vatican II American Catholics would “rediscover” the bible and its significance. In the 1980s Catholic moral theology would turn to the Bible as a source of moral reflection. Husslein anticipated these developments by over half a century. In Bible and Labor Husslein pursued three goals. First, he demonstrated how religion improved the condition of workers. Second, he sought precedents for modern industrial situations. Third, he reclaimed biblical figures used by socialists to justify revolution.4
Religion and Labor For Husslein religion improved the condition of workers by providing moral principles, rewards and punishments, and a judge of moral behavior beyond human self-interest (CSM 3, 23-25). Most importantly, however, religion recognized the dignity of labor. Husslein defined religion as the monotheism that became Roman Catholicism. Thus, paganism was not religion, but rather a materialism that rejected the moral demands of religion. In Genesis, God himself was “The Great Laborer.” In Eden the man and woman cared for the Garden. Genesis, “The Greatest Labor Document,” called for rest on the seventh day (BL 6-11).5 The biblical view of labor contrasted with Greek mythology where the ridiculed god Hephaestus—lame and ungainly—personified labor. Hercules received labors as punishment. The gods also punished Prometheus for giving humans fire to pursue industrial arts. Husslein described a fundamental dichotomy: religion championed the cause of labor, paganism oppressed labor.
3 ~ Husslein’s Bible and Labor
41
Paganism in its most complete material development despised labor under every form. The history of labor in the ancient pagan world is mainly the history of slavery, and the slaves were the merest chattel in the eyes of the pagan State. (WP 75)
For Husslein, the construction of the Egyptian pyramids epitomized the pagan mistreatment of labor: What was the purpose of this gigantic, engineering enterprise? What public good did it serve? It was all meant to satisfy one man’s desire to pile up a dead load of soul-crushing rock over the mere husk of his body when the spirit had flown to meet its Judge. The crude materialism of his creed encouraged him in this, toiling millions of his own subjects, or of wretched slaves and pining captives, were worn out and cast away regardlessly to assure a proud magnificence to his embalmed remains, that perhaps at some future day—such is the irony of fate!—would be disinterred and exposed among the fractured relics of forgotten things to feed the idle curiosity of staring multitudes. (BL 24)
According to Husslein, the Hebrews treated their slaves and servants better than the surrounding pagan cultures because of the Mosaic laws. Servitude was limited to six years. Circumcised male servants became equal before God with their masters. Servant laws even protected family rights (BL 87-94). Masters received punishment for killing servants. Escaped slaves were not returned to their masters and slaves injured by their master were set free. Why did the Bible not forbid slavery? Husslein followed Leo XIII’s reasoning: She [the Church] has deprecated any precipitate action in securing the manumission and liberation of the slaves, because that would have entailed tumults and wrought injury, as well to the slaves themselves as to the commonwealth. (In Plurimus 7)
From this Husslein developed two points to counter socialist calls for revolution: first, the use of violence to improve social conditions had never succeeded; second, improvement in the lot of workers could only take place through the non-violent intervention of religion (SW 1:101). What, then, had revealed religion done? It had taken the social conditions of its time and infused into them, without violence or
42
Stephen A. Werner strain, higher standards, casting its protecting mantle about the weak, guarding virtue and purity in man and woman, and providing even for the least and last the full opportunity of perfectly serving his Creator in the manner befitting his high human dignity. Truly a great achievement. (BL 102)
Husslein described Mosaic laws on the prompt payment of just wages. Mosaic laws on usury protected workers from unjust credit practices. Even the forced labor of Solomon was better than in other lands because of the Sabbath rest, religious holidays, and the insistence on the dignity of labor. Husslein also discussed how the Mosaic laws maintained a wide distribution of property by prohibiting the concentration of land in the hands of the few (BL 64-66, 107-108). God sent prophets to protest social injustice and the mistreatment of workers and the poor. Husslein compared the prophets’ words to Leo XIII’s Rerum novarum (BL 131, CSM 46). The New Testament illustrated the dignity of labor. Jesus grew up in a carpenter shop doing manual labor (BL 170-173). Many of the parables of Jesus dealt with labor. Responding to socialist charges that early Christians supported slavery, Husslein pointed to St. Paul’s writings, cited in Leo XIII’s In plurimus, as the Christian charter of freedom that eventually abolished slavery. Thus the Apostles, . . . taught and laid down the doctrine which more than once occurs in the Epistles of St. Paul addressed to those newly baptized: “For you are all the children of God by faith, in Jesus Christ. For as many of you as have been baptized in Christ, have put on Christ. There is neither Jew, nor Greek; there is neither bond, nor free; there is neither male nor female. For you are all one in Christ Jesus” (Gal. iii, 26-28). “Where there is neither Gentile nor Jew, circumcision nor uncircumcision, Barbarian nor Scythian, bond nor free. But Christ is all and in all” (Col. iii, II). “For in one Spirit were we all baptized into one body, whether Jews or Gentiles, whether bond or free, and in one Spirit we have all been made to drink” (I Cor. xii, 13). (In Plurimus 5)6
In discussing the New Testament, Husslein introduced love as the ultimate social principle: This, therefore, is the law of Christ in all our industrial and commercial as well as social and domestic relations: service through
3 ~ Husslein’s Bible and Labor
43
love, and that love ultimately motived in our love of God above all things. ... The love, then, we are to have for our neighbor, a love to which industry and commerce may set no limits, is the love wherewith Christ loved us. Apply this to our industrial relations and forthwith all our problems of real moment are solved. Difficulties, such as must always arise, could not fail of ultimate adjustment in an atmosphere of friendship and brotherhood, where employer and employed recognize each other as fellow servants of God, and where their perfect observance of God’s will would win for them from the lips of Christ the endearing name of “friends.” There is the Christian solution and the only solution of the labor problem. (BL 174-175)
Old Testament Precedents for Modern Social Situations For Husslein the primary Old Testament precedent for modern industrialism was the importance of religion. Even in our own day the leaders of the nations have failed to learn that social and national welfare is impossible for a people unfaithful to God. Its very prosperity turns into a curse. (BL 156)
Husslein compared the bible accounts to modern civilization: The Egyptian industrialism too, it would seem, was equaled in all its diabolism in modern times during the long reign of economic Liberalism and Individualism. . . . Under the Mammonism that followed the destruction of the gilds and monasteries, many a man labored to the utmost and yet did not receive wages enough to be filled with meat and bread. (The Egyptians at least fed their slaves.) A system of relentless profit-making ground down the toiler as heartlessly as ever did pyramid king or Egyptian Pharaoh in the days of Moses. Little children of their own nationality were driven as long and as hard by laissez-faire overlords as ever the brutal Assyrian with his rod urged on his captives of an alien race in the reigns of Sargon or Sennacherib. (BL 36)
Husslein even compared the Exodus account of the Egyptian order to kill Hebrew male children to modern “paganistic” birth control (BL 36, “Invasion of Race Suicide”). Husslein saw Abraham as a model for modern workers:
44
Stephen A. Werner The shepherd life of these men, with its ample freedom, its wholesome tasks in which all took part, its simple pleasures, its strong, close ties of home and society, and its deep religious faith, was a higher and nobler way of living than that followed by the courtier in Pharaoh’s palace or the commercial magnate in his Babylonian mansion. (BL 29-30)7
Husslein, concerned about irreligion and atheism among labor leaders, feared that desperate workers would be led away from religion: the true solution of the social problem. Thus, Moses served as the model for the true labor leader: “History’s Greatest Labor Leader” (BL 33-34). The merit of Moses consisted entirely in his courageous fidelity to the will of God. In this also must ever consist the merit of every true labor leader in a just industrial cause. (BL 43)
Citing Amos’ condemnation of both rich and poor for their irreligion, Husslein attacked the attitude of labor leaders that “labor can do no wrong.” Husslein insisted that labor leaders deal honestly with employers and not use violence (BL 129-137). Again, it is the characteristic of the social demagogue to defend the actions and activities of labor on all occasion. That labor can do no wrong is just as false as that capital has always a pure intention in seeking its own profits. Labor without religious principles, and without high motives which religion alone can persistently hold out to the masses, is not one whit better than capital and is ready to gain its own selfish ends by exploiting the public, ruining an innocent employer, or oppressing its own fellow-workers. It was irreligion that begot the vices of capitalism and it was the same irreligion that begot the counter-vices of Marxism and Anarchism. (“Priest and Social Problems” 1034)
Writing at a time when corporations used anti-trust laws to break up unions, Husslein compared the corrupt legal processes condemned by Amos and Isaiah to modern judges. Husslein compared the deceitful weights and balances of Hosea’s time to modern capitalists making fortunes by overcharging the poor for clothing, food, and fuel. He found the image of Micah—oppressors eating the flesh of the poor—as an appropriate image for laissez faire economics, where, for the sake of profits, workers toiled in hazardous conditions for wages too low to live decently. Husslein cited Amos and Isaiah for their
3 ~ Husslein’s Bible and Labor
45
condemnations of women living in luxury built upon oppression (BL 131-34, 143, 149-50). Husslein’s use of the biblical prophets is notable. Most Catholics only knew the messianic predictions in Isaiah. Husslein used the prophetic writings as they were originally understand, as critiques of social conditions. Key to the message of the prophets was a return to religion, phrased as a call to reject the false religion of idolatry. If one were to look for a prototype for Husslein, the biblical prophet might be such a model. Husslein stands as an American Amos, criticizing social and economic conditions. The biblical prophet Amos came from an obscure background. After receiving his prophetic call, Amos prophesied in the Northern kingdom of Israel during the reign of Jeroboam II (c. 786-746 B.C.E.).a time of great prosperity for the wealthy and harsh poverty for the lower classes. Amos condemned luxurious and idolatrous lives based on economic oppression. Husslein who came from an obscure midwest background also lived at a time of great wealth amidst great poverty. In many cases this wealth came as profits from businesses in which underpaid workers labored in harsh conditions. For Husslein, idolatry was not the Canaanite god Baal but the materialism of a society that put greater profits ahead of human need. In a sense Husslein’s work with the elder Jesuit John J. Ming served as his prophetic call. The Old Testament prophets used metaphor, image, and language to attack social injustice and to call for a return to authentic religion and just relations between human beings. Husslein used the same tools of language as he struggled at his Underwood typewriter. He attacked the injustice and irreligion he saw in America, giving his most prophetic critique of society in his culminating work: The Christian Social Manifesto. That those criticized ignored Husslein’s message is consistent with the biblical prophets, who themselves were ignored. Amos and other biblical prophets did not claim to speak their own words and ideas. Rather, they spoke messages they believed where given to them by God. In a similar way, Husslein believed that God had spoken to the modern world through Leo XIII’s social encyclicals. Biblical prophets and biblical law were both used by Husslein. He argued that Mosaic laws on property, such as Sabbath year regulations, provided a biblical support for Leo XIII’s call for a wide distribution of property. For Husslein the biblical principle that God owned the land: “‘Because it is mine, and you are strangers and sojourners with me,’” meant that property ownership was not absolute (BL 63). There were limits to what capitalists could do with
46
Stephen A. Werner
property. This biblical principle also opposed land grabbing, and monopolization and abuse of natural resources. Husslein compared the parable of the rich man who built barns for his surplus crops to the businessman who “having made large dividends adds them to his capital stock, but without a thought of the stewardship in which all money must be held and used” (BL 60-69, 151). Husslein compared child labor in the 1800s to the sacrificing of children to the god Molech as mentioned in the Old Testament. With the new Baal of Gain thus established in the fair places of the earth, what could be more natural than the modern repetition of those sacrifices of tender, piteous childhood, which at once followed? (“Moloch of Industrialism” 159)
For Husslein the most specific biblical precedent was a direct application of the biblical condemnation of holding back wages. He cited Leviticus 19:13: “The wages of him that hath been hired by these shall not abide with thee until morning,” as well as Deuteronomy 24:14, 15; Tobias 4:15; Ecclesiasticus 34:13; and James verse 4 as condemnations of the holding back of workers’ wages. Husslein argued that failing to pay just wages was equivalent to holding back wages (CSM 175-76).
Reclaiming Biblical Figures Husslein wanted to reclaim Moses, Aaron, and Jesus from socialists and revolutionaries who used the Bible to justify proletarian rebellion (“Social Study of Prophets” 79). Husslein rejected such interpretations of Moses since they ignored key elements of the Exodus account: the divine call of Moses and the miracles of the Exodus. Husslein objected to the claim that the killing of an Egyptian by Moses justified violence. Moses led the people, not in a proletarian revolution, but in an event wrought by God’s power to free His people to worship. For Husslein, religion was the key element in the Exodus story and the key to solving the labor problem (BL 33-34).8 To escape the burden of forced labor, Jeroboam led the mistreated northern tribes and broke away from the southern tribes. Some considered him a great labor leader. Socialists had cited Jeroboam as another example of a biblical justification for proletarian revolt. Husslein rejected this explanation, for Jeroboam led the people from the true worship of God by setting up golden calves at Bethel and Dan (BL 123-26). For Husslein, Jeroboam made two errors: he rejected true religion and he used violence to improve the conditions of labor.
3 ~ Husslein’s Bible and Labor
47
Husslein saw Jeroboam as a model for what labor leaders should not do. Lastly, Husslein had to reclaim Jesus from socialist claims. As Leo XIII stated: The Socialists, stealing the very Gospel itself with a view to deceive more easily the unwary, have been accustomed to distort it so as to suit their own purposes, nevertheless so great is the difference between their depraved teachings and the most pure doctrine of Christ that a greater could not exist: “for what participation hath justice with injustice? or what fellowship hath light with darkness?” (II Cor. vi, 14.) (Quod apostolici 5)
Socialists described Jesus as a revolutionary. Denying the divinity of Jesus, they described him as a laborer who aroused the people when economic changes threatened his craft. Christ led a proletarian movement, but with time, capitalists used the new religion to exploit and enslave the masses. Paul transformed the religion of Jesus to support Roman imperialism. By the end of the second century Christianity had so accommodated itself to the status quo that it supported slavery. Husslein attacked these views by arguing that Jesus did not come to destroy the social order: the New Testament stated that the authority of Pilate came from God and that servants were to obey masters. Husslein denied that the gospels showed class conflict. Furthermore, Jesus did not reject property or the wage system. Husslein also attacked socialist writers who used the magnificat to argue that Mary was a revolutionary. Husslein’s The Golden Years painted a very nonrevolutionary portrait of Mary. Socialists often cited the community of goods in Acts as proof of the socialist nature of Christianity. Husslein argued that the practice was not compulsory and ultimately resulted in failure (CSP 89-94, 107-18). Husslein pointed out that Jesus, taught no social system; He outlined no plan of economic reconstruction; but He left a doctrine of divine love, fidelity to which can alone bring to the world justice, charity, cooperation, brotherhood, a desire of service above profits, a zeal for souls above dividends, an emulation on the part of employer and worker to promote each others’ welfare, a readiness on the part of both to consult the public interest before their own advantages, and finally the firm determination to seek above all else the things of God and of His kingdom. (BL 179)
48
Stephen A. Werner Christ Himself never preached, as modern radicals have claimed, the destruction of existing systems. He gave instead the doctrine instructing us to love God above all things and our neighbor as ourselves. From that alone were bound to follow, in the course of time, all the wonderful changes which Christianity effected in the world—slowly, silently, but surely, wherever men gave heed to it. (CSM 3)
Husslein used the Bible to argue that true religion improved the lot of workers. He sought precedents in the Old Testament for modern industrial situations and he reclaimed biblical figures. Husslein laid the foundation for his explanation of Christian history.
Christian History and Labor Husslein argued that the Roman Catholic Church had always protected workers. For according to Leo XIII: We need only recall for one moment the examples written down in history. Of these things there cannot be the shadow of doubt; for instance, that civil society was renovated in every part by the teachings of Christianity; that in the strength of that renewal the human race was lifted up to better things—nay, that it was brought back from death to life, and to so excellent a life that nothing more perfect had been known before or will come to pass in the ages that are yet to be. Of this beneficent transformation, Jesus Christ was at once the first cause and the final purpose. As from Him all came, so to Him all was to be referred. For from the time when, by the light of the Gospel message, the human race came to know the grand mystery of the Incarnation of the Word and the redemption of man, the life of Jesus Christ, God and Man, penetrated every race and nation, and impregnated them with His faith, His precepts, and His laws. (RN 22)
For Husslein, only through Christianity, with its principles of universal brotherhood, equality before God, love for one another, and the dignity of labor have workers received justice.9 Pagan society, without such moral principles, could not treat labor justly. “Interest in the laborer for his own sake, or for the love of God whose image he bears, was unthinkable to the pagan mind. Paganism was never concerned about the life and condition of the poor” (DI 22-23). Husslein anticipated Pius XI:
3 ~ Husslein’s Bible and Labor
49
It was Christianity that first affirmed the real and universal brotherhood of all men of whatever race and condition. This doctrine she proclaimed by a method, and with an amplitude and conviction, unknown to preceding centuries; and with it she potently contributed to the abolition of slavery. Not bloody revolution, but the inner force of her teaching made the proud Roman matron see in her slave a sister in Christ. (Divini redemptoris 35)
Husslein answered charges leveled against Christian history by socialists. For instance, Marx held that Christianity had justified slavery, glorified medieval serfdom, and defended economic systems that brutalized workers (Doherty 4-5). Husslein used the weapon of the socialists, historical analysis, to argue that the Church had not exploited workers, but in fact protected them. He focused on historical developments that Marxists often cited: the move from tribes to civilization, from slavery and republicanism in Greece and Rome to serfdom under medieval feudalism, and from industrial capitalism under the modern state to cooperative society. While Marxists explained these in terms of changing modes of production, Husslein described these developments in terms of acceptance or rejection of Catholic teaching (WWW 37-39). In Democratic Industry, Husslein surveyed history. Examining ancient Egypt, Greece, and Rome, Husslein found the conditions of labor inhumane. Although Greek and Roman craft and merchant guilds existed, they were inadequate and undermined by political intrigue and violence. Husslein drew parallels between ancient guilds and modern irreligious unions, such as the Industrial Workers of the World, who had abandoned sound labor principles for political goals. Husslein argued that excessive political involvement by unions, either ancient or modern, led to state interference in unions (DI 1-36). Husslein saw true labor unionism as fundamentally Christian in origin and spirit. However, he made a tautologous argument. For although he claimed that true unionism was Christian, he defined true unionism as Christian unionism. Furthermore, since Husslein saw Catholicism as true Christianity, whenever he spoke of Christian unionism, he meant Roman Catholic unionism. Husslein faced an historical problem. If the Roman Catholic Church protected workers, why was slavery not abolished when Christianity became the official religion for the Roman empire? For socialists claimed that Christianity tolerated slavery. The socialist Kautsky argued that the condition of slaves improved with Christianity only because so many slaves became Christians (Kautsky 153-56).
50
Stephen A. Werner
Husslein used the principle of non-violent change he had developed in discussing Old Testament slavery to argue that slavery was so integral to the culture that attempting to abolish it would have lead to violence. He saw violence as both morally unacceptable and ineffective. According to Husslein, history told of no successful slave uprising. “What bloody strife could not have accomplished was brought about far more surely by the gradual influence of Christian doctrine in the hearts of men” (BL 88). Husslein also argued that the Church had almost abolished Roman slavery when the barbarians reestablished it. The Church first converted the barbarians then abolished slavery (DI 40-42, BL 176, SW 1:91-92). According to Husslein, the Church transformed the condition of slaves. The Church upheld laws requiring that slaves be sold with the land on which they lived. This protected family ties and assured a home for the slaves. Christian emperors improved slave conditions. The Church welcomed slaves and the poor and allowed them to hold Church office, even the papacy. The Church sanctified manumission, making the liberation of slaves a pious work. Fleeing slaves sought refuge in churches. Slaves held by Church institutions were well treated (DI 40-46, SW 1:92). But as in apostolic days, so now the Church insisted upon the essential equality of all men before God, upon the precept of charity and the doctrine of universal brotherhood, and in particular upon the reward of mercy to be accorded to him who freed a brother from his bonds. (DI 59)
Leo XIII, less restrained than Husslein, made this bold claim: It is sufficient to recall the fact that slavery, that old reproach of the heathen nations, was mainly abolished by the beneficent efforts of the Church. (Libertas 9)
The Catholic Church was extremely late in condemning slavery. In 1888 Leo XIII promulgated In plurimis—the first major papal document to condemn slavery—two decades after the American Civil War. Husslein examined the role of Catholic monasteries in improving the conditions of labor. Monasteries, as nurseries for industry and art, preserved ancient Greek and Roman writings, and undertook building and farming projects. They did charity work for the poor and provided shelter for travelers. Monasteries were centers of civilization from a religious, literary, social, economic, and industrial perspective.
3 ~ Husslein’s Bible and Labor
51
By insisting on Ora et Labora, prayer and labor, monks upheld labor as an essential part of Christian life thus giving dignity to work (DI 47-55). They also spread Christian teaching on human dignity. In defending the monasteries, Husslein opposed socialists such as Kautsky who argued that monasteries succeeded because they replaced slave labor with the free labor of monks. For Kautsky, monasteries were merely a step in economic evolution (Kautsky 451-52). Husslein faced another historical problem: why did the Church tolerate serfdom in the early Middle Ages? According to Husslein the Church accepted serfdom as an improvement on slavery and then humanized serfdom. Serfdom gave the peasant religious respect, family rights, a legal status, and property rights. The Church provided for the serfs’ moral and religious welfare and enforced laws protecting them. Serfs could not be sold away from their homes. Husslein claimed that serfdom was better on monastic and episcopal lands (DI 56-57, WP 76). Husslein described the end of feudalism and serfdom in the High Middle Ages. Under the guidance of the Catholic Church true guilds came into being with a religious dimension, concern for moral issues, wide ownership of property, and concern for the common good. Guilds reflected the medieval society based on service and mutual responsibility (DI 102-109, 135-45). It was the Church which in the Middle Ages, when her power was universally acknowledged, everywhere encouraged and established her system of craft unionism in the labor guilds, which like an immense network spread over the entire Christian world. Poverty such as exists in our day was then practically unknown. (CSP 157)
Husslein denied a direct connection between medieval unions and ancient unions and credited the Church with the development, direction, and spirit of the medieval unions (“Origin of Medieval Gilds”). Husslein traced the history of guilds, beginning with the Peace Guilds which settled disputes; provided insurance and courts; recovered stolen property; and helped travelers, pilgrims, and the poor. With the decline of serfdom, workers formed free guilds. A new stage for labor began with the development of the merchant guilds or town guilds.
52
Stephen A. Werner Each craftsman, at this period, was likewise a merchant. He personally manufactured his wares and personally sold them in the market, at the fair, or in his own shop and home. (DI 113)
Husslein admitted that this system was not perfect. Abuses due to human selfishness and the misuse of power crept in. However, “Seen in their best aspect, they are the first approach towards an adequate expression of industrial democracy that the world had known” (DI 110). After the merchant guilds came the craft guilds, or Christian trade unions—the most important social institutions of the Middle Ages. Husslein described the rise of craft guilds as “The World’s Greatest Labor Movement.” They were in fact organizing the first Christian trade unions to work out in this manner their more complete emancipation, to maintain their industrial and civic independence, to preserve within their own hands, though under proper sanction of legitimate courts and rulers, the control of the various trades on which their livelihood depended, and to establish on a true and Christian foundation the dignity of honest labor. (DI 167)
Husslein saw religion as essential to all true labor organizations. This followed Leo XIII who stated: It is clear that they [workingmen’s associations or unions] must pay special and chief attention to piety and morality, . . . Let our associations, then, look first and before all to God; let religious instruction have therein a foremost place, each one being carefully taught what is his duty to God, what he is to believe, what he is to hope for, and how he is to work out his salvation. (RN 42)
Husslein’s explanation of history sought to show the Church as protecting and improving the lot of workers with the medieval guilds as the high point of the Church’s efforts.
“World’s Greatest Labor Movement”: Medieval Guilds John A. Ryan described the importance of Husslein’s writings on medieval guilds: No one has described better the Guild system, or has drawn more important conclusions from the spirit of the Guild System with
3 ~ Husslein’s Bible and Labor
53
regard to cooperative production than Father Joseph Husslein, S.J., especially in his latest book, “Democratic Industry.” Those who are interested in making the connection between the past and the present, in learning the Catholic tradition and ideal in industry, ought to read carefully that work. (Social Reconstruction 179)10
In writing about medieval guilds Husslein offered his key evidence that the Church protected workers. “Catholicity restored it [labor] to honor, and gave it those high ideals which were first to be fully developed under the aegis of the Church in the Middle Ages” (DI 206). Husslein described the guilds: Apprentices, journeymen and employers were gathered together into guilds of their own crafts, were united by identical interests and safeguarded by the protection of the Church authorities. Spiritual, as well as temporal benefits, were sought by the members through life and Masses were offered for their souls after death. Each guild constituted, according to the mind of the Church, one great united family, and all grievances were submitted for peaceful arbitration. (CSP 157)
For Husslein the medieval guilds gave a model of workers’ organizations that protected workers and advanced the common good because of several characteristics: (DI 175-235) 1. The guilds held labor in honor and respected the equality of persons. 2. Guilds achieved a wide distribution of property. 3. Guild membership was open to all workers in a particular trade.11 Guilds protected workers and limited working hours. 4. Guilds assured standards of measure and quality products at reasonable prices. 5. The guilds policed themselves. They often had their own courts, which were quicker, fairer, and less expensive than modern courts. Guilds resolved problems without resorting to government intervention. 6. Guilds prevented fraud and deceit in manufacturing.12 7. Guild rules prevented profiteering, hoarding of raw materials, overproduction, unemployment, improper advertising, unfair competition, monopolies, middlemen, underselling to destroy competition, and unnecessary advertising. (Husslein saw these abuses as endemic to modern business.)
54
Stephen A. Werner
8. Dedicated to religion, guilds protected Sunday and religious holidays (CSM 210-11). (Husslein saw religion as essential to correct social relationships.) 9. Guilds undertook charity work: taking care of the poor and needy guild members. 10. Guilds provided an integrated approach to manufacturing. “The master craftsman of the Middle Ages was capitalist, laborer, merchant and entrepreneur in one” (DI 185). 11. Apprenticeship trained workers adequately (CSM 13-14). Guild rules prevented master craftsmen from profiting from apprentices. 12. Guilds taught brotherhood. 13. As a result of the guild system no significant poverty existed in the Middle Ages (CSP 157). 14. There was no class struggle in this period. Workers and employers knew one another (DI 229). For Husslein medieval society could not be recreated, but the unchanging principles of the guilds—derived from Catholicism— could be applied to modern industry as a model for cooperative ventures in which labor owned, in whole or in part, the factories, and in which labor had a voice in decision making. It is clear that the guilds cannot be reproduced today precisely as they existed in the Middle Ages. One sufficient reason is that they belonged to a period of small-scale industry. What we can and must copy is their spirit and motivation. They were based on sound Christian principles and sought to make just provision alike for consumer and producer. The producer was the workingman himself who had passed successfully through his preparatory stages as apprentice and journeyman, and now could uphold the honour of his trade. For himself and his fellow master guildsmen, however, he prevented by the strictest regulations the concentration of wealth in the hands of a few to the detriment of the many. In this he was true to his Catholic tradition. In what he produced he was concerned about quality first and last. The price, in turn, was to be no more than a fair remuneration for his own labour and that of the one or two apprentices and journeymen the guild allowed him to employ. These were respectively treated by him as son or younger brother, while he was to look in all things to the due observance of morality and religion in his household. Individuals or particular guilds at times fell short of these ideals. That was but human. Yet the spirit of the guilds lived on through the Ages of Faith as the Christian ideal. That spirit can be recaptured in large-scale industry as well. (SW 1:196)13
3 ~ Husslein’s Bible and Labor
55
In the late 1800s and early 1900s many people, disillusioned with modern society, saw the Middle Ages as a Golden Age of an integrated hierarchical social order where everyone knew his or her place and his or her obligations (Curran, American 103-129, DI 237-40).14 For in modern industrialization, science, technology, and war, rather than bringing progress, had brought untold suffering. Husslein, although he looked to the Middles Ages for models, did not romanticize the period as did his contemporaries, Kenkel and Engelen.15 However, Husslein did idealize the Middle Ages and he overestimated the impact of Christian principles on the harsh economic realities of the medieval period. This is not surprising since the tools of social research were just developing in the early 1900s. They had just begun to be applied to contemporary society. It would be much later that these analytical tools would be applied to historical periods such as the Middle Ages. Husslein could not know that a gap existed between the descriptions of the Middle Ages he encountered and the actual lives of Medieval workers. By upholding a previous age as the social and economic ideal, Husslein undermined the theory of Marxist dialectic materialism that economic and social structures evolved from less advanced to more advanced stages. Husslein also undermined the “kingdom of God” approach to Christian social ethics. For Husslein, the true social order lay in the past not in a kingdom of God yet to be established on earth.
“The Great Catastrophe”: Luther and the Reformation If the Catholic Church had the answers to social problems, then for Husslein protestantism did not. For Husslein, the Reformation, “The Great Catastrophe”, by destroying the medieval social structure that had protected workers, caused the modern industrial crisis. Husslein discussed the Reformation in two series of articles on Martin Luther: the first in 1917 on the 400th anniversary of Luther’s posting of the 95 theses, the second in 1921 on the 400th anniversary of the Diet of Worms.16 Husslein developed five arguments on the Reformation. 1) The Reformation established the principle of private judgment. 2) Capitalism and political absolutism grew because of this principle. 3) Without the guidance of the Roman Catholic Church social conditions declined as medieval guilds and monasteries were destroyed. 4)
56
Stephen A. Werner
Luther alienated the working class and lowered the status of women. 5) Luther opposed human liberties. Husslein admitted that prior to the Reformation abuses existed. However, Luther undermined Church teaching with the doctrine of private judgment. Each one might read out of the Bible or into it his own favorite prejudices. This false individualism in religion soon had its parallel in the false economic individualism on which the Protestant prosperity was founded. In all social and economic relations the Church demands that the common good be first and always kept in view. All private privilege must yield to it. But with the new doctrine a new ethical code arose. Each one sought, under the new individualism of the Reformation, to enrich himself to the utmost without regard for the common good of his fellow-men. (“Rise and Fall of Protestant Prosperity” 490) By the unhappy separation from the Church founded by Christ upon Peter men had lost the one and only authority that could with certainty guide and direct them in the principles of social justice and of charity. (DI 308)
Husslein saw economic liberalism (laissez faire capitalism), rationalism, and all modern social problems—greedy industrialists, impoverished masses, revolutions, even World War I—as consequences of the rejection of the moral authority of the Church. According to Husslein, with the Reformation, princes ignored the moral authority of the Church and became judges of both politics and religion. They supported the Reformation because it provided religious justification for political tyranny. For Husslein, “the divine right of kings” was a Reformation idea condemned by the Church (DI 240). So it came about that the ideals of popular government were killed outright by the Reformers, and State and Church alike were delivered, shackled, into the hands of autocratic rulers, who were taught to invoke a Divine right. The prince was to decide the religion of his subjects. Luther had given the authority for this, although he meant such powers to be used by Lutheran princes only. But men were more logical than that. Politically and economically, the poor peasants were everywhere rendered more helpless than before. In various Reformation countries they were
3 ~ Husslein’s Bible and Labor
57
again reduced to practical slavery or serfdom. The city workers, too, fared worse than ever. (“Reformation and Popular Life” 127)
With the Reformation, social conditions declined. (Even Luther recognized the decline in public morality.) According to Husslein, Luther attacked the Catholic position on good works, thus good works declined. Luther held out unbelief as the only sin. This denied the sinfulness of other actions; as a result sin increased. Lastly, Luther held that men were slaves to their wills and ultimately not responsible for good and evil (“Luther and Social Life,” DI 294-310). The most significant social decline was the destruction of the medieval guilds (WP 174-75). Further destruction took place in the looting of guild property which had been used to protect workers. Peasants were reduced to near slavery by the nobles. Many monasteries and charitable institutions, which had helped the poor, were destroyed and looted. But the pillage of monasteries and foundations, and the introduction of the New Evangel at once destroyed the flourishing work of charity. Luther hoped that the money taken with his approval might, as he expressly states, be spent in propagating his new religion, and the superfluities devoted to governmental and charitable purposes. Needless to say, his hope was vain. The princes and nobles had joined his revolt for booty and license and the ampler power which, by making them the sole spiritual rulers, it gave them over their subjects. They were by no means minded to bestow upon the poor the riches which Luther had authorized them to gather into their treasuries. (“Luther and Social Life” 261)
In Husslein’s time Luther had been hailed as the champion of the working class. Husslein attacked this notion, arguing that Luther alienated the workers by supporting slavery, serfdom, and oppression. (Husslein attacked Luther for supporting slavery and serfdom yet Husslein defended the Church’s failure to eliminate both, believing that the Catholic Church improved the lot of slaves and serfs while the Reformation worsened their lot.) In the Peasant’s Rebellion of 1525 Luther sided with the nobility and urged them to stab and slay the peasants. But Luther literally out Herods Herod in his final reflection upon the poor slaughtered peasants, who were butchered in the revolution, and for whose fate he was doubly responsible. Leading Protestant historians freely admit that he had been largely the
58
Stephen A. Werner immediate cause of their uprising, which took place in the name of the New Evangel. Yet not content with their defeat, he goaded the princes to their slaughter. But our blood boils when, on recalling the fate of 100,000 of these misguided men, incited to revolt by his violent invectives against bishops and princes, we hear him actually boasting, years after the bloody deeds had taken place. (“Luther, Slaves and Peasants” 287)
According to Husslein the peasants’ offense was that their gospel interpretation differed from Luther’s. Husslein attacked the idea that Luther restored dignity to women. He criticized Luther for secularizing marriage, removing its sacramental character and making it a mere legal ceremony. According to Husslein, Luther thought that sex, even in marriage, was inherently sinful. The domestic peace of Luther’s own home was questionable in light of his coarse table talk with many crudities toward women. Luther even sanctioned the bigamist marriage of the Landgrave Philip of Hesse (“Luther and Woman”).17 In attacking Luther on women, Husslein wanted to establish that the Catholic Church had the true answers to women’s issues. Husslein attacked Luther for opposing modern liberties. Desiring to prove the compatibility between Catholicism and American culture, Husslein argued that the Roman Catholic faith defended true liberty while Protestantism did not. However, to do this, Husslein had to depart significantly from Leo XIII. For Leo XIII did not hold to modern conceptions of liberty.18 In “Luther and Freedom of Thought” and in “Luther’s Freedom of Conscience,” Husslein attacked the claim that Luther advocated freedom of thought and freedom of conscience; a claim based on Luther’s refutation of papal authority at the Diet of Worms in 1521. Husslein argued that Luther wanted these freedoms for himself, but in his later years denied them to those who preached a different gospel (“Story of Marxism” 361-62). Originally desiring free congregations, Luther later insisted on conformity and control of them. He urged princes to ban the Catholic mass and to force people to attend Lutheran sermons. Luther was particularly intolerant of Anabaptists and Jews. He called for their imprisonment, banishment, and at times their execution (What Luther Taught 22-24). Husslein quoted Luther on preachers who did not agree with him: ‘Those who come without official position or commission,’ Luther wrote, ‘are not good enough to be called false prophets, but tramps
3 ~ Husslein’s Bible and Labor
59
and rogues who should be handed over to Meister Hans [the executioner]’ . . . What would have become of Luther if Catholic princes had acted upon this principle in his regard? At least one apostle of brutal coercion would have been silenced effectively. (“Luther and Freedom of Thought” 159)
Husslein also attacked the claim that Luther supported separation of church and state even though Leo XIII rejected church/state separation as a “fatal principle” (Libertas humana 14).19 Husslein recognized the complexity of Luther’s writings on the subject. Early in his career Luther held to separation of church and state. But as time went on, Luther became more dependent on the princes. For Husslein, Luther introduced the doctrine of unconditional surrender of religion to the secular power. In exchange for political support Luther delivered religion into the hands of the state. Luther’s principle, in brief, was that there must be no limit to the power of princes in spiritual matters provided they employ it faithfully in enforcing his own doctrine down to the least article. He [Luther] is the father of the most reprehensible form of political despotism, despotism over the consciences of men. (“Luther and the State” 211-12)
Even though Leo XIII did not accept modern liberties, Husslein— appealing to an American audience—described the Church as the true upholder of human liberty: Nothing whatsoever was added by Luther to human liberty, since all the freedom of thought and action which man can rightfully vindicate for himself, without license or godlessness, has ever been granted by the Catholic Church since the days of Saint Peter. (“What, Then, Remains of Luther?” 321) The movement for popular rights that followed in more modern times was not an outgrowth of the Reformation, but a reaction against these results. In all its best expressions it is purely a return to Catholic, pre-Reformation principles. (“Reformation and Popular Liberty” 127)
Even Leo XIII, despite numerous statements against modern liberties, claimed that the Church did in fact promote true liberty (“Ap-
60
Stephen A. Werner
ostolic Letter” 19 March 1902; Libertas humana 1). Husslein believed this claim, yet he downplayed Leo XIII’s rejection of specific liberties. Husslein set the stage for later Catholic thinkers, such as John Courtney Murray, who argued that principles such as religious freedom were fundamentally Catholic values. Such a position was a long way from Gregory XVI’s Mirari vos (1832) and Pius IX’s Syllabus errorum (1864) which opposed modern freedoms. Husslein was one of the bridges spanning the chasm between Pius IX and Vatican II’s “Declaration on Religious Freedom.” Husslein attacked Luther only on social issues. He did not attack protestant theology. In fact, in Channels of Devotion Husslein quoted Luther in defense of the real presence in the Eucharist. However, there was no ecumenism in Husslein’s writings. This is not surprising. In the early part of this century great misunderstanding, hostility, and even hatred existed between Catholics and Protestants. Nativism against Catholics, although declining, still threatened Catholics. Many Protestants feared and resented the growth of Catholicism. For Catholics it would not be until after Vatican II that a significant thaw in Protestant/Catholic relations would take place. Furthermore, for Husslein the insistence that the Catholic Church had the answers to social problems blinded him to the common ground Catholicism shared with Protestantism. However, it was a rare Catholic thinker of this period who could see beyond the biases of the time. It is also possible that Husslein felt competition from Protestant social thinkers such as Gladden and Rauschenbusch. Seeing a good offense as the key to a good defense, Husslein tried to discredit claims that Protestantism furthered the rights of workers. The overall picture of Luther that Husslein painted was quite negative. In sum, Husslein stated: “What, then, remains of Luther?” Nothing, we reply, apart from what the Church had already bestowed upon mankind in far more perfect ways. The results of his work may all be summed up in a mere negation. They are dissensions among his followers, uncertainty, rationalism and in civic and social life, individualism, with its consequent extortion on the part of the rich and revolution among the classes of the toilers and the poor. All these are negative things: denials of unity, faith, authority, charity and order. The revolt of Luther was nothing less than a rejection of the divine guidance of the Holy Spirit Whom Christ promised to send upon His Church to abide with her forever. The entire work of Luther’s life, summed up in brief, was to nullify, as far as God’s Providence permitted, the solemn prayer made by our Lord upon His depar-
3 ~ Husslein’s Bible and Labor
61
ture from this earth: “That they all may be one, as Thou, Father, in Me and I in Thee; that they also may be one in Us; that the world may believe that Thou hast sent Me.” It is this Unity in Catholicity which has ever remained the distinctive mark of His Church. (“What, Then, Remains of Luther” 321)
As part of Husslein’s view of history the Reformation represented the transitional stage from the ideal social order of the Middle Ages to the disaster of modern industrialism. It was from the Reformation that all social problems flowed. With society broken away from the moral guidance of the Church, individualism, materialism, and liberalism grew. These led to a capitalistic system unchecked by moral principles. Husslein surveyed history for historical proof of Leo XIII’s fundamental principle. Using the Bible Husslein argued that only true religion could solve social problems, that biblical stories must be understood in their context, and that the Bible had insight into the present social situation. In examining Christian history Husslein presented the Catholic Church as the protector of workers as shown in the medieval guilds. The destruction of medieval society by the Reformation led to the present industrial crisis. Although Husslein treated history uncritically, he believed history proved the value of Catholic answers to social problems. Husslein believed that all advances in the condition of workers were due to the acceptance of true religion. This belief led Husslein to reject the extremes of socialism, Christian socialism, and liberal capitalism. In their place Husslein proposed Democratic Industry based on Christian principles.
Notes 1
Strobell and Brown in CSP 107-113, Kautsky 335-37, 381. Melvin Williams (159) described Husslein’s Democratic Industry as one of “the first clear-cut attempts by American Catholics to rewrite history by applying the social principles of the Church to specific social and cultural phenomena and problems.” 3 Husslein usually interpreted the Bible literally. See ESP 106-107 and BL 31-32, 53-59. Husslein briefly discussed biblical interpretation in CSP 120. He tried to reconcile the creation story with contemporary science. Also Husslein accepted evolutionary theories if they maintained ultimate creation by God (ESP 95-116). 4 According to Tome Husslein wrote Bible and Labor against socialists to argue: 1) the dignity of labor, 2) that labor was blessed by God, and 3) the Church had always championed the cause of working men (87). 2
62 5
Stephen A. Werner
Several of Husslein’s themes in Bible and Labor were similar to themes in John Paul II’s Laborem exercens, (4, 25) which discussed the dignity of labor as shown in the book of Genesis. 6 See Husslein, SW 1:98-99. The socialist Karl Kautsky had argued that Colossians and I Peter supported slavery as a moral duty: “In antiquity, the slave was kept in his place by fear. It was reserved for Christianity to exalt the blind obedience of the slave to a moral duty, cheerfully performed” (413). 7 For Husslein, the polygamy of the patriarchs was a remnant of ancient paganism and not a sign of the historical development of marriage. 8 According to Husslein, Pharaoh saw Moses and Aaron as foreign labor agitators using religion to stir up the people. 9 Husslein sketched the basic lines of his argument on the historical relationship of Christianity to labor in CSP 157-62. He developed this fully in Democratic Industry. “With the aid of the Church, labor rose from slavery to serfdom, and from serfdom to democratic industry” (DI vii). See also WWW 38-39, CSM 3-4, SW 1:91-93. 10 Ryan based this book on lectures he gave at Fordham during the time Husslein taught at Fordham. Very likely Husslein attended the lectures and heard this compliment. 11 Husslein opposed unions that were difficult to enter. He accepted closed shops, but not closed unions. Husslein, however, cited Ryan’s view that it was best not to have closed shops (WWW 29-31, WP 173). 12 Husslein was critical of deceit and fraud in World War I manufacturing and critical of modern unions which covered up faulty manufactured goods (DI 195-200). 13 Husslein’s position followed Charles Plater who stated, “We shall only make ourselves ridiculous by advocating impossible measures such as the restoration of the old guild system in all its details. What we need to do is rather to recover the social spirit which animated these guilds, and to embody it in institutions adapted to modern needs” (McEntee 121). 14 The idealization of the Middle Ages—in part due to German romanticism and survival of craft guilds in Germany and Austria—was a key element in German and Austrian social Catholic thought. This thought greatly influenced Leo XIII (D. O’Brien 12-13). 15 McDonough in Men Astutely Trained repeatedly described Husslein as a naive romantic wanting to return to the middle ages. Yet Husslein wanted to recapture only two things from that era: 1) a recognition of the moral authority of the Church, and 2) social principles from the medieval guilds that could be applied to modern situations. Nonetheless, McDonough, “Metamorphoses of the Jesuits” 352, wrote: “His fondness for a tapestry-like medievalism caused him to posit the Catholic ghetto as an ideal written large, with the church monopolizing authority in public and private spheres.” Curiously, McDonough linked medievalism with the Catholic ghetto. In the Middle Ages non-Christians lived in the ghetto. Husslein did not envision the Church monopolizing authority in the public and private realm. He only asserted the authority of Catholicism as the preeminent teacher of Christian morality. Husslein, following Leo XIII, saw this moral authority as a leaven in society to teach both workers and managers to treat each other according to their God given dignity. 16 Five of these articles were published in Husslein’s What Luther Taught. Husslein quoted Luther liberally although uncritically; selecting texts to prove the superiority of Catholicism over Protestantism in protecting workers. Husslein used
3 ~ Husslein’s Bible and Labor
63
von Hartmann Grisar’s Luther which emphasized incriminating passages in Luther’s works. 17 Husslein ignored the complexity of Luther’s thought on women, particularly Luther’s positive statements on marriage. 18 Leo XIII rejected religious freedom in Immortale dei 10, 16. Leo XIII rejected the concepts of freedom of conscience, freedom of religion, and freedom of speech (Libertas humana 15, 18-21, 30). 19 "Justice therefore forbids, and reason itself forbids, the State to be godless; or to adopt a line of action which would end in godlessness—namely, to treat the various religions (as they call them) alike, and to bestow upon them promiscuously equal rights and privileges” (Libertas humana 16).
64
Stephen A. Werner
Chapter 4 Major Themes of Husslein’s Social Thought— Democratic Industry: An Altenative to Socialism and Capitalism Husslein, who saw true religion as necessary for social justice, attacked social systems which he believed to be based on “irreligion.” In doing so, Husslein developed and applied the teaching of Leo XIII’s Rerum novarum to the American scene by rejecting socialism, Christian socialism, and laissez faire capitalism. He proposed an alternative: Democratic Industry. Between the selfish and unjust extremes of tyrannical Socialism and unrestrained Capitalism there lies the only way to industrial liberation and Christian concord, which is pointed out by the Catholic Church. (CSP v)
Socialism Husslein crusaded against socialism throughout his life. Yet it is difficult today, when socialism is a virtual nonentity on the political landscape, to appreciate how much socialism frightened Catholics of the early 1900s. That is why Husslein’s life and work provide a valuable window into this period. His writings provide one of the clearest examples of American Catholic fear of socialism. Husslein and others, perceiving socialism as both potent and dangerous, raised the alarm. Ironically, this alarm fostered the illusion of the danger and threat of socialism. Husslein’s first book, The Church and Social Problems, attacked the Socialist Party of America which called for evolutionary and parliamentary change but did not call for immediate abolition of private property. Thus Husslein did not strongly criticize socialism for promoting violence and revolution, nor did he emphasize Leo XIII’s argument for private property.1 Rather, Husslein attacked socialism for its irreligion, atheism, opposition to Christianity, and material-
4 ~ Major Themes of Husslein’s Social Thought
65
ism. In attacking socialism, Husslein did not expect to convert socialists and radicals. Rather he spoke to the growing Catholic population, showing them the principles of Catholic social thought as the only true solution to social problems. He expected less to influence political leaders directly than to influence American Catholics who would in turn influence political leaders.2 The title page of Husslein’s The Church and Social Problems quoted Matthew’s gospel, “Whom will you that I release to you, Barabbas, or Jesus that is called Christ?” Husslein saw socialism—Barabbas—as fundamentally incompatible with and antagonistic to religion, because of socialism’s economic determinism, injustice to rightful property owners, and materialism. Husslein cited socialists who opposed Christianity and who described Roman Catholicism as a superstition supported by capitalists to keep workers in their places (CSP 13-15, WP 29). In later writings, Husslein cited the atrocities of the Spanish Civil War and the official and oppressive atheism of the Soviet Union as proof of the fundamental socialist hatred of religion.3 Husslein rejected socialist claims of neutrality toward religion (CSP 25-30, CSM 61-64). He quoted the Chicago platform of the 1908 National Convention of the Socialist Party of America: “The Socialist Party is primarily an economic and political movement. It is not concerned with matters of religious belief” (CSP 25). Husslein described this as a subterfuge—a tactical falsehood—to attract members, one readily admitted by socialists. He stated, “Let us, then, make no mistake. True Christianity and true Socialism, as here described, are forever irreconcilable” (CSM 85). Husslein saw materialism and atheism as essential elements of all socialism. Whether or not they accepted in full the materialistic conception of history, which is the basis of the entire Marxian philosophy, they all became imbued and saturated with its materialism and in practice have proved themselves militantly materialistic in every country, opposed to religion in general, to Christianity in particular, and to the Catholic Church above all things. (“Story of Marxism” 360-61)
Leo XIII did not discuss materialism extensively, but Husslein attacked it frequently. Husslein argued that materialistic theories did not help social problems but rather undermined religion, the true solution. Materialism denied the foundation of religion on timeless principles. For socialists the Church, the teaching of Christ, the sacraments, the Ten Commandments, even the concept of God were
66
Stephen A. Werner
necessitated by economic causes—man created God (CSM 57-60). Husslein attacked this view: The fact that it [materialistic socialism] admits of no principles that are eternally true, irrespective of time and place; no infallible, unchanging creed, such as we find realized in the Catholic faith, is sufficient evidence to condemn it. (CSP 60)
For Husslein, the Church which had remained the same in every “jot and tittle” of its doctrine, despite two millennia of changing economic conditions, disproved materialism. “Historic Materialism, like every other heresy and error, is wrecked upon the rock of Peter” (CSP 61). Husslein described socialist materialism: Underlying all this doctrine is the starkest materialistic evolution, claiming the descent of man, body and mind, from the brute: the evolution of the family from a purely animal herd, and denying, on the other hand, the existence of anything except matter and force, thus doing away with God, soul, and free will. With the belief in these rejected there can no longer be any true authority, which must ultimately be derived from God alone, and no responsibility, which depends on freedom of the will. (CSM 60)
Socialist materialism rejected the concept that moral decisions determined social situations. Husslein never clearly defined socialism. He chose those socialist statements which best supported his conclusions. (For example, in discussing the religious neutrality platform of the Socialist Party of America he quoted dissenting voices as the more accurate view of the party even though the dissenters lost the platform vote.) Although aware of divergence within the socialist movement, Husslein attacked a “pure” or “basic” form of socialism not actually held by most socialists.4 However, Husslein recognized some truth in socialism: “No heresy has ever been so wholly and hopelessly false that it did not reflect at least some broken lights of truth” (CSP v). Husslein found common ground with the socialist critique of capitalism (CSM 90). In addition to rejecting socialism in light of Leo XIII’s fundamental premise, Husslein made six ancillary arguments against socialism. 1) Socialism would eliminate private property. 2) The socialist position on class conflict stood at variance with Christian love. 3) Socialism was not scientific. 4) Socialism destroyed freedom. 5) Socialists were attempting to control education. 6) Socialism would not work.
4 ~ Major Themes of Husslein’s Social Thought
67
Many socialists sought collective ownership of the means of production, exchange, and distribution, although disagreeing on the extent of collective ownership. Husslein argued that socialists would be stealing property in violation of the moral law and God’s commandments (CSM 66-69). Husslein, following Leo XIII, sought a wider distribution of property—not collective ownership—in a Christian order “in which private ownership of the means of production shall not be perpetually denied to the masses, as would equally be the case under a godless Capitalism and a true, materialistic Socialism” (CSM 70). Contrary to the Christian demand of love, socialists promoted class hatred: a “method of warfare [which] is essentially unChristian, promoting an universal discontent and the hatred of class against class over all the world” (CSP 31). Husslein insisted, Marx, inspired with the hatred of the lost archangel, casting off all religion and belief in God, fulminated his thunders against the entire state of existing Society. Confusing abuses with inherent evils, he strove, under cover of materialistic evolution, to set class against class in a deadly conflict, lifting up the battle cry which was to arouse every latent passion of envy, greed and hatred in the hearts of his followers. (“Ketteler Centenary” 248)
Husslein described class struggle as paganism in economic life (WWW 39).5 He followed Leo XIII in rejecting a Marxist understanding of class conflict, believing that Christianity would unite society in a commonwealth of solidarity, with the interests of each individual as the interests of all, and the interests of all as the interests of each individual (RN 15, WP 33). Husslein described socialism as unscientific. Socialists misused science, accepting as infallible any theory that lent plausibility to socialism. The Church, on the other hand, had nothing to fear from science, welcoming every discovery as “a new fortress added to her already impregnable position” (CSP 62). There could be no contradiction between revealed religion and established science. To every duly informed and impartial investigator, the Catholic Church must appear, as she is in reality, the most truly advanced and scientific of all institutions, ancient and modern. (CSP 63)
Husslein and Leo XIII made many statements on the Church’s openness to science, largely to outflank Marxist claims of providing scien-
68
Stephen A. Werner
tific answers to social questions.6 Obviously these statements ignored such moments of Catholic history as the “Syllabus of Errors” and the Church’s condemnation of Galileo. Husslein argued that socialist materialist philosophy denied freedom of the human will. This undermined all morality and religion, and destroyed the concepts of virtue and vice. Socialist morality consisted solely in promoting revolution (SW 1:116, CSP 61). Husslein cited the Bolshevik revolution in Russia as an example of socialist destruction of freedom: But Socialism would not merely deprive the worker of any hope of ever exercising his natural right of ownership. It deprives him of countless other liberties. As carried out in practice it has invariably meant the end of all freedom of the press, the end of liberty in education, the end of every form of independent labor organization, the end of all efforts at remonstrance through strikes and other forms of legitimate self-defense, the end, in fine, of the most precious of all liberties—the freedom of true religious worship and instruction. (CSM 74)
Husslein feared that socialists would control education. Some socialists attacked Catholic schools. Husslein feared calls for compulsory public schools, for these would undermine Catholic schools with their religious and moral education. He even opposed “Socialist Sunday Schools” (CSP 33-40, Tome 40). Lastly, Husslein argued that socialism would not work. Workers were deluded if they expected to receive the full worth of their work as promised by socialists. The value of their work would have to cover the expenses of production, equipment, catastrophe, bureaucracy, and the numerous social programs socialists proposed (“Promise of Socialism” 352-353). The average income of all is not raised so excessively as may be imagined by the exceptional fortunes of the few very wealthy members of society. When their money has been absorbed the average income will of necessity sink still lower, since the waste of the present system will be as nothing compared with the lack of incentive and the slackness and inefficiency that would follow under socialism. (“Socialist Equality” 429)
Plans to pay equal wages would remove all incentive.
4 ~ Major Themes of Husslein’s Social Thought
69
To claim that a social consciousness, aside from all religious principles, would urge every man to perform his duty is equally childish. The fact of original sin cannot be so easily ignored. (“Promise of Socialism” 353)
Husslein considered as ridiculous socialist claims that people would behave differently in socialist society. He followed Leo XIII’s position that socialism would not result in a better distribution of wealth: The sources of wealth would themselves run dry, for no one would have any interest in exerting his talents or his industry. That ideal equality of which so much is said would, in reality, be the leveling down of all to the same condition of misery and dishonour. Thus it is clear that the main tenet of Socialism, the community of goods, must be utterly rejected; for it would injure those whom it is intended to benefit, it would be contrary to the natural rights of mankind, and it would introduce confusion, and disorder into the commonwealth. (RN 12)
Furthermore, socialism would fail to achieve the proletarian dictatorship it promised. Writing in 1921, after the Bolshevik revolution, Husslein argued that rather than sweeping aside class distinctions, socialism introduced the tyranny of class rule: the absolute autocracy of a few mob leaders. The people were delivered into the power of a despotic state (WWW 69-70). Husslein predicted that a bureaucracy, not workers, would control industry (WP 208-209). He described the results of socialist revolution: It is unjust because based upon robbery. It is irreligious because it would destroy alike the authority of God and man, while at the same time it would subject all to its own relentless system of espionage and oppression, extending over the school and press, reaching even into the sanctuary and the home, and tearing down the altars of religion. Honest labor is reduced by it to slavery while militarism rules supreme. Liberty of press and platform is at an end. We have seen its hand at work in many lands and know its nature. (WWW 69).7
This 1921 description would prove to be an accurate prediction of Soviet socialism.
70
Stephen A. Werner
Revisionist Socialism Husslein attacked and rejected revisionist socialism which sought change through democratic and parliamentary means—promoting evolutionary socialism instead of radical, revolutionary socialism. Husslein contended that this moderate approach conflicted with the basic Marxist view of “constantly increasing tension in social conditions, until the strain is heightened beyond all endurance and the end shall come suddenly, as Marx describes it, like the bursting of an integument” (CSP 54). All attempts to improve social conditions merely delayed this great event. Therefore, evolutionary socialism contradicted Marxist socialism. Husslein followed Leo XIII who failed to recognize and understand reformist (revisionist) socialism (Camp 57, Nitti 370). Husslein anticipated Pius XI’s, Quadragesimo anno, which condemned mitigated (revisionist) socialism. Whether socialism be considered as a doctrine, or as a historical fact, or as a movement, if it really remain socialism it cannot be brought into harmony with the dogmas of the Catholic Church, even after it has yielded to truth and justice in the points We have mentioned; the reason being that it conceives human society in a way utterly alien to Christian truth. For according to Christian doctrine, man, endowed with a social nature, is placed here on earth in order that, spending his life in society and under an authority ordained by God, he may develop and evolve to the full all his faculties to the praise and glory of his Creator; and that, by fulfilling faithfully the duties of his station, he may attain to temporal and eternal happiness. Socialism, on the contrary, entirely ignorant of and unconcerned about this sublime end both of individuals and of society, affirms that human society was instituted merely for the sake of material advantages. (QA 117-118)8
(Writing in 1931, Husslein softened his opposition to revisionist socialism, admitting a purely economic socialism if limited and freely accepted (CSM 63).) Pius XI condemned mitigated socialism for its view that humans instituted society (Camp 67-68). This opposed the Catholic view that humans lived in society, under an authority ordained by God, to serve God and attain temporal and eternal happiness. Catholic opposition to mitigated socialism came down to this particular point: socialism was wrong because its concept of the origin of society differed from the papal concept of society.
4 ~ Major Themes of Husslein’s Social Thought
71
The contempt between Catholic social reformers and socialists proved tragic, for both groups sought the same social reforms: safe working conditions, limited working hours, better wages, and an end to child labor. Husslein also rejected those who sincerely tried to work out a Christian socialism.
Christian Socialism Husslein rejected Christian socialism: a diverse movement in the United States and in Europe in the late 1800s and early 1900s. In Husslein’s time the ambiguous term, “Christian socialism,” was applied to non-Marxist Christian social reformers—utopian socialists—as well as to those who attempted to unite Christianity with scientific socialism. In America, the major non-Marxist Christian socialists included Washington Gladden (1836-1918), Walter Rauschenbusch (1861-1918), and Shailer Mathews (1863-1941). These reformers made up the American Social Gospel movement. George D. Herron (1865-1925) exemplified the more Marxist form of Christian Socialism. He held the chair of applied Christianity at Iowa (later Grinnell) College (Abell, Urban 77-81). Husslein’s writings on Christian socialism were a bit confused because of the ambiguity of the term (which Husslein did not clarify), the diversity of the movement, and Husslein’s lumping together of different, if not contradictory, elements in the same category. He attacked Christian socialism as an attempt to combine Christianity with Marxist socialism. He also attacked the Social Gospel movement even though some of its key thinkers rejected Marxist socialism (CSP 67-142, CSM 83-86). For Husslein, Christian socialism denied Leo XIII’s fundamental premise by upholding socialism as a valid interpretation of the gospels. Furthermore, Christian socialism rejected the teaching of the Catholic Church as the key to solving the social question. Christian Socialism is therefore based upon the two-fold falsehood that the Church of Christ, with her divine promise of indefectibility, has capitulated in practice and doctrine to Mammon, and that the gospel of Christ, though denied by Socialists, is nevertheless Socialism pure and simple. (CSP 89)
Seeing a fundamental opposition of socialism to Christianity, Husslein rejected Christian socialism as a contradiction (SW 1:230, CSM 86). Also, the Social Gospel movement was largely Protestant.
72
Stephen A. Werner
In Husslein’s view, the Protestant appeal to freedom of conscience had led to the catastrophe of modern industrial capitalism. Christian Socialism is the last development of Protestantism and the last result of the private and unauthorized interpretation of the Word of God. (CSP 89)9 That large portions of the Protestant population have accepted it [revisionist socialism as compatible with Christianity], rather than the Christian labor reforms of the Centre [Centre party in Germany], only shows, as other facts make clear, how far Protestantism in many parts of the world has drifted from its Scripture moorings, leaving once more the Catholic Church the sole defender of an inspired Bible and a divine Redeemer of mankind. (CSP 56)
Husslein thought that Christian socialists were duped by socialists. First, he saw little Christian impact on the socialist movement. Second, Husslein claimed that socialism was truly revolutionary despite the calls of some socialists for mere social reform. Third, Christian socialists distorted the mission of Jesus and the message of the gospels by denying the divinity of Christ. Approaching scripture as a human document, they rejected passages that did not fit their views. Thus, for example, Paul was viewed as a distorter of Jesus and a champion of capitalism and slavery (CSP 67-68, 90-95). Husslein pointed to socialist skepticism about Christian socialism and the Social Gospel movement. He quoted the socialist author John Spargo: One gathers from Professor Rauchenbusch a concept of Christianity which would justify most men who now call themselves atheists and agnostics being included in the category of Christians. Theological Christianity is dead! (CSP 95)10
Husslein quoted the socialist Haywood’s statement that a Christian socialist “is one who is drunk on religious fanaticism and is trying to sober up on economic truth” (CSP 78). Many socialists denied the possibility of Christian socialism. Christian socialism and the Social Gospel movement attempted to realize the kingdom of God on earth. Husslein rejected this approach by describing the kingdom of God as limited to three aspects: 1) the invisible kingdom within the soul of the Christian; 2) the visible kingdom of the Church; and 3) the kingdom of glory in the afterlife
4 ~ Major Themes of Husslein’s Social Thought
73
(CSP 96-104). The invisible kingdom within the soul was the indwelling of the Holy Spirit by grace in virtue; a revolution, not in the socialist sense, but a rebirth. Through baptism one entered the kingdom of the Church, visible in its sacraments, leaders, preaching of the gospels, and its unity of faith. “The kingdom of God is within us and without, on earth and in heaven, for time and eternity. It is equally verified in the Church militant and in the Church triumphant” (CSP 98). Entrance to the kingdom of Glory of the afterlife was based on charity. (According to Husslein, socialists condemned charity. Thus, they stole away the completion of the kingdom of God under the guise of purely economic considerations.) Husslein’s view of the kingdom departed significantly from thinkers of the Social Gospel movement such as Walter Rauchenbusch, who argued for the need to work for the kingdom on earth.11 Christian socialists saw in the concept of the kingdom a vision of a new world order. Although definitions of the kingdom were always to lack concreteness, the belief that the ideal preached by Christ was a terrestrial, social kingdom as well as a heavenly or spiritual one was a matter of vast import to a nascent social gospel. (Hopkins 19)
Husslein argued that Jesus denied a worldly dimension to his kingdom—as if Jesus foresaw modern heresies. Thus it was a modern materialist heresy to repeat the false expectations of the Jews who looked for a temporal Messiah to free them from the Romans. According to Husslein, Christian socialists read into the kingdom their own ideas, treating it as the highest sociological expression of economic and industrial Christianity. What Husslein was doing, though probably unaware of it, was fighting over the meaning of eschatology. It has long been noted that Marxist socialism, in describing the relentless movement of history toward an ideal communist society, promoted a materialist eschatology. It is not surprising that some Christian socialists have been able to find links between such Marxism and the statements of Jesus on the kingdom of God. Husslein, by contrast, promoted the standard Catholic view of eschatology that although there would ultimately be an “end of the world”, it was irrelevant to the present living out of Christianity. Thus Husslein drained the eschatology out of the gospel concept of the Kingdom of God.
74
Stephen A. Werner
Husslein argued that his view of the kingdom did not lead to an ignoring of the world’s problems, rather, it led to a dedicated effort to improve the world, inspired by heavenly goals. It is because each moment is large with possibilities for eternity, and because these are to be realized here upon earth in faith and hope and charity and in all good works, that the saints have ever been the greatest benefactors of their race. (CSP 105)
Husslein ‘s view of the kingdom found in the Church was consistent with Leo XIII’s fundamental premise that the Church could solve social problems. A triumphant ecclesiology underlie both Leo XIII’s and Husslein’s views. Husslein had no use for a future kingdom of God since history provided a model of harmonious social order: the medieval guilds. (For Husslein, guilds were part of the second element of the kingdom, the visible Church—this time in its institutions, the guilds.) Husslein did not need to look ahead since he could look back. Also, by looking to the past, Husslein avoided some of the eschatological themes of Marxism. Protestant thinkers without such an historical example needed the concept of the kingdom to provide both a goal and a motivation for a future social order. As an alternative to the Social Gospel movement’s insistence of the kingdom of God, Husslein emphasized the image of Christ the King. Husslein developed this theme in many of his writings, including a book on the subject: The Reign of Christ. For Husslein, Christ reigned in his Church, which, as history had proven, provided moral teaching to solve social problems. Husslein summarized his views on Christian socialists: Their Christianity was nothing more than the thinnest veneer, if we may so dignify it. Christ, Marx, and Bebel were hopelessly confused in their minds, and it was Marx whom they might finally regard as the greatest of all. (CSM 86)
Unfortunately, Husslein’s adherence to the concept that the Catholic Church could solve the social crisis kept him from dialogue with Christian socialists. Even more unfortunate Husslein failed to understand the Social Gospel movement. However the Social Gospel movement had its foundation in enlightenment optimism about human goodness and liberal, middle-class origins (Dombrowski 19, 26-28). These made the movement somewhat alien to Husslein.
4 ~ Major Themes of Husslein’s Social Thought
75
Capitalism Since papal social teaching has sought a middle ground between socialism and liberal capitalism, Husslein rejected both extremes. He critiqued three aspects of capitalism: 1) the origins of liberal capitalism, 2) the irreligion of capitalism, and 3) the injustice of capitalism. Husslein also provided a Catholic perspective on capitalism.12 In attacking capitalism Husslein imitated the biblical prophets by using language, image, and metaphor to attack social injustice.13
Origins of Liberal Capitalism Husslein traced liberal capitalism to the “Physiocrats” of the eighteenth century who demanded the free and unhampered “rule of nature,” or “physiocracy.” For Husslein, this represented the historic rejection of the role of Catholic moral teaching in the economic realm. The philosophy of the Physiocrats, arriving on the heels of the destruction of the guilds, began with Dr. Francois Quesnay (1694-1774), physician to Louis XV and Mme de Pompadour, who wrote Physiocracy or the Natural Constitution of Government Most Advantageous to the Human Race and Tableau economigue (1758). Quesnay responded to Mercantilism, an economic system based on tight government control. Quesnay argued that economies worked according to fixed principles which must be allowed to work without state interference. He proposed a “laissez faire” doctrine calling for freedom to bargain for wages, the elimination of tolls and taxes, and the complete freedom of business. The government’s role in the economy was to be limited to protecting contracts. Laissez faire capitalism, on the assumption that the interests of all were harmonious, argued that allowing complete freedom to business would achieve the greatest prosperity. From the laissez faire “rule of nature” economic view came two principles: the denial of the laborer’s right to organize and the denial of the right of the state to intervene in labor situations.14 Husslein responded: The laissez-faire policy could obviously have no other effect than the destruction of the economically weaker party and his complete oppression, without any hope of redress or assistance from the State. To imagine that the rights of capital and of labor would balance themselves, without any superior control, was no less palpable a deception than to fancy that man’s nature could develop most perfectly by granting full license to all its senses and faculties. (WP 80)
76
Stephen A. Werner
Husslein discussed Quesnay rather than Adam Smith, who was influenced by Quesnay, to link Quesnay with the agnosticism and anti-religion of his contemporaries and companions, Rousseau and Voltaire. Husslein argued that laissez faire theory grew from their irreligious philosophy, based on the false principle of Rousseau that man, being basically good, need but follow the tendencies of his nature. Such reasoning denied the reality of human sinfulness. From this view of man came the morality of the “superman” where each developed his own personality following the natural instincts of self-expression and self-aggrandizement regardless of the effects on others (CSM 30). Under such a morality the weak and powerless existed only for exploitation by the strong, as in the ancient paganism the slave population was presumed to live for the sole benefit of its masters. It was the Darwinian survival of the fittest turned into an ethical code. In a military sense, it meant oppression of the weaker nations by the stronger; in a financial sense, it signified the ruthless manipulation of stocks and the ruin of less powerful competitors or less criminally clever investors; in an industrial sense, it implied the sole consideration of unlimited profits, no matter at whose cost or whose misery they might ultimately be obtained. In all these things nature was having its course. (CSM 30-31)
Liberal capitalism insisted on the “man with man” contract and limited government intervention to the enforcement of such contracts. Beyond this the employer was not held to be bound by any commandments of justice or charity to pay more, under any circumstances, than the law of supply and demand required, and this practice was given relentless scope. It was ancient paganism, pure and simple, reduced to action in modern industrial life. (CSM 36) Its [liberal capitalism’s] practical expression, in social life, was to give to everyone full scope for the most unlimited self-aggrandizement, no matter at whose cost, provided only that contracts were “freely” concluded and legally observed. Not moral, but mere physical liberty was here in question, since the laborer, whenever obliged to work for less than a living wage, is coerced by want and not acting freely, except in a physical way. (CSM 38)
4 ~ Major Themes of Husslein’s Social Thought
77
Liberal capitalism condemned labor unionism in theory and forbad it in law. The worker had only the “freedom” to take or leave an unjust contract offered him. Competing with countless others workers—including women and children—the laborer who did not take the job could not survive. Husslein summarized his views: We still have men in business for whom there is but one industrial principle, and that is the law of supply and demand; for whom labor is but a commodity upon the market to be purchased at the lowest price and worked to the utmost limits that so they may procure through it the highest profits; for whom, in fine, all considerations urged for the need of adequate family wages, such as may suffice to keep the mother engaged in the care of her children amid the decent comfort of a happy home, are pure sentimentalism which has no place in business, commerce, and finance. It is that class of men, devoid of practical Christianity or true religious principles—and let us hope their number is daily growing less!—which is the real menace of industry and civilization, far more than Socialism, Anarchism, or the whole Soviet regime of Bolshevism ever could possibly be. Such men, precisely, are the most responsible for all radical systems and labor revolutions that disturb the world. (CSM 44)
The Irreligion of Capitalism Husslein attacked the irreligious foundation of liberal capitalism which rejected moral demands in the economic realm. According to Husslein, capitalists ignored the moral teaching of the Church, thus promoting great injustice through their greed: Ignoring the precepts of the ancient religion, the Liberalistic industrialist had set up his own gospel of greed. “Get all you can,” was his motto, “no matter how.” Having rejected God, and so all sound reason for responsibility regarding his neighbor, he was now free to exploit his workers to the very limit of their physical possibilities. There was no longer any reason why he should show the least concern for justice or for charity. There was no one to whom he was accountable. (CSM 85)
Husslein attacked capitalism for the concentration of property in the hands of a few, the domination of capital, and the subordination of all interests of production to personal gain.
78
Stephen A. Werner The gospel rule of charity, the laws of justice and the sanctions of religion were all obliged to yield to the overmastering considerations of profit, rent and interest; in a word, to the one absorbing idea of personal gain. This became the sole motor power of the entire system as the idea of religion was eliminated from its business transactions. (WP 37)
Husslein lamented the system of ethics that justified this: Its law was summed up in the materialistic motto: “Business is business,” which means that the considerations of humanity and religion may have their proper time and place, but must not be allowed to interfere with the interests of personal gain. A man might grind and crush the poor, pay starvation wages to labor and exact starvation prices for his products, and yet stand justified by the principles of this system. He might even, if he chose, be crowned as a philanthropist and public benefactor, to satisfy his craving for publicity. Such a code of morality was impossible in the Middle Ages. (WP 37-38)
Husslein saw liberalistic capitalism as essentially pagan, opposed to Christian principles at every point, and the breeding ground for socialism and revolution. But the laborer, rendered equally irreligious by the lessons thus taught him, now saw no further reason why he, too, on his part, might not draw his own similar conclusions. “Get all you can, no matter how,” was the lesson which Liberalism had taught the employer. Then why should not the atheistic laborer, too get all he could, without any more regard to justice, conscience, or religion than the Liberalistic employer had shown? (CSM 85)
Husslein viewed laissez faire capitalism as worse than socialism. In an article “Is the Law of the Jungle to Prevail?” Husslein stated: “There is little choice between radical capital and radical labor, except that the former is likely to be the more dangerous of the two evils” (10).
Injustice of Capitalism Since liberal capitalism rejected the moral demands taught by the Church, many abuses resulted. Husslein attacked capitalistic abuses with the same vehemence he attacked socialism. In doing so, Husslein
4 ~ Major Themes of Husslein’s Social Thought
79
answered socialist criticism that the Church sided with and defended capitalism: The attempt of Socialists to turn into ridicule the position of the Church by maintaining that all the existing conditions of excessive riches and squalid poverty, of riotous wealth and oppressive labor are condoned or even championed by her as “the will of God,” is the purest injustice. The Church, while defending unconditionally “the order established by God,” does not because of this sanction any industrial iniquity established by man in the present state of society. She has been the first to lift her voice against the abuses which today exist, and as long as even a single man is denied his just wages, or a single woman is bent down with unnatural toil, or a single child is deprived of its God-given right to love and happiness and all the due development of every faculty of body and soul, she will continue to repeat her pleadings and denunciations. Nor is the Church indifferent to the proper education of the people and the diffusion of true knowledge, since ignorance and prejudice are her greatest enemies. Least of all, is the post-Reformation capitalism preached by her as “the order established by God.” (WWW 102-103)
Typical of Husslein’s attacks on capitalist abuses was an article, “The Message of Dynamite” on the bombing of the anti-union Times of Los Angeles building in 1910 by radical unionists. Twenty-two people died. Husslein condemned the bombing but then turned on business: It is important, however, that the crimes of capital be weighed in the same scales with the crimes of labor, and that the same Nemesis overtake them both. It is needless to enumerate the scores of industrial accidents, the poisoning, crippling and premature death brought on by the neglect of capital in providing the proper means of safety and sanitation where the need of them was sufficiently understood. Although such neglect was not always criminal, yet there are instances where the fatal results could have been worked out with almost mathematical certainty. Not infrequently the wasting diseases or sudden deaths due to certain manufacturing processes and conditions of labor could readily have been averted, but the remedy would have diminished to some extent the stream of dividends pouring into the already overflowing reservoirs of wealth. Gold has proved more deadly to the human race than dynamite. (414)
80
Stephen A. Werner
When Husslein spoke of the crimes of capitalism he had in mind the modern assembly line where working conditions were often unsanitary, unhealthy, and dangerous. Industrial accidents were common with no compensation for lost work time and no medical care provided. Workers were at times poisoned by exposure to toxic chemicals and fumes. Hours of work were long and pay was minimal. Workers had few rights. They could be fired arbitrarily. Husslein also had in mind the following anti-union practices: 1) Blacklisting—the names of workers who encouraged unions were circulated among employers so that these workers would not be hired. 2) Yellow-dog contracts—as a condition of employment, workers had to sign contracts promising not to join a union. 3) Injunctions— employers were successful in obtaining court injunctions against striking workers. 4) Labor spies—hired to infiltrate and undermine unions. 5) Lockouts—factories were closed until workers agreed to the conditions demanded by management. 6) Strikebreakers (scabs)— hired by employers to replace workers or to intimidate and attack strikers. These strikebreakers were sometimes thugs, all too ready to use violence. At other times, they were hired detectives, such as the Pinkertons. Employers were often able to use local law enforcement officials, state militias, state troopers, and even federal troops to attack strikers, enforce injunctions, and replace workers on the assembly line. Husslein criticized courts biased against labor. Writing at a time when large companies successfully used the courts to hamper union activity Husslein lamented: Even the laws themselves have often been discriminating, and the law’s delay and circumstances have brought untold misery upon the needy plaintiffs. Nothing so readily breeds violence among the masses as a distrust of judiciary. (“Message of Dynamite” 413)15
In a 1915 article, “The Rebel Poet,” Husslein discussed statements made by Joseph Hillstrom before his execution. Hillstrom, a member of the Industrial Workers of the World, openly advocated violence. Rather than using Hillstrom’s statements as a springboard to attack radical labor, Husslein attacked capital. The guilty class among the capitalists did not scruple about the means to attain its end, and the godless revolutionary class of labor has learned the lesson and will not scruple anymore: “The end the means is justifying.” The words with which this article begins are
4 ~ Major Themes of Husslein’s Social Thought
81
the key to the entire situation. They have been on the lips of the godless rich and the godless poor: “I have my own religion and I don’t need any help!” Governments and nations have repeated them, and both have now learned to know what they can accomplish by themselves. The pillars of civilization are trembling and the vast edifice threatens to collapse into ruin. It is high time that men acknowledge once more the authority of that Church which Christ has given, and own, in becoming humility, the need of God’s helping hand. (177)
This statement clearly reflected Husslein’s position. Had he been merely a conservative defender of the status quo he would have used this case to assault the labor movement. Husslein attacked unrestrained capitalism, with its child labor and women labor. Coining into gold the lifeblood of the children whose innocence and joy were sacrificed to Mammon; tarnishing the purity of the poor girl victims of financial greed, the future mothers of our race; sapping the strength of womanhood amid endless unremunerative toil, and seeking only to secure the greatest service for the least reward, these champions of a modern gospel of greed and pagan individualism may well take to themselves the credit of having taught the first lessons of revolutionism to the impoverished and disinherited. And they have learned their lessons well. In the meanwhile a class of idle rich are vying with each other in their vulgar display, and outraging still more by their worse than heathen luxury the poverty they should relieve, too often replacing by canine worship the duties of motherhood and religion. They all alike forget or utterly ignore that they are only stewards of God, that they possess nothing which is unconditionally their own, and that for every penny gained or spent they have a strict account to render, no less than for every idle word, as the Scripture teaches. (“Forecast of General Strike” 77)
Husslein objected to capitalism because it misused the principle of private property to allow the hoarding of property by a few, thus preventing the wider distribution of property called for by Leo XIII (SW 1:170). Leo XIII identified three other causes of the present injustice which Husslein cited: the callousness of employers, rapacious usury (including excessive profit), and the misery of the masses (CSM 42-48). Husslein also attacked a number of specific capitalist
82
Stephen A. Werner
abuses that Leo XIII had not addressed: labor spies and stock watering (WP 9, 54-55).16
A Christian Perspective on Capitalism Husslein attempted to provide a Christian perspective on capitalism. He held that capitalism, based on private property, was not intrinsically immoral. “Capital, indeed, is not to be condemned in itself, but only in its abuse. Not Capitalism but Mammonism we are to fight” (CSP 158). Husslein distinguished between the reasonable use of property and the abuses which “are only the poisonous growth of Mammonism upon the body economic and call for instant and relentless amputation in the interest of the common welfare” (WWW 122). Husslein argued that even large concentrations of property were acceptable if used according to moral principles. The conditions of modern industry and commerce, moreover, make it necessary that larger fortunes be concentrated into the hands of individuals than in the days of the Fathers. These accumulations of wealth are, however, to be invested not for the sole benefit of the owner, but for the utility of the poor, to whom his superabundance is to minister, while allowances for alms in various ways are likewise to be made. Great industrial enterprises, nevertheless, may often afford opportunity for the truest Christian charity. (CSP 140)17
Husslein maintained that the Church favored neither capital nor labor but sought to unite both. The Church accepted economic systems based on private property, but insisted that property be used within the bounds of justice and rights of public welfare. Historically capitalism had not done this. Husslein maintained that property was not the ultimate cause of social problems, as socialists claimed, but rather the immoral use of property (WWW 59-60). However, Husslein saw the profit system as fundamentally pagan. He started with two principles: 1) man was created to praise, reverence, and serve God, thereby gaining eternal salvation; 2) all material things were to help humans reach this. From this argument, Husslein reasoned that an economic system based on profits perverted both the purpose of material goods and the goal of human life. Husslein based his critique of the profit system on the “First Principle and Foundation” of the Spiritual Exercises of St. Ignatius:
4 ~ Major Themes of Husslein’s Social Thought
83
Man is created to praise, reverence, and serve God our Lord, and by this means to save his soul. The other things on the face of the earth are created for man to help him in attaining the end for which he is created. Hence, man is to make use of them in as far as they help him in the attainment of his end, and he must rid himself of them in as far as they prove a hindrance to him. (Puhl 165)
Husslein stated: When, therefore, man has acquired a reasonable sufficiency of this world’s goods to maintain becomingly and without excess his status in life, he possesses all that can be necessary and desirable for his own personal and family uses. The rest, according to all Christian teaching, must be administered by him in the strict spirit of stewardship that others may profit by it. He must be mindful of the general welfare. (CSM 166)
Although Husslein gave a qualified acceptance to capitalism, he believed it to be inadequate. Thus he proposed an alternative based on Christian principles: Democratic Industry.
Democratic Industry In agreement with Leo XIII, Husslein rejected socialism, Christian socialism, and liberal (laissez faire) capitalism. However, according to the fundamental premise of Leo XIII, the Church could provide an alternative: “If, then, society is to be cured now, in no other way can it be cured but by a return to Christian life and Christian institutions” (RN 22).18 But Rerum novarum called for institutions based on a wide distribution of property: “The law, therefore, should favour ownership, and its policy should be to induce as many people as possible to become owners” (35). Husslein saw this as the culminating economic principle of the encyclical. Thus, Husslein had to provide a Catholic alternative to socialism and liberal capitalism, based on a wide distribution of property. Pius XI later repeated this theme in Quadragesimo anno. This program cannot, however, be realized unless the propertyless wage earner be placed in such circumstances that by skill and thrift he can acquire a certain moderate ownership, as was already declared by Us, following the footsteps of Our Predecessor. We deem it advisable that the wage contract should, when possible, be modified somewhat by a contract of partnership, as is already being
84
Stephen A. Werner tried in various ways to the not small gain both of the wage earners and of the employers. In this way workers and officials are made sharers in the ownership or the management, or in some way participate in the profits. (QA 63, 65)
Leo XIII gave few clues on how to achieve this wide distribution of property. He insisted that the natural right of property could not be violated (property could not be forcibly taken from present owners), nor could violence be used to redistribute property. Furthermore, although a wider distribution of property may have made sense in an agricultural economy, it was far less applicable in an industrial economy.19 However, Leo XIII gave one directive to Christian institutions: History attests what excellent results were affected by the artificer’s guilds of a former day. They were the means not only of many advantages to the workmen, but in no small degree of the advancement of art, as numerous monuments remain to prove. Such associations should be adapted to the requirements of the age in which we live—an age of greater instruction, of different customs, and of more numerous requirements in daily life. (RN 36)
Pius XI echoed this theme in Quadragesimo anno: At one period there existed a social order which, though by no means perfect in every respect, corresponded nevertheless in a certain measure to right reason according to the needs and conditions of the times. That this order has long since perished is not because it was incapable of development and adaptation to changing needs and circumstances, but rather because of the wrongdoing of men. (QA 97)20
Husslein responded to the twin challenges of Leo XIII—developing institutions based on a wider distribution of property and adapting the medieval guilds to modern industrialism—by promoting the cooperative movement.21 In cooperatives, workers owned, in whole or in part, the companies where they worked and shared in decision making (WWW 119-20). Husslein described such businesses as Democratic Industry: a modern application of guild principles. (Although writing in response to Rerum novarum, a European source, and basing his ideas on a European guild model, Husslein gave his proposal a name that appealed to American readers. Whether Husslein invented the term “Democratic Industry” or borrowed it is not
4 ~ Major Themes of Husslein’s Social Thought
85
known. However the term was not commonly used by other contemporary writers.) “The object of a study of the medieval gilds is to reform society according to the mind of the Church—to renew it in Christ Jesus” (“Anglo Saxon Gilds” 345). Husslein saw Democratic Industry as an alternative both to capitalist businesses employing powerless workers and to unions becoming self-interest power groups, promoting their own demands without consideration of the common good. Thus, unions would fight for higher wages without concern for the quality of manufactured goods, the economic impact on the community, and their employers. Throughout his writings there was a constant demand that all organizations and institutions—businesses, unions, and private property—adjust to the demands of the common good. For Husslein, Democratic Industry applied guild principles to industrial problems without extensive legislation. Yet he envisioned a role for the state. According to Husslein, the State can best perform its functions and cooperate in social reconstruction by reaffirming the guild concept. For as he puts it, “The basis of all true social reconstruction is the guild concept. The ideal social order will be that which most perfectly applies it.” (Melvin Williams 442)
American Catholic social thinkers in the early 1900s believed that Leo XIII’s principles on property had an industrial application. For example, the American bishops in their pastoral “Social Reconstruction” stated: Nevertheless, the full possibilities of increased production will not be realized so long as the majority of the workers remain mere wage-earners. The majority must somehow become owners, or at least in part, of the instruments of production. They can be enabled to reach this stage gradually through cooperative productive societies and co-partnership arrangements. In the former, the workers own and manage the industries themselves; in the latter they own a substantial part of the corporate stock and exercise a reasonable share in the management. However slow the attainment of these ends, they will have to be reached before we can have a thoroughly efficient system of production, or an industrial and social order that will be secure from the danger of revolution. It is to be noted that this particular modification of the existing order, though far-reaching and involving to a great extent the abolition of the wage system, would not mean the abolition of private ownership. The instru-
86
Stephen A. Werner ments of production would still be owned by individuals, not by the State. (237-38)
However, the bishops did not give specifics on how to carry out such proposals (D. O’Brien 42). By proposing Democratic Industry, Husslein offered a solution to the scandal of poorly paid workers living in inhumane conditions while company owners grew rich from the workers’ efforts. As owners of productive property, workers could receive the profit of their labor and have input on decisions affecting their lives. The dominance of wealth, or the particular capitalistic regime under which the great masses of the people are possessed of little but their labor power, while the ownership of the instruments of production is concentrated in the hands of a few powerful employers, is known as the “Servile State.” There can be no industrial peace where such conditions exist, no matter how wages may increase and hours of labor be shortened. Democratic forms of government are in themselves no solution. (WP 201)
Husslein wrote during a period of great interest and experimentation in cooperatives. The cooperative movement had been extremely active in England in the 1800s. Farming cooperatives were common. Cooperative production and cooperative stores had been established, with the Rochdale Society of Equitable Pioneers founded in 1844 as the most notable. Cooperative societies also existed in Russia, Denmark, New Zealand, Canada, and some countries in Asia. The movement spread to the United States, where its success was limited mainly to rural cooperatives. Husslein promoted the cooperative movement from a Catholic perspective, showing its support from papal documents. In addition, Husslein promoted the most advanced scheme—co-production—by trying to solve some of its theoretical problems. For Husslein, cooperatives provided a mechanism for social change, neither violent nor revolutionary (DI 317). Most importantly, cooperatives proved the viability of Catholic principles of economic organization. For Husslein, Democratic Industry involved five approaches: profit sharing, cooperative banks, cooperative stores, copartnership, and co-production.22 However, Husslein envisioned a mixed economy: cooperative industries alongside capitalist industries.
4 ~ Major Themes of Husslein’s Social Thought
87
Profit Sharing This simple scheme gave a share of the profits to workers. It presupposed that workers received a living wage. Thus, bonus plans, based on profits, could not take the place of a living wage or be used to prevent raising wages. An objection to this approach was that workers shared profits but not risks. Husslein cited examples of workers’ willingness to share risks, such as taking pay cuts in times of poor business. Husslein considered profit sharing a positive step, but an inadequate solution to the industrial problem, since workers had no share in management (WP 218-19, WWW 79-80).
Cooperative Banks The cooperative bank or credit union provided for Husslein the primary cooperative example. These banks allowed poor people to obtain credit when refused by commercial banks and to escape usurious interest rates. Husslein described existing successful cooperative banks. He desired a credit union for every parish. For Husslein, credit unions solved a problem lamented by Leo XIII: that usurious money lending worsened the condition of workers (RN 2, CSM 45, WP 213). (Credit unions turned out to be the most successful cooperative ventures.)
Cooperative Stores Husslein also described cooperative stores. In this approach members owned a limited number of shares of stock in a store where they purchased goods at low prices. Such stores eliminated middlemen. (Husslein saw middlemen as a constant source of injustice for they raised prices without providing tangible service to consumers.) Cooperative stores reinvested profit or distributed it to members according to the amount of their purchases. Some stores set limits on the interest on capital to prevent the store from becoming a profit making organization (WP 215-17). Husslein cited several examples of cooperative stores such as the Cooperative British Wholesale Society. In 1913 over 600 million dollars in cooperative sales took place in Great Britain. The Rochdale cooperative system in Great Britain held principles of a democratic organization, one vote per member, equal ownership per member, cash returns to members after expenses of the cooperative had been met, rejection of the principle of profits, and sales to members only (WWW 82-83).
88
Stephen A. Werner
Husslein saw cooperative stores as “the first premonition of the passing-away of a system which made of profits the end of man, and man the slave of profits” (WP 217).
Copartnership In copartnership, workers owned a substantial share in voting stock and a reasonable share in management (CSM 191-94). But unions would still be necessary. Then, in a word, the wage earner, privately owning shares of stock in his own industry, proportionately to his thrift and ability, will have been converted into a capitalist, and there will be no one who cannot subscribe freely to that form of capitalism. It would be the agricultural ideal of Pope Leo XIII, that to the tiller should belong the soil, now duly applied to industry also. It would not be Socialism or Communism, but universal private ownership in which all could participate. Our wish is that this dream may, at least in great part, become a reality. It would leave no inch of soil and no corner of a workshop where the revolutionist could find a refuge. It would deprive no one of his just possessions but increase indefinitely the number of private owners. That is the ultimate Catholic ideal. (CSM 191)
In one copartnership plan, the cooperative mercantile organization, members owned a cooperative which then hired workers according to the wage system.
Co-Production Schemes Lastly, Husslein discussed co-production (also called cooperative production and cooperative ownership), in which workers owned and managed the businesses in which they worked (CSM 194-95). This approach was voluntaristic, not socialistic, and based on private, not public, ownership. In co-production the numbers of shares held by an individual worker would be limited so that no one had excessive power. Management was to be done by chosen representatives of the workers or by hired managers. The cooperative would succeed through superior efficiency, the elimination of middlemen, and government protection (WP 222-29). Husslein discussed several problems with co-production. Workers, competing with wealthy corporations, would have trouble raising enough money among themselves or borrowing money at reasonable
4 ~ Major Themes of Husslein’s Social Thought
89
interest rates. Cooperative banks might be a partial solution, having proven their ability to raise large sums of money. However, the interdependence of cooperative businesses and cooperative banks would make failure even more disastrous (CSM 194). Husslein suggested that to raise capital, cooperatives could “take a leaf from capitalism” and sell notes, bonds, and preferred (non-voting) stock. Common stock with voting rights would be owned by the workers (WWW 91-96). However, as Husslein repeatedly stated, the greatest want was not capital, but preparation and education. Another obstacle to co-production was workers’ fear of losing their investments. After all, a rich investor risked his surplus, a worker risked his life’s savings. Cooperative management also could be difficult. A final problem would be opposition from capitalist corporations that would undersell, blackmail, or withhold raw material and machinery. Government aid and legal oversight would be needed. Admitting the difficulties, Husslein pointed to the proven success of co-production in farming. Husslein saw co-production as a revival of the medieval guild system, with the worker as an owner of productive property. The economic gild idea, as conceived in its perfection, is a movement of the workingmen, by the workingmen, for their own and the common good, understanding by “workingmen” all those who labor either with hand or brain, provided their purpose is not the amassing of their own individual profits. They must seek the common good no less than their own advantage. (DI 311-12)
Co-production differed from two other proposals for worker ownership that Husslein rejected: syndicalism and guild socialism. Husslein maintained that syndicalism, in which workers owned and managed factories, organized by industry, held the guild idea but by unjust means and rejected authority and justice. It destroyed state authority and the rights of private owners (WP 229). Husslein saw guild socialism as a contradiction since guildism meant individual, not collective, ownership, although Husslein saw nothing immoral in principle with collective ownership—if property had been justly acquired (WP 205-206, WWW 87). For Husslein cooperative and co-production plans borrowed the concept of private property from capitalism and the concept of worker control of production from socialism.
90
Stephen A. Werner Our just regard for the dignity of human beings, our preference of the common good to private interests, our insistence upon Government control and oversight of industry to whatever extent it may be required for the welfare of the people, our countless cooperative societies already bursting into full blossom in every land, and withal the universal aspiration for the brotherhood of all mankind—what are all these signs of our time, when taken at their best, other than Catholic revivals? (WP 212-13)
By linking the cooperative movement to the medieval guild Husslein made a significant contribution to American Catholic thought. Not all Catholic social thinkers considered cooperatives workable. In the early years of his career, Bishop Ketteler of Mainz envisioned a broad program of workingmen’s producer cooperatives but later abandoned this as unrealistic and concentrated on mitigating the worst evils of capitalism (Doherty 16). Peter Dietz did not advocate cooperatives: Unlike Ryan and others who stressed producers’ cooperation and co-partnership as desirable solutions of industrial strife, Dietz lacked faith in these historic social reform panaceas, insisting that the generic remedy lay in the growth and progressive development of trade unionism with whose great leaders he was on terms of closer intimacy than any other Catholic clergyman. (Abell foreword in Fox, vi)
In advocating cooperatives Husslein tried to salvage Leo XIII’s teaching on property which had a limited applicability to modern industrialism. If Husslein’s cooperative plans were unrealistic, it was only because of his close adherence to Leo XIII. In proposing Democratic Industry as a restoration of the medieval guild principles, Husslein anticipated Quadragesimo anno. For after Rerum novarum many Catholic thinkers believed that unions, although essential, were inadequate to solve workers’ problems. They sought a system of cooperation between employers and workers that gave workers control over their lot. Quadragesimo anno called for both Occupational Groups and the building of a corporative society, or corporatism.23 Husslein used the term Occupational Group to describe organizations that would coordinate union and management activity. Democratic Industry, although similar to corporatism in seeking a structure more comprehensive than unions, was different in application and scope. Democratic Industry called for worker-run enter-
4 ~ Major Themes of Husslein’s Social Thought
91
prises within a mixed economy. Corporatism sought to organize factory communities of workers, owners, and managers with each group equally represented. Industries in similar fields were to be organized regionally and nationally. These organizations would be represented in a parliament that would mediate between the state and economic groups (Camp 26-27, Bowen 9). Husslein did not envision a corporatist society, but rather Democratic Industry as taking place within the given American society. Husslein extracted medieval guild principles as a source for norms for modern industrial situations. Guilds were not to be literally restored but rather their ideals were to be restored (“Medieval and Modern Economics” 124). Husslein proposed Democratic Industry as a modern application of the principles of the medieval guilds and as a mechanism to achieve Leo XIII’s call for a wider distribution of property. Such a Christian alternative was necessary because of the inadequacy of liberal capitalism, socialism, and Christian socialism. A rejection of these economic systems and the promotion of Democratic Industry were the main themes of Husslein’s social thought based on Leo XIII’s Rerum novarum and the fundamental premise of Leo XIII.
Notes 1
Surprisingly Rerum novarum did not attack socialist ideas on violent revolution and atheism (McGovern 97). 2 McDonough, Men Astutely Trained stated that Husslein’s writings were ineffective since his religiously based social views would be ignored by leftists, the secular center, progressives, and influential persons. “He [Husslein] packaged conservative proposals in semipopular form on the supposition that his main antagonists were revolutionaries on the left. He did not, nor did the evolutionaries, advance democratic propositions in analytical form for a specialized audience” (55). Several points in this statement are inaccurate. First, Husslein’s proposal for Democratic Industry, which in the 1990s seems benign, was not a conservative proposal to maintain the status quo, but was in many ways quite progressive. Secondly, Democratic Industry was based on worker ownership and control of businesses. Husslein gave many specific details on how to form cooperatives. Thirdly, although Husslein saw leftists as antagonists, he considered unjust capitalists to be worse. It was their unjust practices that had spawned radicalism. Fourthly Husslein wrote to a very specialized audience—Roman Catholics. Husslein attacked the left and right but he knew the battle ground was the Catholic worker. Lastly, over sixty years after Husslein wrote, how can know with any certainty whether influential persons did nor did not read his work? 3 For example see Husslein’s preface to Face to the Sun, by Arthur McGratty.
92 4
Stephen A. Werner
See WP 24-26. “From a practical point of view, the Marxian scientific Socialism is the only form that needs to be considered here. All others which have since arisen are but adaptations or limitations of this. Revisionist Socialism is a partial rejection of Marxian theories which can be disregarded without rejecting the essentials of his naturalistic philosophy” (CSM 57). See also CSM 61, 63; SW 12; “Varieties of American Socialism.” 5 In contrast to Husslein and Leo XIII’s view that Christianity overcame class hatred, the socialist Karl Kautsky argued that Christianity was originally a proletarian movement based on class hatred of the rich. He argued that the frequent condemnations of wealth in the gospels proved this (327-31). 6 "Therefore, when it is said that the Church is jealous of modern political systems, and that she repudiates the discoveries of modern research, the charge is ridiculous and groundless calumny. . . . But as all truth must necessarily proceed from God, the Church recognizes in all truth that is reached by research, a trace of the divine intelligence. And as all truth in the natural order is powerless to destroy belief in the teachings of revelation, but can do much to confirm it, and as every newly discovered truth may serve to further the knowledge or the praise of God, it follows that whatsoever spreads the range of knowledge will always be willingly and even joyfully welcomed by the Church. She will always encourage and promote, as she does in other branches of knowledge, all study occupied with the investigation of nature” (Leo XIII, Immortale dei 19). According to Wallace, 207, 408, 409, since Marx appropriated science the Church tried to reappropriate it. 7 Similarly, Leo XIII described the failure of socialism: “They [socialists] hold that, by thus transferring property from private persons to the community, the present evil state of things will be set to rights, because each citizen will then have his equal share of whatever there is to enjoy. But their proposals are so clearly futile for all practical purposes, that if they were carried out the workingman himself would suffer. Moreover they are emphatically unjust, because they would rob the lawful possessor, bring the State into a sphere that is not its own, and cause complete confusion in the community” (RN 3). 8 See QA 111-122, CSM 83-85. Pius XI described mitigated socialism: “Not only does it condemn recourse to physical force; it even mitigates and moderates to some extent class warfare and the abolition of private property, if it does not reject them entirely. It would seem as if socialism were afraid of its own principles and of the conclusion drawn therefrom by the communists, and in consequence were drifting toward the truth which Christian tradition has always held in respect; for it cannot be denied that its programs often strikingly approach the just demands of Christian social reformers” (QA 113). 9 Husslein also stated, “A serious warning is offered here for believing Protestants, for all who still retain their faith in the divine Saviour Christ, to return to the Home which they have left, to the Fold whence they have strayed, to the Church apostolic, holy, one and Catholic, whence long ago they have wandered forth, before their footsteps are lost in the night” (CSP 89). Although Husslein often criticized the impact of the Reformation on social conditions, this was one of the rare places where he openly called for Protestants to return to the Catholic Church. 10 Husslein did not write extensively about Rauschenbusch, although both lived in New York at about the same time. 11 Rauschenbusch rejected the kind of understanding of the kingdom that Husslein proposed (Hopkins 132). Advocates of the Social Gospel took exception “to the
4 ~ Major Themes of Husslein’s Social Thought
93
Catholic interpretation of the Kingdom as synonymous with the Church; to the idealistic view that the Kingdom was located within another world or the next world; and finally to the pietistic interpretation of the Kingdom as existing within a body of believers. The Kingdom of God, given a purely ethical interpretation, meant the transformation of this world into a just and righteous society. Much importance was attached to the words of Jesus, ‘Thy will be done on earth as it is in Heaven’” (Dombrowski 15-16). 12 Melvin Williams (244-45) described Husslein as producing important studies on the consequences of capitalism, and labor problems. 13 McDonough failed to see the Old Testament prophet as prototype underlying Husslein’s writings. McDonough inaccurately stated, “The high-toned homiletic pitch of his writing, appropriate in sermons on personal morals, seemed poetic and therefore impractical when he [Husslein] touched on social and economic matters” (54). 14 Husslein considered individualist capitalism, laissez faire capitalism, the Manchester school, and the system of Physiocrats as forms of liberal capitalism (CSM 28-38). 15 The Sherman Anti-Trust Law was used against unions. In 1914 the Clayton Anti-Trust Act took labor unions out of the Sherman Act. However, the Clayton Act was vague, allowing yellow dog contracts in which workers were forced to agree not to belong to unions. In 1919 the Clayton Act was gutted by the Supreme Court. During the early 1920s courts continued to prosecute unions as illegal trusts (Abell, “Labor” 36-37; Faherty, Rebels 60). 16 See “The Labor Spy in American Industry,” “The Menace of the Labor Spy,” “The Labor Spy at Work.” 17 This followed Leo XIII’s position that one who held possessions, once he or she had supplied necessity, was to use them for the common good as required by charity: “Whoever has received from the divine bounty a large share of blessings, whether they be external and corporal, or gifts of the mind, has received them for the purpose of using them for perfecting his own nature, and, at the same time, that he may employ them, as the minister of God’s Providence, for the benefit of others” (RN 19). 18 See also QA 129. For Leo XIII, the importance of guilds not only affirmed his fundamental premise that the Church had the answer to the social question, but also acted as an historical judgment that provided the key to understanding Rerum novarum. Based on his view of the value of medieval guilds Leo XIII called for a restoration of society. Leo XIII traced the principal causes of the social crisis to the loss of religion and the destruction of the medieval guilds. Rerum novarum looked for a restoration of the past. Pius XI in Quadragesimo anno talked of reconstructing society along the lines of medieval Christianity (McGovern 96-97, 103). 19 "Land is uppermost in his [Leo XIII’s] mind when he speaks of property, although not exclusively. The indications are too numerous for us to think that very probably Leo XIII, was envisaging an agricultural society and not of the irreversible condition of the urban industrial worker towards the end of the 19th century” (Josol 56). See Curran, Directions 24. 20 See Husslein, CSM 223-24. McGovern argued that Pius XI wanted to reconstruct society along the lines of medieval Christendom (103-104). Nell-Breuning, Reorganization held that Pius XI did not envision a return to guilds because “present national and world economic conditions should be set back several hundred years” (259).
94 21
Stephen A. Werner
See Tome 70. Calvez and Perrin, xii, argued that Church social doctrine did not provide a model for social reform: “It is a statement of the social implications of a religious faith.” Husslein, with his application of the medieval guild model to cooperative enterprises, attempted to develop such a model. Husslein promoted what seemed to him a realistic and concrete application of Catholic social and ethical principles. Yet McDonough stated “Husslein’s writing exhibited the classic flaw of visionary literature: a lack of follow-up and specificity about the application of old truths or revolutionary predictions to current conditions” (55). Husslein was quite specific. 22 Husslein’s writings on cooperative and coproduction were mainly in his books: WP XVIII, XIX, XX; DI XXVII, XXIX, XXX; WWW VII; CSM XXVII. 23 1t is extremely difficult to understand the views of Pius XI on corporatism. Quadragesimo anno did not explain his corporate view of society. In addition, a study of contemporary European corporatist theories does not clarify his view, since such theories were extremely diverse and complex. Furthermore, Nell-Breuning suggested that Pius XI did not understand corporatism (“Drafting” 63-65).
5 ~ Husslein’s “A Catholic Social Platform”
95
Chapter 5 Husslein’s “A Catholic Social Platform” In “A Catholic Social Platform” Husslein applied the teaching of Leo XIII to a wide range of issues to show how the Church could answer social problems.1 Perhaps the most inclusive publication on social principles was the Catholic Social Platform drawn up by an American Catholic, Joseph Husslein, which has been published in numerous books and pamphlets both in England and in the United States. (Melvin Williams 32)
Husslein wrote his platform for the Confederation of Catholic Societies of Great Britain and Wales. The Catholic Social Guild in Great Britain adopted the platform. So too a resolution was unanimously passed by the delegates of the Catholic Confederation of England and Wales recommending it as: “An excellent statement of Catholic social principles, as a useful basis for the discussion of those principles, and as a means of directing Catholic thought on correct lines” (Review of DI 138). “The Catholic Social Guild has been working very hard at the distribution of the Platform,” the great social missionary, Father Charles Plater, S.J., wrote me [Husslein] from England. “It has gone to all the M.P.’s, the clergy, etc. We have a great number of letters of approval of the Platform. “Your Platform,” wrote Father Plater again from Campion Hall, Oxford, under date of March 10, 1930, “is likely to make a real impression on the country, the first 10,000 copies were speedily exhausted. It will form the theme of an important meeting in London shortly, at which the Bishop of Northampton will speak on the Platform.” (Romig 134-135)2
96
Stephen A. Werner
The platform consisted of sixty social principles grouped in eleven sections. For most of the principles Husslein indicated the corresponding chapters in his books Democratic Industry (D.I.) and The World Problem (W.P.).
Preamble 1. True modern democracy first arose beneath the fostering care of the Church, derived its principles from the great Catholic thinkers of the Middle Ages, found its expression in many of the early Catholic city-democracies, was actively maintained in its rights of self-government during the wars of the twelfth century by Pope Alexander III, has been continuously exemplified since the thirteenth century in the Catholic cantons of Switzerland, and was most brilliantly defended in the theological schools of the seventeenth century. The Reformation doctrine of the Divine right of kings was ever strenuously opposed by the Church. (D.I., XXVI.)3
Husslein claimed a Catholic origin to democracy to demonstrate the fundamental compatibility between Catholicism and American culture. Emerging from a minority status, American Catholics were eager to show this (D. O’Brien 30-31). In particular, Husslein attacked the contention that Protestantism gave birth to democracy. Husslein argued for a Catholic origin by describing the similarity of the ideas of Robert Bellarmine (1542-1621) and Francisco de Suarez (1548-1617), and the framers of the American government (DI 270-84).4 Husslein stated: Nothing is more clear than the continual defense on the part of Catholic philosophers and theologians of the doctrine of popular supremacy and government by consent during the centuries immediately preceding and following the Reformation. It was to this strictly Catholic doctrine, to which the nations of the earth have again returned in modern days, that the Reformation sought to give the death-blow. (“Reformation and Popular Liberty” 126)
Husslein cited several Catholic examples of democracy: religious orders with their systems of representation, guild organizations, city democracies based upon guild organizations, Church councils, and Catholic towns and provinces with democratic structures. Democracy existed in the nature of holy orders—a peasant could become pope. Husslein even cited a comparison of the Church’s government with the government of the United States. Husslein claimed democ-
5 ~ Husslein’s “A Catholic Social Platform”
97
racy as fundamentally Christian, for Christianity taught the dignity of all persons created in the image of God and the equality of all under the fatherhood of God (DI 45-46). 2. All true democracy, as an embodiment of the brotherhood of man, must be based on the fundamental doctrine of the Fatherhood of God. (D.I., V.)
Using a Social Gospel slogan, “brotherhood of man and Fatherhood of God,” this principle attacked the socialist view of brotherhood based on class solidarity (Hopkins 207).5 For Husslein, only true religion could bring true brotherhood. Husslein continued his definition of democracy: 3. Its aim is not the abolition of classes, from which universal happiness is vainly expected by some to flow. It freely acknowledges “the diversity of gifts that man receives, with the consequent inevitable difference in position, learning, acquirements and possessions which have ever characterized, and must always characterize the members of the human race.” (Cardinal Bourne.)6
For Husslein, Christian cooperation provided the key to solving social problems. 4. The perfect social ideal is found only in the Christian cooperation of all classes and of all individuals, as members of one social body, under the governance of lawfully appointed authority, whose power, however conferred by the people, is ultimately derived from God. (W.P., XXV.)
This principle opposed the socialist view on class struggle and countered the main tenet of Rousseau’s social contract: the authority of the sovereign comes from the people. Husslein, following Leo XIII, maintained that all human authority came from God. Principle 4 also described the basic meaning of the “solidarism” of Heinrich Pesch. Husslein explained “solidarism”: It regards civil society as a moral organism whose principle is authority and whose bond of unity is not only the brotherhood of man, but likewise the fatherhood of God. It sees in society the likeness of the Blessed Trinity, as it beholds in each individual the image of God. And finally it draws from these truths the consistent
98
Stephen A. Werner conclusions of strict moral obligations of “each to all and all to each!” (CSP 195)
From discussing political democracy Husslein moved to democracy in education. 5. Democracy in education took its beginning in the great system of public schools created by the Church (Third and Fourth Lateran Councils, 1179 and 1215) and in the vast medieval universities fostered by her, with their gilds of masters and scholars. (D.I., XXIII.)
This principle reflected Husslein’s concern about excessive government control of education, especially when this tended to be anti-Catholic. Also, socialist influences on education concerned him (CSP 33-37, DI 242-34). From these initial principles Husslein described the origin of present social problems. 6. With the “Great Pillage,” the suppression of monasteries and the confiscation of gild funds devoted to religion and charity, pauperism arose for the first time. The one power that by its very teaching and influence, as exemplified in the gilds at their perfection, could have preserved the working classes from the degradation to which they were subjected, was set aside. Hence the “rapacious usury” that followed, so that, as Pope Leo XIII described the conditions existing in his own day: “A small number of very rich men have been able to lay upon the teeming masses of the laboring poor a yoke little better than slavery itself.” (R.N.) (D.I. XXVII)
Husslein described the Christian solution: 7. The chief aim of Christian social endeavor, or “Christian Democracy,” is, in the words of the same Pontiff: “To make the condition of those who toil more tolerable; to enable them to obtain, little by little, those means by which they may provide for the future; to help them to practice in public and in private the duties which morality and religion inculcate; to aid them to feel that they are not animals but men, not heathens but Christians, and so to enable them to strive more zealously and eagerly for the one thing which is necessary: the ultimate good for which we are all born into this world.” (R.N.) What doth it profit a man if he gain the whole world and suffer the loss of his own soul. (Matt. xvi: 26.) (W.P. XXV; D.I. XXVIII.)
5 ~ Husslein’s “A Catholic Social Platform”
99
This principle, by emphasizing gradual change, rejected the revolutionary Marxist view—based on Hegel—that society changed in leaps. The emphasis on eternal salvation in this principle rejected Marxist materialism. For Husslein, Christian democracy began by rejecting false social systems.
False Social Systems The second section of Husslein’s platform summarized his position on socialism and liberal capitalism. 8. Socialism is no solution for the evils which have followed the Reformation. Far from satisfying the legitimate desire of the worker for a personal share in productive ownership, it would ultimately deprive all alike of such ownership, subjecting the laborer hopelessly to a bureaucratic control, both tyrannical and inefficient. Socialism is more or less complete in proportion as it aims at this abolition of private productive ownership. (W.P., III; D.I., IV.) 9. Individualistic capitalism, understood as a system in which the means of production are in the hands of a few men of wealth, inspired merely with a passion for the utmost gain and unrestrained by due legal restrictions, is equally pernicious. (W.P., IV, XXI)
Christian Democracy This platform section explained “Christian Democracy,” a concept Leo XIII developed in Graves de communi, to describe a movement of Catholic charity to help the masses economically, intellectually, and spiritually. Leo XIII rejected the term “social democracy” used by socialists (Graves de communi 5).7 Husslein defined the scope of Christian Democracy: 10. The Church of Christ has not been founded to teach any particular system of sociology or economics. She condemns whatever is morally false in the existing practices or theories and commends whatever form of social order, based upon the natural law and the Gospel, wisely answers the needs of any given period. She is not for any single generation but for all time, while economic conditions are fluctuating perpetually. (W.P., XVII; D.I., V-VIII, etc.)
100
Stephen A. Werner
Consistent with Leo XIII’s fundamental premise, Husslein emphasized unchanging moral principles: 11. Yet it is the duty of Christians, particularly at the present moment, not to overlook the social dangers that imperil civilization; and it is possible for them to build up on her principles, teachings and traditions a true system of democratic industry which shall answer all the needs of their day. On no other foundation can a sound social order be erected.
Leo XIII saw Christian Democracy not as a political movement, a political system, or a preference for a particular form of government. It had nothing to do with political democracy. More accurately titled, “Christian Popular Action,” the movement worked through organized Catholic charity, not political change.8 Husslein further described the movement: Christian Democracy is based upon the fundamental truth that society is a moral organism: a social body all the members of which are united for a common purpose, by a common bond of brotherhood, under the common fatherhood of God. “No one lives in a community for his personal advantage only,” says Pope Leo XIII . . . “he lives for the common good also.” Each member is therefore to contribute his own share towards the welfare of the entire body, and that body, in turn, must reasonably provide for the welfare of its individual members. (WP 272-73)
In his “A Catholic Social Platform” Husslein described the mechanism for achieving Christian Democracy: a wider distribution of property. By doing so, Husslein gave a much broader meaning to Christian Democracy than Leo XIII. 12. Equally opposed to the unnatural abolition of private productive ownership under Socialism, and to its restriction to a few men of wealth under capitalism, the true social system advocates instead the widest diffusion of the possession of productive as well as of private property, that as many as possible of the workers can hope, by just means, to become sharers in it. And this personally, and not merely in the name of a communistic commonwealth. (W.P., XVIII; D.I., I, XIX, etc.) 13. Such possession will satisfy the aspirations of men, lift them above the position of wage-earners only, and help to their full and
5 ~ Husslein’s “A Catholic Social Platform”
101
harmonious development, insuring the stability of the new social order. (D.I., XXIX, XXX.)
Husslein followed Leo XIII in holding as sacred and inviolate the right of property, founded on the laws of nature and commands of God. For Husslein, the state determined ownership of specific properties. Yet the land did not cease to minister to the needs of all. Those who did not own land were to receive the equitably distributed produce of the land, since everything that people ate, wore, or lived in came from the land (CSM 101, 109-112; WWW 114-22). Husslein warned about property abuses, such as the monopolizing of land. He feared that “the rapid and marvelous inventions of large-scale farm machinery all tend in that direction” (CSM 105). He also criticized the system of tenant farmers as being a great waste. Workers labored but had no chance of owning the land. Why then should they work their hardest? In addition, workers lost all incentive to protect the soil from overuse. Husslein summarized Christian Democracy as opposing both socialism, by insisting on the right of property, and capitalism, by demanding regulation of private capital. “Christian Democracy is the golden mean between the two destructive extremes of Socialistic and capitalistic excesses” (WP 276). Husslein recalled an earlier, more equitable distribution of property: 14. Such was the consummation most closely attained when Catholic gildhood was in its prime and the influence of the Church effective; when the apprentice might hope, by industry, skill and virtue, to become a master; when social discontent was unknown and pauperism undreamed of; when each lived for all and all for each. Such is the Catholic ideal. (D.I., XVIII-XXII, XXV.)
Husslein described his application of Christian Democracy to his time: Democratic Industry.
Democratic Industry 15. The old organizations cannot be restored as they were. But it is possible, in the words of Pius X: “To adapt them to the new situation created by the material evolution of contemporary society in the same Christian spirit which of old inspired them.” (D.I., XXVIII.)
102
Stephen A. Werner 16. Such, in a material way, are the cooperative trade, credit and agricultural societies intended for self-help and to eliminate a wasteful system of distribution. Such are the attempts at cooperative production, where the entire enterprise is owned by the workers who alone receive both wage and profit, and where each worker is personal owner of shares and participates, directly or indirectly, in the management. (W.P., XIX, XX; D.I., XXIX, XXX.) 17. Such, too, though less completely, are the various plans in which the workers own a considerable part of the voting stock. And such in fine, to a greater or less degree, are all copartnership arrangements by which the workers share in the corporate stock and reasonably participate in the industrial management: the regulation, through their shop gilds, of hours, wages, discipline, processes of production, etc. (W.P., XIX; D.I., XVIII.) 18. Since every business is constituted of money-capital and labor-capital, it is unreasonable that the former alone, as under capitalism, should have the entire power of control and the latter be subjected to a state of complete dependence. Men are more than money, and persons more precious than machinery. (D.I., XVIII, etc.) 19. But for the lasting success of any economic plans, religion is essential. The gilds were able to maintain their spirit of democratic industry in proportion only to their religious zeal. With this they waxed or waned. Without certain disaster, religion can never be dissociated from economics. (D.I. XIV, XXVII.)
In Principle 19 Husslein reiterated the necessity of religion for solving social problems.
The Public Good Husslein’s platform pivoted on Principle 20. 20. While keeping clearly in sight this vision of the true city, which is to be constructed after no merely speculative model, we must not forget the intermediate measures that are not, however, to be confounded with the ultimate goal.
5 ~ Husslein’s “A Catholic Social Platform”
103
Before reaching the “true city”—Democratic Industry—interim measures were to be undertaken. Principles 1-19 described Husslein’s ultimate goal. Principles 20-49 described these measures. Many of Husslein’s principles, such as those on the regulation of work and monopolies, were also key tenets of progressivism and the Populist movement: the first significant American effort to insist that government protect the common good (Abell, American 138; Hofstadter 61). Husslein called for government regulation to eliminate abuses until Democratic Industry could be realized. 21. Adequate government regulation should prevent the accumulation of excessive gains in the hands of a few, the monopolistic control of commodities, and the abuses that may arise in such public service monopolies as are under private operation. (D.I., XII.)
In principle 22 Husslein discussed unfair prices: 22. Monopolies or combines are guilty of injustice when in the articles of common use they exceed the highest prices, that would obtain in the market were it freely open to competition, presuming in each instance the previous payment of a just wage. They may offend against charity by not lowering this price as well when notable hardship is inflicted upon the poor. All “cornering” must be prevented absolutely and all unfair business methods. (W.P., V, VI.)
Although he did not develop a theory on prices such as Heinrich Pesch did—evidence that Pesch had limited influence on him— Husslein discussed several aspects of prices. Desiring a true free market to establish just prices, he objected to abuses such as cornering markets, giving expensive contracts to subcontractors in which directors had a vested interest, artificial means of bloating costs, and underselling to drive competitors out of business. Believing that large businesses were inefficient, Husslein looked to moderately scaled enterprises in a competitive market to provide low prices. However, just prices presumed living wages for workers. (Husslein cited Thomas Aquinas and St. Alphonsus on just prices.) (Mulcahy 99-105, WP 44-64). Husslein rejected the laissez faire view of prices:
104
Stephen A. Werner The Church will not admit as a general principle that a price is just simply because it has been agreed upon between seller and buyer. So likewise she will not admit that wages are just simply because they were determined by a “free” contract between employer and employed. On this principle the stronger in wealth or the more cunning in wit could always take advantage of his weaker and more innocent brother. Such is the theory of liberalism and modern commercialism, but such is not the doctrine of the Church of Christ. (WP 46-47)
He proposed the Catholic understanding of prices: They permit a margin of profits which will enable commerce to flourish in a healthy state, but at the same time they provide that the life-blood of trade may circulate freely through the veins and arteries of the social body for the common good. They forbid excessive charges, a source of wealth to a few, a cause of hunger and misery to many. They neither allow the cancer of capitalistic selfishness to fasten itself upon the social body, nor suffer the paralysis of Socialism to afflict society. (WP 45-46)
Husslein returned to the role of the government: 23. State ownership should not be introduced where State control suffices. The farther an industry is removed from a public service utility or a natural monopoly, the greater the presumption in favor of private ownership, cooperative or otherwise. (W.P., XVIII.)
Husslein’s fear of excessive state control or “state paternalism” typified many American Catholics. For example, many other Catholics opposed federal laws prohibiting child labor, preferring state laws, out of fear of an excessive role for the government—a fear in part due to the experience of Catholics in Ireland and Germany who emigrated to escape government policies (McQuade, Callahan 33-34). For Husslein, the state should not interfere with private welfare but protect the economic, social, physical, intellectual, and moral well-being of citizens. Principle 23, a variant of the principle of subsidiarity later described in Quadragesimo anno, described the limits of state intervention.9 (Once more, Husslein anticipated Pius XI.) Whenever warranted by the common good the state could take over public utilities or monopolies by giving just compensation. However, the presumption was against government control since it contradicted the fundamental goal of Leo XIII of a wider distribution of property.
5 ~ Husslein’s “A Catholic Social Platform”
105
Husslein remained wary of adding government inefficiency and political meddling (CSM 144-45, WP 203-207).10 Again anticipating Pius XI, Husslein held state regulation of natural resources as legitimate: 24. Since it is the duty of the State to see that natural resources are turned to good account for the support and welfare of all the people, “the State or municipality should acquire, always for compensation, those agencies of production, and those agencies only, in which the public interest demands that public property rather than private ownership should exist.” (Irish Bishops, 1914) (W.P., III, XXI.)
Husslein insisted on the importance of property. 25. Unjust restrictions should not be placed on those, who to the general benefit are acquiring legitimate prosperity under private enterprise. (W.P., XVIII.)
This principle attacked the single tax theory of Henry George which Husslein saw as a socialist denial of the right to property. Husslein did not grasp the fine points of George’s thought.11 Husslein argued that by taking away all revenue from land the land lost its practical value. This was equivalent to confiscation. (However, George did not propose taking all rent revenue, only the “unearned” portion of it.) According to Husslein, the theory denied the fundamental right of ownership of productive property. Also, the single tax theory, by levying taxes on land owners, would allow large manufacturers who rented land to be free of taxes while small farmers would be heavily taxed (CSM 106-107, 192; WP 207). Husslein discussed taxation: 26. Taxation should bear most upon those who are able to contribute most to the common good, but should not be made a means of confiscation. Special protection should be given to the small share-holder and a wider diffusion of shares made possible, within the limits of justice. The words of Pope Leo XIII must be borne in mind: “The right to possess private property is derived from nature, not from man; and the State has the right to control its use in the interest of the public good, but by no means to absorb it altogether. The State would therefore be unjust and cruel if under the name of taxation it were to deprive the private owner of more than is fitting.” (R.N.) (W.P., XXI.)
106
Stephen A. Werner
For Husslein, taxation did not imply that the right of property came from the state. Principles 20-26 showed Husslein’s approach: a modified capitalism, based on private ownership—including worker ownership— with all ownership responsible to the common good. For Husslein government had three duties: protect workers, prevent capitalistic abuses, and protect natural resources.
Labor Measures This section proposed specific measures on labor. 27. Until a larger social justice reigns, minimum wage laws must enable every male worker to support a family in Christian decency. Every adult woman worker must be enabled to live respectably by her earnings alone. Enough should gradually be paid to make it possible for every worker to provide for the future out of his or her own wages, without need of State insurance. In this way only can industry be said to be properly supporting those engaged in it. (W.P., IX.)
Catholic teaching did not reject the wage system as Marxists had, but insisted on living wages as “the Corner Stone of Social Justice.” Husslein did not trust capital to provide a living wage. “Human nature, even at its best, is never to be trusted too far, where gain and profits are in question” (WP 88). Nor could unions achieve it, for not all workers were organized. Husslein saw legislation as essential (WWW 17-18). Husslein gave his understanding of the minimum wage: Every toiler has the right to a living wage, a right which takes precedence over every other consideration, excepting only the right which the employer himself has to a remuneration which will enable him and his family to live in reasonable and moderate comfort according to their position in life. It is important moreover for both employer and employee that the continuance and welfare of the industry itself be wisely consulted. Beyond this there can be no question of any profits until the living wage has been paid to the employees. (WP 91-92)
Husslein opposed laissez faire capitalism which held that markets determined wages and that workers were free in accepting or rejecting
5 ~ Husslein’s “A Catholic Social Platform”
107
any particular job. Laissez faire capitalism limited the role of government to enforcing labor contracts. According to Leo XIII: There is a dictate of nature more imperious and more ancient than any bargain between man and man, that the remuneration must be enough to support the wage-earner in reasonable and frugal comfort. (RN 34)
Husslein defined the living wage as income for a suitable home of “about four wholesome rooms together with the modern arrangements for cleanliness and decency,” food, clothing, furniture, and recreation (WP 94-85). This supported a family in frugal comfort and provided for sickness, emergencies, unemployment and old age. Husslein anticipated Pius XI, who clarified Leo XIII, by insisting on family wages. For Pius XI wages were to be determined by the need for support of the worker and his family, the state of business, and exigencies of the common good.12 Husslein called for state or local boards with capital, labor, and the public represented to investigate costs of living and set minimum wage rates. Wages could be adjusted for cases such as disabled workers. Minimum wage laws would protect Christian-minded employers— who wanted to pay decent wages—from criminal profiteers and unfair competition. Husslein stated that in cases where employers could not pay living wages, the state should remedy the situation (WWW 17-18, WP 93-96, CSM 182). For Husslein the “adequate wage,” not only protected the worker and his family, but also represented the worker’s contribution. Husslein argued that high wages, combined with skilled and beneficent management, would result in lower prices and greater profits. Husslein also described the “constructive wage” that increased consumption and decreased unemployment: 28. As exceptional business enterprise and efficiency, directed towards the greater common good, is entitled to an exceptional reward, so labor also should be remunerated in proportion to its contribution to industry.
This opposed Marx’s view that to workers alone belonged the value of production. Husslein argued that labor and capital contributed value to production, entitling both to a reward. (Husslein referred to a wage sufficient to own property as a “saving wage.” He also mentioned a “cultural wage” that achieved true economic balance.)
108
Stephen A. Werner
Husslein defined the term “worker” as including laborers and administrators: By workers we understand all engaged in mental as well as in manual occupations, in the service of distribution or production, from manager to messenger, although the need of State protection for the former may be insignificant.
Husslein returned to the role of the state: 30. As the State must come to the aid of the consumer in as far as the general welfare requires, so too it must safeguard labor’s rights: religious, moral, physical and economic. In like manner the rights of every class must be duly protected by it to whatever extent the common good demands. (W.P., VIII.)
This principle attacked laissez faire capitalism which limited the role of government. Husslein insisted on the role of the government in protecting consumers. Husslein followed Leo XIII in arguing that the first concern of the State must be the rights of the poor. The state must exercise, what today would be called, “a preferential option” for the poor and laborers. For Husslein this meant special legislation (CSM 144-47). Quoting Leo XIII, Husslein argued: “The richer population have many ways of protecting themselves, and stand less in need of help from the State; those who are badly off have no resources of their own to fall back upon, and must chiefly rely upon the assistance of the State. And it is for this reason that wage earners, who are, undoubtedly, among the weak and necessitous, should be specially cared for and protected by the commonwealth” (ibid.). [R.N. 29] Too often, as we well know, the very opposite rule has been followed by political statesmen and judges, who look to votes and not to rights; whose ears are keen enough to hear the siren song of wealth, but deaf to the doleful wail of poverty; who look for tenure of office and preferment, but who for thirty pieces of silver have been ready to sell again their Christ in His suffering members. In the words of the Prophet Jeremias: “They have not judged the cause of the widow, They have not managed the cause of the fatherless, And they have not judged the judgment of the poor”(v.28). (CSM 154-55)
Husslein followed Leo XIII in describing the duties of workers and employers:
5 ~ Husslein’s “A Catholic Social Platform”
109
31. The duty of labor is to give a fair day’s work, as the duty of the employer is to provide a fair wage and proper working conditions, from a religious and moral, as well as from a material and sanitary point of view. (W.P., X.)13
Husslein next discussed strikes: 32. Strikes are permitted for a grave and just cause, when there is a hope of success and no other satisfactory solution can be found, when justice and charity are preserved, and the rights of the public duly respected. Conciliation, arbitration and trade agreements are the natural means to be suggested in their stead. Hence the utility of public boards for this purpose. As in the strike, so in the lock-out, a serious and just cause is required, and the rights of the workers and of the public must be respected. Charity is far more readily violated in the lock-out than in the strike, because of the greater suffering likely to be inflicted on the laborer deprived of his work than on the employer. (W.P., XI.)
Husslein insisted on four conditions for strikes: 1) just cause, 2) hope of success, 3) the benefit gained outweighed the cost, and 4) last resort after arbitration and conciliation had failed. He responded to socialist and syndicalist calls to use strikes to “get all you can get.” According to Husslein, socialists imitated capitalist expediency. “Beyond this, however, the public good is not consulted either in amassing profits by watered stocks and exorbitant prices or in screwing up wages by strikes and intimidation” (WP 113).14 Husslein saw government protection of workers as the ultimate solution to strikes. Husslein considered strikes, when “laborers, without personal cause against their employer, suspend work in approval and support of other workers who are striking” (WP 123). 33. Justification of the sympathetic strike will rarely be found, while the presumption is overwhelmingly against the general sympathetic strike. (W.P., XII.) Blacklists on the part of employers that permanently exclude from his trade a worker displeasing to them, who honestly seeks employment, are opposed to the first principles of justice.
Husslein discussed unemployment: 34. The problem of unemployment should be met by a permanent national employment service, acting with the cooperation of municipal and private bureaus. Methods of preventing or meeting the crisis of unemployment should be carefully studied. Govern-
110
Stephen A. Werner ments have a serious duty to obviate this evil, and provide for the unemployed according to their necessity. (W.P., XIII, XIV.)
Husslein followed the American bishops who called for continuance of the United States Employment Service established during World War I (WP 130-53, WWW 20-25). According to Husslein: God has imposed upon every man the law of labor. He consequently desires that in the ordinary course of events all should have the possibility of fulfilling this obligation. The corollary to the law of labor is the right to labor. A civilization in which frequent unemployment on the part of a multitude of men, able and willing to work, is a normal condition, has gone astray from the paths set for it by God. (“What’s Wrong With the World?” 31)
Immoral economic principles caused unemployment. Husslein proposed observing Sunday rest and religious holidays; preserving the home (by paying the husband a living wage so his wife could stay home, thus freeing jobs for male workers); and avoiding extravagance. Husslein called for labor bureaus for the unemployed, citing the success of medieval labor unions. Wary of private agencies taking advantage of workers, Husslein recommended national bureaus to help immigrants (to encourage them to settle on farms) and free municipal and state exchanges (protected from political control so they could not be used for patronage) (“Problem of the Hour”). Husslein discussed working conditions: 35. Hours of labor should be neither unreasonably long nor unreasonably short. Sunday labor should be prohibited, except in cases of real necessity, such as is too often merely presumed to exist. (W.P., VIII; D.I., XIX, XX.)
Husslein, followed Leo XIII in holding that human dignity required decent working conditions. Husslein discussed specific measures such as forty hour weeks and eight hour days (“Limits of Labor”, “Eight Hour Day”). Although Husslein rarely discussed public housing efforts he included a principle on it. 36. Until labor can properly provide for itself, the State should interest itself in housing conditions, particularly where there is
5 ~ Husslein’s “A Catholic Social Platform”
111
danger to morals and religion as well as to the physical wellbeing of the worker and of his family. Health inspection in the schools and municipal clinics for the poor are recommended. (W.P., II.)
This principle followed the American bishops (“Social Recontruction” 231). Principle 37 also followed the American bishops: 37. Vocational training is desirable, without neglecting the cultural and religious education of our children. “A healthy democracy cannot tolerate a purely industrial or trade education for any class of its citizens.” Further, “the opportunities of the system should be extended to all qualified private schools on exactly the same basis as to the public schools. We want neither class divisions in education nor a State monopoly of education.” (American Bishops) (D.I., XXI.)
The next principle discussed social insurance. 38. So long as proper wages are not accorded, social insurance is to be favored to whatever extent may be necessary to safeguard the laborer in sickness, accident, invalidity and old age. It must be clearly understood, however, that there is question of a temporary substitute only for an adequate wage, which will enable the worker to carry his own insurance and not to be a mere ward of the State. The dignity of labor must be protected from communistic paternalism as well as from capitalistic abuses. (W.P., XVII; D.I., IV.)
Husslein called for social legislation to secure peace and prosperity—modern legislation following the guild tradition. He described social insurance for workers paid for by the state, employers, and laborers. Many Catholic social thinkers, as well as the American bishops, called for social insurance. However, in social legislation Husslein was wary of promoting state paternalism (WP 190-94; Abell, “Labor” 41-42). Husslein discussed prison labor. 39. An intelligent penal system will make it possible for dependents to live upon the earnings of the imprisoned wage-earner. It may also enable the prisoner to lay aside something for future rehabilitation. (W.P., XVII.)
112
Stephen A. Werner
He attacked the leasing of unpaid convicts to contractors as undermining the labor market, exploiting prisoners, and depriving the families of prisoners of support. Husslein recommended training prisoners to help them support their families during incarceration and to find employment after release (WP 198-200). Husslein next discussed labor unions. 40. The right of labor organization is no longer in question and never should have been. The worker should see that Christian principles are maintained within his union and not permit it, through his own carelessness, to be made the helpless tool of extremists. (W.P., XVI; D.I., III.)
Leo XIII, against liberal capitalism, asserted the right of workers to associate as a natural right: “It is this natural impulse which unites men in civil society; and it is this also which makes them band themselves together in associations of citizen with citizen” (RN 37). Leo XIII gave prestige to unions through his recognition of their legitimacy. According to Leo XIII, the right to associate preceded the state. Thus the state, as protector of natural rights, must protect unions. However, when associations failed to consider the common good above private interest the state had a right to intervene (RN 42, 38; CSM 199-204). Husslein argued that benevolent employers did not make unions unnecessary, for often such benevolence was designed to keep unions out. Labor unions prevented employers paying good wages from being forced out of business by competition. Husslein considered collective bargaining a right and an absolute necessity. For the individual worker stood at an extreme disadvantage. The employer would not go hungry without a just labor contract, but the worker might. Furthermore, while capital could be moved from one market to another, workers could not often change occupations. New machinery could destroy the entire capital of the worker: his skill. Unskilled workers particularly needed unions. Destruction of labor unionism would be paramount to the destruction of democracy and liberty. There can be no freedom of contract once collective bargaining is abolished. To put the argument concretely. Enormous organizations, with business running into billions of dollars, can evidently not be bargained with on equal terms by the helpless, inexperienced, and perhaps poverty-stricken worker who timidly knocks at the office door. With him it is a question of work or starvation. He is without
5 ~ Husslein’s “A Catholic Social Platform”
113
freedom of contract, without liberty, without power of self-determination. He is confronted by the inevitable, and must take what is offered him, or else look helplessly upon the misery of his wife and children. But quite different is his case when, backed by hundreds of thousands of his fellows; supported by the experience, the generalship and often the high intelligence of the ablest of his class; with a reserve of millions of dollars in the treasury that will all be poured out in defense of his single self, he comes as a power to be reckoned with. So it should be, so it must be, under the present system; merely let him not abuse his power. A tremendous responsibility rests upon him. Let him use this power justly, unselfishly, sacredly, for the good of all the people. To do this he will stand in need of the influence of religion. (CSM 204)
Husslein argued that unions must not be irreligious. Leo XIII had stated that unions “must pay special and chief attention to piety and morality, and that their social discipline must be directed throughout by these considerations” (RN 42). Leo XIII called for Christian Trade Unions to pursue three goals: 1) strictly trade union interests (not politics), 2) mutual help in economic matters, 3) religious and moral duties.15 Pius XI later clarified that when Catholics could not join Christian unions, they were to join secular unions and also join religious associations. (Secular unions must allow religious freedom for Catholics.) Leo XIII also wanted Christian associations for employers. Pius XI lamented that these had failed (RN 36, QA 31-38, CSM 213-20). Catholics in America did not form Catholic unions because few socialist unions existed. Labor unions in America welcomed Catholics. Also, separate Catholic unions would have weakened the labor movement. However, Catholics in neutral unions largely ignored the requirement to join religious associations. Husslein advocated “Occupational Groups,” a concept stated, but not explained, in Quadragesimo anno. Husslein envisioned a system of Occupational Groups made up of employees and employers organized along trade lines. The Occupational Groups would be organized into Central Bureaus made of freely chosen employer and employee representatives from the various Occupational Groups. Husslein hoped that Occupational Groups could resolve industrial disputes and promote cooperation (CSM 221-31).16 In the last principle of this section Husslein discussed the importance of Catholic social education:
114
Stephen A. Werner 41. It is therefore of the highest importance that Christian social education through organization and literature, be extended to every single one of our own labor unionists. Hence also the imperative need of Christian schools of sociology for the training of Christian social leaders. (W.P., XVI, XXV.)
Husslein stressed the need to educate priests in social teaching. In addition, he recommended Christian associations for youth, study groups (Study Circles) on Catholic social teaching, and lay retreats based on the spiritual exercises of Ignatius (CSM 236-40, 249). Husslein directly applied Principle 41 by establishing the School of Social Service at Saint Louis University.
Woman Labor In Principles 42-45 Husslein addressed the problems of women created by the Industrial Revolution (WP 241-71, WWW 48-57). Machinery made it impossible for wives to assist husbands at home with their work as craftsmen. Husbands’ inadequate wages forced women to work in factories under deplorable conditions. Factory owners eagerly hired women, who though often more diligent and skilled, were paid less than men. Working conditions were deplorable. Unemployment among men increased (Faherty, Destiny xvi-xvii). Husslein argued that the Reformation created these problems. Luther failed to uphold the dignity of women; they were handed over to working conditions no longer influenced by Roman Catholicism for “no one has been so consistently devoted to the unfolding of woman’s powers and the promotion of her temporal and spiritual welfare as the Catholic Church” (WP 241). Husslein reacted against radical feminist and socialist answers to “the woman question”. He saw their ideas as irreligious, dangerous to the family, and undermining the dignity of motherhood, child care, and the family (Melvin Williams 112). Husslein feared socialist advocates of free love and free divorce, thus denying the sanctity and inviolability of marriage, and undermining morality, the key to solving social problems. Husslein wanted a National American League of Catholic Women as an alternative to socialist organizations for women (CSP 181-66).17 In the face of socialist criticism that Roman Catholicism ignored women’s issues, Husslein proposed a Catholic answer (CSP 22).18
5 ~ Husslein’s “A Catholic Social Platform”
115
42. Exploitation of woman and child labor is to be strictly abolished, as well as every other form of sweating. (W.P., XXII, XXIII, XXIV.)
“Sweating” referred to sweat shops where women worked for long hours in unhealthy conditions for woefully inadequate wages. This principle followed Rerum novarum: Finally, work which is suitable for a strong man cannot reasonably be required from a woman or a child. And, in regard to children, great care should be taken not to place them in workshops and factories until their bodies and minds are sufficiently mature. For just as rough weather destroys the buds of spring, so too early an experience of life’s hard work blights the young promise of a child’s powers, and makes any real education impossible. (RN 33)
According to Husslein, women should not work in dangerous or unhealthy jobs. Husslein cited such specific health problems as exposure to lead fumes and industrial poisons, reductions in birthrates, and the health impacts on children caused by mothers working certain jobs (WP 264-66). For Husslein, the state must insure safe and sanitary working conditions with reasonable hours and no night work. (Husslein feared night work exposed women to dangerous situations.) Husslein called for maternity leave. Women forced by necessity to work should be granted an ample rest before and after childbirth. He called for a continuation of World War I regulations on women factory workers. In addition, Husslein was concerned about the moral dangers to women, such as sexual harassment in the work place (WP 267-69). Husslein discussed the wages of working women: 43. While woman in industry is to receive a minimum wage sufficient for her own support, it is reasonable that she should moreover be paid according to her service. This will imply an equal wage with man for work equal in quantity and quality, when engaged at the same task with him. (W.P., XXIII.)
Husslein argued that employers exploited women and children because they were cheaper than both men and machinery. This created unemployment by driving men from jobs thus clogging the labor market with starving men and women willing to slave for a
116
Stephen A. Werner
pittance because their husbands did not have jobs (WP 254-259, WWW 15-16). In 1919 Husslein was ahead of his time in his views on women as seen in this call for equal wages for women. Husslein argued for equal wages for women as a principle of justice, but also to eliminate unfair competition with men. (Equal wages for women had been upheld in World War I by the United States government.) Husslein’s writings were unclear on whether working women should receive family wages. Probably because he did not foresee family wages for men and equal pay for women happening soon, there was little point in being specific about the subsequent issue of equal family wages for women. Husslein wanted to secure the woman’s place in the home to reduce unemployment. By removing women and children, from the work force, more jobs would be available for men, the primary family wage earners. This would reduce the oversupply of workers and force wages to rise. Husslein argued that several interdependent problems— unemployment, neglect of children, and low wages—could be solved by providing adequate wages to husbands and by protecting the woman’s role at home. 44. If wife and mother are no longer driven to the factory, owing to the husband’s inadequate wage, and child labor is ended, there will be work for the fathers of families as well as for all men and women who must provide their own support. So too a widowed mother’s pension, to be paid as far as necessary, will keep both mother and children in the home. (W.P., XVII.)
Husslein’s overarching concern was for women forced to work by the inadequate wages of their husbands, thereby neglecting their children. Husslein believed that the proper role for women should be working at home, caring for the physical, educational, moral, and spiritual needs of the family. Thus, he quoted Leo XIII: 45. “Woman,” says Leo XIII, “is by nature fitted for home-work, and it is this which is best adapted to her modesty and to promote the good up-bringing of children and the well-being of the family.” (R.N.) “The proportion of women in industry ought to be kept within the smallest practical limits.” (American Bishops) They should not be placed at occupations unfit, or morally or physically dangerous; it is the duty of the State to ensure this right for them and to secure for them reasonable hours, sanitary conditions,
5 ~ Husslein’s “A Catholic Social Platform”
117
abolition of night work, and the removal of all circumstances injurious to sex and maternity. (W.P., XXIV.)
Although this sounds chauvinistic to modern ears, in the late 1800s and early 1900s it was an attempt to protect the family and the mother’s role in the family. Husslein, following Leo XIII, attempted to establish a “natural condition” argument. By holding that women belonged by nature in the home they implied that paying inadequate wages to male spouses was unnatural and unjust.19 Based on Leo XIII’s weltanschauung, Husslein rejected the socialist concept of radical equality of women and men. For Husslein, God had created men and women different: Here therefore are clearly defined the normal occupations of both sexes for which the Almighty has especially fitted them. The hard and burdensome toil of the outer world is, so far as possible, to be the portion of man, while the gentler, but even more heroic sacrifices of home and motherhood fall to the part of women. (WP 245)
However, Husslein listed only a few occupations as inappropriate for women: work in mines, quarries, barrooms, poolrooms, and jobs such as public messengers, street-car operators, elevator operators and bell boys. Husslein only opposed women working at jobs he saw as dangerous or unhealthy. He never opposed women pursuing professional careers. In 1930 he would establish the School of Social Service at Saint Louis University—the first department at the University to accept women. Husslein promoted the field of Social Work, one of the first professions to accept women on an equal basis. Not completely free from the biases of his age, Husslein, in an atypical statement, gave the following argument why women should not work in certain occupations: Women, as physical experts tell us and experience proves, are by nature predisposed to nervous troubles. Their sexual functions weaken the nerves, and nervous tension will therefore exaggerate any evil tendencies to which they may be prone. (WP 264)
Melvin Williams summarized the view held by Husslein and his contemporaries:
118
Stephen A. Werner Social Catholicism upholds the doctrine that married women, girls, and children should seldom if ever infringe upon their own rights and the rights of men by working outside the home. Instead, the adult male should perform these functions and be paid a “living wage” or a family wage because he has a natural right to each. If women, children, and girls work for wages, other duties must be neglected—primary duties to one’s self, to society, and to God. If the adult male is not paid a “living wage,” he is not receiving what is naturally and rightly his. (38)
In writing on feminism and suffrage Husslein did not attack moderate but only extreme feminist writers as holding views contrary to Christian teaching on marriage and family life. “Underlying the entire theory is the false, un-Christian and Socialistic supposition that the dignity of woman is compromised by the authority of the husband over the household” (“Radical Woman” 438). No statement of Husslein on women voting has been found. Although he attacked radical elements in the suffragist movement he did not oppose the women’s vote in his writings.20 By modern standards Husslein’s views seem conservative, for he saw jobs for women as normally a passing stage, leading to matrimony and the home. This insistence sprang from a desire to protect the family. On the other hand, Husslein’s specific principles on working women— calls for safe working conditions, equal pay, maternity leave, and protection from sexual harassment—seem progressive.
Farm Labor Husslein, who lived in cities, wrote little on farming compared to Ryan, and Kenkel, whose Central Blatt and Social Justice had a large rural circulation. However, Husslein included four principles on the subject, as a realistic application of Leo XIII’s vision of a wider distribution of property.21 46. Every just encouragement is to be given to promote farm labor and the development of a large class of small farm owners. (W.P., XV; D.I., VIII)
Husslein feared for farmers who went to cities seeking better lives, but wound up living and working in intolerable conditions. The increased mechanization of farming that led to large corporate factory farms and drove small farmers off the land also concerned him (WP 164, CSM 104-105, WP 156).
5 ~ Husslein’s “A Catholic Social Platform”
119
The American bishops proposed to place World War I servicemen on farms with government loans to help them: The importance of the project as an item of any social reform program is obvious. It would afford employment to thousands upon thousands, would greatly increase the number of farm owners and independent farmers, and would tend to lower the cost of living by increasing the amount of agricultural products. If it is to assume any considerable proportions it must be carried out by the governments of the United States and of the several States. (“Social Recontruction” 227)
Husslein’s view, which followed Leo XIII, paralleled the American populist myth of the yeoman farmer. The yeoman, who owned a small farm and worked it with the aid of his family, was the incarnation of the simple, honest, independent, healthy, happy human being. Because he lived in close communion with beneficent nature, his life was believed to have a wholesomeness and integrity impossible for the depraved populations of cities. His well-being was not merely physical, it was moral; it was not merely personal, it was the central source of civic virtue; it was not merely secular but religious, for God had made the land and called man to cultivate it. (Hofstadter 24-25)
Richard Hofstadter traced the origin of this myth to rural American and European aristocrats, threatened by the industrial classes, who drew heavily on classical writers such as Hesiod, Xenophon, Cato, Cicero, Virgil, and Horace. Not surprisingly, the well-educated, aristocratic Leo XIII held such views. Husslein stressed farm cooperatives: 47. Cooperative buying, selling and credit associations, and cooperative production are here to be particularly recommended as thoroughly approved by experience. All abuses in transportation, working equal hardship on the producer and consumer, must be removed, and produce brought to the market with the least intervention of middlemen. (W.P., XIX, XX, VII; D.I., XIII.)
In the rural sector cooperatives succeeded. Husslein saw them as eliminating the problem of middlemen who raised the price of goods excessively while farmers received little. Husslein condemned abuses
120
Stephen A. Werner
in transportation, such as corrupt railroads practices that prevented farmers from receiving a fair price for their products (WP 158-61). A large class of farmers required government assistance. 48. Government loans should be made, where needed, to enable men to settle upon the land, either as owners or as tenants with long-time leases. “It is essential that both the work of preparation and the subsequent settlement of the land should be effected by groups or colonies, not by men living independently of one another and in depressing isolation.” (American Bishops.) Attention should be given in particular to the facilities of regularly fulfilling religious duties. The problem of the farm laborer, too, is to be carefully studied. (W.P., XV.)
Husslein followed Leo XIII and Pius XI on farm workers, but never solved the problem of organizing farm labor (RN 35, CSM 104). Maintaining a large class of small farmers required protecting the right of property. 49. The principle of land nationalization is to be strongly condemned as unnatural, economically ruinous and undemocratic. The rights of the tiller to his soil must be held sacred. Keeping inviolate all just property rights, the laborer should “be encouraged to look forward to obtaining a share in the land.” (Leo XIII, R.N.) (W.P., XVIII.)
Causes of Social Disaster Husslein turned to religious and moral issues: 50. The roots of the social problem penetrate deep. The evils of impurity, birth control and divorce corrupt the individual, the home and society. With these are associated the inordinate craving after pleasure, the shirking of duty, and the wide-spread wastefulness and excess of all classes, together with a desire for the utmost gain, regardless of the common good. (W.P., II, XI; D.I., IX.)
Husslein, following Leo XIII, saw modest living as a Christian principle and a key element in solving social problems (RN 20). Husslein often wrote about simplicity and frugality. He upheld the biblical examples of the nomadic patriarchs and the holy family as examples of simple, frugal, and virtuous living (WWW 48, BL 29-30). Following Leo XIII and Pius X, Husslein did not blame the poor but suggested frugality as part of the remedy.22 This contrasted with others
5 ~ Husslein’s “A Catholic Social Platform”
121
such as William S. Kress, a contemporary of Husslein, who wrote, “Poverty is not due to the social order, but drink, lack of thrift and foresight. Then again the cause of destitution is often pure laziness.” (Cited by Doherty 66). Husslein contrasted the wealthy matron with the dignity of the frugal working girl. The woman parasite who lives for fashion, luxury and pleasure, be she ever so wealthy and refined in worldly culture, is a menace to society. Immeasurably above her, in the scale of human worth as of heavenly grace, stands the poor struggling working girl, who combats poverty and vice by fidelity to her lowly duties, and with the love of God gilds all her work. (WWW 49)23
Returning to the fundamental premise, Husslein connected social problems with a rejection of religion: 51. These evils, which naturally flow from a rejection of religion, are most intimately connected with all our economic and social disorders, whose last cause is godlessness. (W.P., XIV.)
Husslein discussed human rights: 52. Finally, there is the doctrine that would make of the State a fetish to which all human rights, whether of the family or of the individual, are to be relentlessly sacrificed. Hence follow State autocracy, bureaucracy, Socialism and all the endless forms of State paternalism that threaten to submerge democracy. (D.I., I, IV, XXVI, XXIX, etc.)
Husslein held that human rights derived from a human nature created by God and therefore preceded the state. Leo XIII had argued that both family rights and the right to property derived from nature and not from the state. Pius XI reiterated this (RN 6, 10; QA 49).
First Principles This section covered several diverse issues: 53. The sacredness of all human life must be recognized, and the duty of conforming it to the Will of God.
This duty flowed from the fundamental premise of Leo XIII.
122
Stephen A. Werner
Husslein spoke of the family: 54. The purity of family life must be restored, and the family, as the unit of society, must bravely assume its duties and responsibilities in a true Christian spirit. The future belongs to those who safeguard the home.
This principle directly followed Leo XIII who insisted on the nuclear family as established by God from the beginning of human existence.24 Husslein returned to the role of the state: 55. The pagan theory that the individual exists for the State and not the State for the individual, must be absolutely rejected.
With religion as the solution to social problems, Husslein opposed education devoid of religion: 56. Secularization of education must be opposed as the greatest danger to modern society, together with all over-centralization and undue State interference, as tending to establish the most pernicious of all autocracies. To the parent alone, and not to the State, belongs, of itself and directly, the responsibility for the upbringing of the child.
This principle also followed Leo XIII (Sapientiae christianae 22). Husslein moved to the importance of a Catholic press. 57. The safe-guarding of the just rights of Christianity, on which the future of civilization depends, is not possible without the development of a strong, alert, loyal and intelligent Christian press. The support and furtherance of this is a first duty. The law, on the other hand, should be made to prevent the publication of untrue statements and reports, and protect from slander all, whether individually or collectively.
Husslein applied this directly in establishing his “A University in Print.” The last principle in this section called for “organization” of effort for Christian Democracy. Husslein applied this directly in his establishment of the School of Social Service at Saint Louis University. 58. The success of Christian Democracy, which is purely social and not political, will finally depend upon the utmost organization and
5 ~ Husslein’s “A Catholic Social Platform”
123
concentration of effort. Nor should Catholics neglect the full use of their political rights in the measure in which they are granted to every citizen, since by reason of their Divine Faith they “may prove themselves capable, as much as, and even more than others, of cooperating in the material and civil well-being of the people, thus acquiring that authority and respect which may make it even possible for them to defend and promote a higher good, namely, that of the soul.” (Pius X. “Christian Social Action.”)
Conclusion Husslein completed his platform with two principles stating the fundamental premise of Leo XIII: 59. Beside the rules of social justice, the laws of Christian charity should bind together employer and employees, and all classes and ranks, into one Christian brotherhood. To accomplish this in its perfection, nothing can be of greater importance than that all should heed again the voice of that Mother from whom the nations have wandered, who begot them in the unity of a great Christendom in the ages of Catholic Faith. Her teachings are the same now as they were in the days of the Apostles, and as they will remain to the end of time, yet always perfectly adapted to every changing period of history. For the promise of Christ to her can never by made void: “Behold I am with you all days, even to the consummation of the world.” (Matt. xxviii: 20) (W.P., XXV.) 60. Hence she alone can never possibly mislead mankind, and there can be no surer hope for true and lasting reconstruction than the return of all to her, the one and only apostolic Church, the Church of our fathers.
“A Catholic Social Platform” provides a framework for analyzing minor themes of Husslein’s social thought. In the platform, Husslein argued for democracy and true human equality as Catholic values. On this foundation he built his description of Christian Democracy. Rejecting the false social systems of socialism and liberal capitalism, Husslein proposed Democratic Industry as the fullest realization of Catholic social principles. However, because Democratic Industry could not be achieved immediately, Husslein looked to government legislation to promote the public good and to protect labor—especially woman labor and farm labor. Husslein turned to moral and religious themes to describe the causes of the social disaster and to
124
Stephen A. Werner
establish first principles. He concluded his platform with the fundamental premise of Leo XIII. Specific remedies in Husslein’s “A Catholic Social Platform” resembled those in other social reconstruction platforms of the time. However, Husslein provided a “baptized” social platform. By linking his proposals with the thought of Leo XIII, he attempted to demonstrate the validity of Leo XIII’s fundamental premise by showing how Catholic social teaching provided answers to a broad range of issues.
Notes 1
The platform is in Husslein, Democratic Industry, and Church and Labor. “Between February, 1918, and June, 1919, more than sixty programs under the title, ‘Social Reconstruction’ or some variation of it, were drawn up and published by prominent groups of persons in Italy, France, Great Britain, and the United States” (Ryan, Social Doctrine 143, cited in Tome 71). Tome noted that Ryan did not specifically cite Husslein’s platform. See also Abell, American (199). Significantly, Husslein’s platform was not listed in Estella T. Weeks, Reconstruction Programs: A Comparative Study of their Content and of the Viewpoints of the Issuing Organizations. However, Weeks listed platforms published as late as May, 1919. The reviews of Husslein’s Democratic Industry in late 1919 and early 1920 indicate that Husslein’s platform was probably not available for the study of Weeks. 2 For background on the Catholic Social Guild see Melvin Williams 31-33 and McEntee 152-201, 229-230, 252. The Catholic Social Guild grew out of the Catholic Truth Society in England. Charles Dominic Plater (1875-1921) and Monsignor Henry Parkinson (1852-1924) founded the guild in 1909. Plater used Husslein’s platform as a textbook for summer programs of the guild. 3 Husslein’s platform in DI 345-62. See also D. O’Brien, 215. McDonough (58-59) stated regarding Husslein: “He draped his skepticism about democratic government in the effulgent patriotism common to American Catholics at the time.” and “He was conventionally, even enthusiastically, patriotic.” Both statements distort Husslein’s writings. There is little if any patriotism in Husslein’s writings other than his use of the terms “Democracy” and “Democratic” in his proposals for Democratic Industry and Christian Democracy. Husslein rarely promoted the United States of America. He wrote little on either World War. He rarely mentioned specific political figures and usually maintained the perspective of talking about social issues from a moral perspective that transcended national borders. Although he attacked Communism, he did not present the United States of America as the ideal alternative. Husslein vigorously attacked social and economic conditions in the United States including injustices done by American courts. Thus to describe Husslein as “draped . . . in effulgent patriotism” is to misunderstand Husslein. Husslein was skeptical that American government or any other government could resolve social and economic problems. He believed that this was beyond the capability of government. For Husslein true social reform could only be achieved by moral reform brought about by true religion. Such a moral reform, while including personal morality, emphasized moral economic relationships. However, government did have an important role in providing legislation to protect
5 ~ Husslein’s “A Catholic Social Platform”
125
workers since such moral reform was an ideal not likely to be achieved. Lastly, in claiming a Catholic origin of democracy, Husslein attempted to give democracy an international grounding rather than an American grounding. 4 Melvin Williams (270) described Husslein as an ardent defender of democratic principles. See also Trehey 15-32, Furfey 224-25, McShane 22-23. Husslein responded to the socialist argument that the democracy of early Christianity was destroyed when it became a state religion under Constantine. See Kautsky 445-49. 5 According to Husslein: “The doctrine of brotherhood itself, of which Socialism boasts so loudly, is derived from no other source than the Catholic Church, and is based only upon her teaching of the essential equality of all men, whatever their race or sex or condition” (CSP 146). 6 Francis Cardinal Bourne (1861-1935), archbishop of Westminster, England, was active in Catholic social reform in England. 7 "Christian Democracy,” New Catholic Encyclopedia and Michael P. Fogarty, Christian Democracy in Western Europe,1820-1953. Husslein wrote about Christian Democracy in Chapter XXV of WP, “Christian Democracy and Politics,” and “A Rally for Christian Democracy.” 8 Leo XIII, Graves de communi 6. See also Husslein, SW 1:227. Leo XIII warned of three dangers with Christian Democracy. 1) It could promote extreme forms of democracy. 2) It might help only common people and neglect other classes; “paying so much regard to the interests of the lower classes as seemingly to neglect the upper classes, who nevertheless are of equal importance to the preservation and development of the State.” Christian Democracy “must maintain that distinction between classes, which properly belongs to a well-ordered State.” 3) Christian Democracy might subvert legitimate authority (Graves de communi 5-8). According to Leo XIII, the main work of Christian Democracy was establishing institutions of mercy, almsgiving, and the fostering of self-help. Leo XIII gave six more warnings to those promoting Christian Democracy: 1) avoid sedition and seditious persons, 2) hold the rights of everyone inviolate, 3) show a deferential attitude towards employers and perform honest work, 4) avoid developing a distaste for home life, 5) attend to religion, and 6) avoid public dispute of doubtful issues (Graves de communi 18). 9 Pius XI stated the principle of subsidiarity: “Just as it is wrong to take away from individuals what by their own ability and effort they can accomplish and commit it to the community, so it is an injury and at the same time both a serious evil and a perturbation of right order to assign to a larger and higher society what can be performed successfully by smaller and lower communities” (QA 79). “The state, then, should leave to these smaller groups the settlement of business and problems of minor importance, which should otherwise greatly distract it. Thus it will carry out with greater freedom, power, and success the tasks belonging to it alone, because it alone is qualified to perform them: directing, watching, stimulating, and restraining, as circumstances suggest or necessity demands” (QA 80). 10 Melvin Williams (239-40) distinguished two schools of Catholic social thought. The Angiers school stressed “economic freedom and noninterference by the State in socioeconomic affairs.” The Liege school stressed “the importance and necessity of labor groups and state intervention to protect laborers.” Williams
126
Stephen A. Werner
placed Husslein, along with Ryan, in the Liege school for their insistence on limited government intervention. See also Abell, American 72-73. 11 "It is not necessary to enter here upon the further question of the so-called ‘unearned increment,’ which must not be confused with the fundamental fallacy of denying the natural right to all private-land ownership, which is the basic error of Single Tax” (CSM 107). The single tax seemed simple, but George’s description of how to calculate the unearned increment was a bit complicated. Very likely, Husslein, as did many others, rejected the single tax theory without fully understanding it. 12 "Every effort must therefore be made that fathers of families receive a wage sufficient to meet adequately ordinary domestic needs. If in the present state of society this is not always feasible, social justice demands that reforms be introduced without delay which will guarantee every adult workingman just such a wage” (QA 71). See Nell-Breuning, Reorganization 173-74. 13 Citing the epistle of James, Husslein described the defrauding of workers wages as a crime against heaven. Husslein condemned the cutting of workers’ salaries; usurious dealing, such as company owned stores; and unjustified deductions from workers’ wages (CSM 127-30). 14 See WP 111-22, WWW 39-43, CSM 159-60, SW 1:190, RN, 31. In reacting against radicalism, possibly Husslein was overcautious in limiting strikes, given the unjust working conditions of his time. 15 The papal insistence, which Husslein followed, that unions stay out of politics left labor at a disadvantage since capital often used politics to its advantage. 16 Apparently Husslein saw Occupational Groups as independent of a direct political involvement. This made his proposal far more limited than European discussions of corporatism. 17 Husslein thought socialist women’s organizations might provide the model and stimulus for Catholic women’s organizations. “It is evident, therefore, that Catholic women can no longer be indifferent to the great social issues; and while they may not adopt all the practices of their revolutionary sisters, they can find in the activity of Socialist women, and especially in the literary propaganda and zeal for organization displayed by them, sufficient suggestiveness to indicate the methods which they themselves must follow in carrying out their divine mission to mankind” (CSP 184). 18 Socialists such as Bebel argued that the Church did little to help women. Rejecting the argument that Catholic devotion to Mary exemplified a high regard for women, Bebel cited Church fathers who were hostile to women and Paul on the submission of women to their husbands, and the denial to women of the right to speak at assemblies (50-53). Bebel charged, “While both extremes cling like shipwrecked mariners to the water-logged theory of private ownership in the means of production, the one extreme, represented by the Roman Catholic church-machine, is seen to recede ever further back within the shell of orthodoxy, and the other extreme, represented by the pseudo-Darwinians, is seen to fly into ever wilder flights of heterodoxy on the matter of ‘Marriage and Divorce.’ Agreed, both, in keeping woman nailed to the cross of a now perverse social system, the former seeks to assuage her agony with the benumbing balm of resignation, the latter to relieve her torture with the blister of libertinage” (v). 19 McDonough described the paradox of Husslein’s thought in that he promoted egalitarianism combined with hierarchy (52). Yet when Husslein emphasized hierarchy, he limited it to the Roman Catholic Church as a moral authority.
5 ~ Husslein’s “A Catholic Social Platform”
127
Husslein idealized the home yet he never spoke of male dominance over women. Considering Husslein’s 1919 call for equal wages for women, his attacks on sexual harassment, and his promotion of Social Work—a field that treated women as professionals, it is a grave injustice to Husslein to imply that he held chauvinistic views. Husslein followed Leo XIII in arguing that married women belonged at home caring for their children. Yet it is anachronistic to claim Husslein promoted male dominance by this position. Husslein faced problems different from those of the 1950s, 1960s, and 1970s when social pressures kept women from pursuing careers outside their homes and realizing their full potential. Husslein fought the “the great woman problem” of the 1910s and 1920s: women working in factories (sweatshops) for minimal pay, in dangerous and unhealthy conditions, subject to sexual harassment, forced to neglect the care of their children because their husbands wages were inadequate to support a family. Husslein sought, above all, adequate family wages for men so that wives did not have to work in the horrible factories. 20 Carr Elizabeth Worland in her dissertation, “American Catholic Women and the Church to 1920” (144-153) listed Husslein as an opponent of suffrage yet cited no specific text on his views on suffrage. In the articles she cited, Husslein, “The Radical Women” and “The Womanly Woman.” Husslein stated specifically that he was not talking about suffrage: “Saying this, we make no allusion to the movement for the suffrage on the part of such as deem it desirable for civic and not revolutionary purposes; nor to that necessity which at times forces women, under economic pressure, to enter into competition with man even in certain occupations which had been regarded as peculiarly his own. What must, however, be unconditionally condemned is the “new thought” principle, that woman’s sphere, as Christianity has defined it, is too narrow and confining, and must be expanded until it likewise embraces in every direction that of man” (“The Womanly Woman,” 461). Worland also cited Husslein for the view that, based on Genesis, women were inferior to men (151). Husslein never made such a statement. In the article cited by Worland, Husslein attacked a writer who used Genesis to claim that men were inferior to women. Husslein spoke of neither gender as inferior to the other. 21 McDonough referred to the “austere, homey ruralism idealized by Husslein . . . “ (247). Such a statement exaggerated Husslein’s very limited writings on rural life. 22 Leo XIII stated: “Christian morality, when it is adequately and completely practised, conduces of itself to temporal prosperity, for it merits the blessing of that God who is the source of all blessings, while it powerfully restrains the lust of possession and the lust of pleasure—twin plagues, which too often cause a man without self-restraint to be miserable in the midst of abundance. Further, it makes men supply by economy for the want of means, content with frugal living, and keeps out of reach of those vices which eat up not merely small incomes, but large fortunes, and dissipate many a goodly inheritance” (RN 23). 23 "The most idle lives are often those spent in opulence and ease, while the most heroic self devotion is not seldom displayed by women whose own poor homes, crowded with many children, are models of Christian perfection” (Husslein, “Launching a Great Enterprise” 9-10). “How dignified and noble by the side of this scented creature, whose only worth is in her silks and satins, her lap dogs and her limousines, is the true Christian working girl!” (WP 242). In contrasting the idle rich with the virtuous poor, Husslein followed “A Meditation on Two Standards” from the Spiritual Exercises of St. Ignatius
128
Stephen A. Werner
(136-48). The meditation compared the standard of Satan, coveting riches, to the standard of Christ, seeking poverty, if it be the will of God (Puhl 60-63). 24 "No human law can abolish the natural and primitive right of marriage, or in any way limit the chief and principal purpose of marriage, ordained by God’s authority from the beginning. ‘Increase and multiply’ (Gen. i, 28). Thus we have the family—the “society” of a man’s own household; a society limited indeed in numbers, but a true ‘society,’ anterior to every kind of State or nation, with rights and duties of its own, totally independent of the commonwealth” (RN 9). Although Husslein wrote about the family and considered it a critical element in reforming society, McDonough overstated the case that Husslein described the family as the microcosm of the state (62, 52). Husslein never used language such as “building block” or “linchpin” for the family. Husslein frequently discussed the family but did not propose “the familial hierarchy was the bulwark of collective order” as McDonough described (“Metamorphoses” 352). Husslein saw morality and religion as the true linchpins for recreating society.
6 ~ Husslein’s Other Work
129
Chapter 6 Husslein’s Other Work When Husslein left New York for St. Louis in 1929, an important shift took place in his work. He completed his writing on social issues with the publication of The Christian Social Manifesto in 1931. From that point, until the end of his life, Husslein wrote little on social issues and diverted his energies to editing, organizing, teaching, and devotional writing. Was the shift for Husslein simply the effect of a change in assignments? Since he no longer wrote for America, did he no longer feel a demand for his social writing? Or did Husslein conclude that writing on social issues was ineffective? A third possibility is that Husslein went deep to the core assumptions underlying his social writing: that social change would only come about with a change in the hearts of humans beings and only true religion could accomplish such change. Perhaps Husslein sought more direct ways to change people, and less direct ways to deal with social problems. Since for Husslein the key to changing people was the truth of Roman Catholicism, he set himself to the task of promoting Catholicism. Husslein undertook three projects to spread Catholic belief and teaching: organization of “A University in Print,” the establishment of the School of Social Service at Saint Louis University, and devotional writings. Husslein envisioned these projects as tools to guide the building of society aright. These projects found the same foundation as Husslein’s social thought: the fundamental premise of Leo XIII that the Church had the answers to social problem. For Husslein in his later years the answers depended on religious renewal. These works of Husslein took place during his years at Saint Louis University from 1929 to his death in 1952. These years were a time of particular vibrancy for the University. Several publications Classical Bulletin and Modern Schoolman became influential. Daniel A. Lord (1888-1955), a member of the university’s Jesuit community achieved local and national fame. Extremely popular with young people, Lord became national director of the Catholic youth organization Sodality of Our Lady and editor of its publication Queen’s Work. Lord was a writer, lecturer, organizer, and promoter of Catholic literature. Lord produced hundreds of pamphlets which sold over twenty-five million copies. He
130
Stephen A. Werner
wrote and produced musical pageants and plays often with insightful social commentary. The quiet Husslein and gregarious Lord had dissimilar personalities and were probably not close friends but they shared a common vision. Both believed that the key to a better world lay in the advancement of the Catholicism. Neither figure was a great intellect, but both Husslein and Lord shared the American genius for promotion. They stand in a long line of Catholic promoters that includes such diverse figures as David Goldstein author of Autobiography of a Campaigner for Christ and later Fulton Sheen.
“A University in Print” Rationale and Organization of “A University in Print” Husslein’s “A University in Print” responded to three factors: the lack of American Catholic intellectuals, the lack of American Catholic literature, and the social problems Husslein addressed.1 In Husslein’s time the shortage of American scholars was widely recognized. John A. O’Brien, published Catholics and Scholarship: a collection of papers lamenting the lack of Catholic scholarship (McAvoy 70, Ellis 112-17). Many Catholics also lamented the lack of American Catholic literature. In fact, there was a deliberate effort to create and encourage an American Catholic literary revival. Arnold Sparr has described three goals behind this effort: to promote American Catholicism, to defend the Catholic faith, and to redeem American secular society. The American Catholic literary revival was a “curious mixture of insecurity, protest, and apostolic mission” (Sparr 17).2 “A University in Print” flowed from Husslein’s social thought. He believed that society could only be restored with a return to religion and morality. However, such a restoration required quality Catholic literature. Early in his career Husslein lamented the dearth of Catholic literature. Ironically, the publishing of socialists gave him a vision of what Catholics might accomplish. The large and comprehensive set of Socialist classics—if we may dignify them with this name—translated from all languages, is bound in uniform edition and sold at the lowest prices, while we, with all our years of experience and all the grand literature at our disposal, have not yet been able to issue one single, handy, attractive, inexpensive and carefully exclusive set of our own Catholic classics of the world, or even of those of our own
6 ~ Husslein’s Other Work
131
language—invaluable as such an edition would be for the class-room and library. (“Socialist Press Propaganda” 128)3
Husslein’s early mentor, Father John Ming, also “felt the need of a literature that should answer the infidelity of our day. . . “ (Husslein, “Rev. John J. Ming” 307). Husslein described the irreligious press as the great Delilah in comparison with the Catholic Press as Deborah calling forth Barak to attack the hordes of Sisera. Husslein wanted an active Catholic press to fight socialism. He cautioned workers to avoid socialist literature and wanted a Catholic alternative (CW 95-106; Karson, American 234-82). In his later years Husslein described his publishing effort as a strong defensive and offensive weapon against Atheism and Communism. Husslein also recognized the power that capitalists held through their control of the press.4 In response to these three factors—the lack of American Catholic intellectuals, the lack of American Catholic literature, and his own social thought—Husslein began his important editing work with Bruce Publishing.5 In 1931 Husslein started his “Science and Culture Series” by publishing A Cheerful Ascetic by James J. Daly. Husslein sought first, “the constant perfecting of an intellectual and inspiring Catholic leadership; second, the acceptable interpretation of Catholicism to the non-Catholic intellectual world.”6 Within a year and a half the Cardinal Hayes Literature Committee stated: The Science and Culture Series . . . has already given to the reading public a number of useful and pertinent volumes and enriched present-day Catholic literature with works of unexcelled eminence in their respective fields. (“University in Print,” Jesuit Bulletin 15, 1)
Husslein desired a university in print with books of biography, history, literature, education, the natural sciences, art, architecture, psychology, philosophy, scripture, and religion. Most books contained a short preface by Husslein. It was to be a university for the people, a university for the men and women with intellectual interests, whether within college walls or outside of them, offering to all the best scientific and cultural thought of Catholic thinkers, scientists and literary men. Each work was intended to be the result of original research while at the same time presenting larger and more familiar aspects of the subjects treated. It was to be popular, but without sacrificing scholarship. (“University in Print,” Jesuit Bulletin 15, 1)
132
Stephen A. Werner What is envisioned throughout was in truth a University in Print, free, wide and open as the world itself to all who are eager for truth, religion and the things of mind and spirit. And all this for the one supreme purpose of developing and inspiring an intellectual Catholic leadership such as now the world needs to win it back to Christ. (“University in Print,” Jesuit Bulletin 26, 12)
The faculty of the “A University in Print” were significant Catholic authors, their books were lectures with the world as their student body. Although started in the Great Depression, the series grew rapidly with such authors as Hilaire Belloc, Donald Attwater, Christopher Hollis, Theodore Maynard, Eva J. Ross, Daniel Sargent, Padraic Gregory, Joseph Clayton, and Fulton J. Sheen. A year and a half after starting the “Science and Culture Series,” Husslein began the “Science and Culture Texts” series. In May 1934 Husslein started the “Religion and Culture” series with The Catholic Way in Education by William A. McGucken, S.J. Husslein envisioned, but never started, a fourth series of sixteen books on missiology, “The Church Universal Series.”7 The emblem of the Science and Culture Series, modeled after the statue of St. Louis at the St. Louis Art Museum in St. Louis, Missouri appeared on the binding and title page of each book. The fitting emblem of the series is the heroic figure of the crusader king, St. Louis, mounted on his straining charger and holding aloft the sword reversed, its hilted handle changed into a cross, humanity’s true sign of progress.8
The Religion and Culture Series had its own emblem. Avoiding unsolicited books, Husslein preferred to select topics and then choose expert authors based on their contribution to the field and their ability to write in good literary English. Husslein also invited qualified authors to suggest topics. For the sake of quality, Husslein gave writers as much time as they needed.
6 ~ Husslein’s Other Work
133
Never has the Science and Culture Series sought popularity at any cost, but has always insisted upon the cultural worth of any contribution accepted by it. Nonetheless it firmly sets forth as its ideal an invariable popularity of treatment, consistent with scholarship and genuine originality. (“University in Print,” Jesuit Bulletin 26, 12)
Husslein described the requirements for each book: . . . that it combines in an outstanding way scholarship, originality and popular presentation, while its subject itself is not too specialized to be of vital and actual interest to the generality of intelligent readers. (“University in Print,” Jesuit Bulletin 15, 2)
Working without a secretary, Husslein edited 213 books during a twenty-one year period. Bruce set up a subscription plan offering a 20% discount. New books were sent to subscribers on a five day approval. Subscribers had to buy six books a year. Each new book, usually issued on the tenth of each month, came with a Science and Culture Series Forecast describing the next book. The success of Husslein’s series helped the Bruce company survive the Great Depression.9 Distributors sold the books in the United States, India, the Philippines, Australia, New Zealand, South Africa, England, Ireland, Canada and Italy. Husslein cited an assessment by the Irish writer and contributor to the series, Aodth [Hugh] de Blacam: Thus, broadcasting from Dublin no later than September 28, 1934, Aodth de Blacam said: “I recommend this remarkable series for more than one reason. The first is that it will appeal particularly to most Irish readers as being almost the only series of its kind appearing in English that is written from what most of us regard as the orthodox point of view. . . . The Science and Culture Series should serve our purpose if we were asked to point to a really trustworthy example of American culture—of American scholarship, deep and sound. Here we find that long range of interest, that freshness of point of view, and yet that reverent attitude towards tradition which together make up the characteristics of American culture.” (Romig 137-38)
The Scope of “A University in Print” Husslein saw “A University in Print” as part of the Catholic Literary Revival and included several books reflecting this self-consciousness:
134
Stephen A. Werner
Calvert Alexander, The Catholic Literary Revival: Three Phases in its Development from 1845 to the Present (1935); Stephen James Meredith Brown and Thomas McDermott, A Survey of Catholic Literature (1945); Elbridge Colby, English Catholic Poets, Chaucer to Dryden (1936); and Michael Earls, Manuscripts and Memories: Chapters in Our Literary Tradition (1935). Regarding Katherine Brégy, From Dante to Jeanne d’Arc: Adventures in Medieval Life and Letters (1933) a New York Times review stated: This pleasant and well-made little book of essays upon medievalism is written from the Roman viewpoint primarily for Catholic readers, but that is not to say that its charm and richness of subject are the exclusive property of any creed. Any one sensitive to romanticism and the flavor of the past will find its pages delightful.10
Several books described particular figures in Catholic literature: Terence Connolly, Francis Thompson: In His Paths: A Visit to Persons and Places Associated with the Poet (1944) and Gerald Walsh, Dante Alighieri: Citizen of Christendom (1946). Other works covered broader ranges of Catholic literature such as Constance Julian, Shadows Over English Literature (1944); Mary Keeler, Catholic Literary France from Verlaine to the Present Time (1938); Inez Specking, Literary Readings in English Prose (1935); and James J. Daly, A Cheerful Ascetic and Other Essays (1931). These books show Husslein’s emphasis on acquainting American Catholics with their older European heritage. Other figures in the American Catholic Literary Revival were only concerned with 20th century Catholic writers. Although called the Science and Culture Series only three books covered science: Victor Allen, This Earth of Ours (1939); James Macelwane, When the Earth Quakes (1947); James Shannon, The Amazing Electron (1946). Two books dealt with art: Frank Brannach [Francis Edward Walsh], Church Architecture: Building for a Living Faith (1932) and Padraic Gregory, When Painting Was in Glory, 1280-1580 (1941). For Husslein, a revival of Catholic literature had to deal with the most important Christian literary work: the New Testament. Husslein gave particular attention to books on scripture. (It is a common misconception that Catholic interest in the Bible began after Vatican II.) Husslein sought a middle ground between the technicalities of critical biblical studies and simple devotional works by providing books for the intelligent reader that presented academic research such
6 ~ Husslein’s Other Work
135
as James Kleist, The Gospel of Saint Mark: Presented in Greek Thought-units and Sense-lines With a Commentary by James A. Kleist (1936); The Memoirs of St. Peter, or the Gospel According to St. Mark (1932); and with Joseph Lilly, The New Testament: Rendered From the Original Greek with Explanatory Notes (1956). Other books on scripture included William Dowd, The Gospel Guide: A Practical Introduction to the Gospels (1932); C. Lattey, Paul (1939); Emile Mersch, The Whole Christ: the Historical Development of the Doctrine of the Mystical Body in Scripture and Tradition (1938); George O’Neill, The Psalms and the Canticles of the Divine Office (1937); and The World’s Classic: Job (1938). Particularly important and well read was the two volume translation of Ferdinand Prat, Jesus Christ: His Life, His Teaching and His Work (1950). In addition to writings on scripture, another fourteen books covered theology. Of particular importance were Gerald Ellard, Christian Life and Worship: A Religion Text for Colleges (1933-34); Francis Mueller, Christ (1935); and Piotr Skarga, The Eucharist (1939). Other works included Hilaire Belloc, The Question and the Answer (1932); C. Lattey, Paul (1939); Emile Mersch, The Whole Christ: the Historical Development of the Doctrine of the Mystical Body in Scripture and Tradition (1938); and Bakewell Morrison, The Catholic Church and the Modern Mind (1933). Another twelve works in “A University in Print” dealt with Catholic social teaching. These ran the gamut from Paul Martin, The Gospel in Action: The Third Order Secular of St. Francis and Christian Social Reform (1932); Albert Muntsch, The Church and Civilization (1936); John K. Ryan, Modern War and Basic Ethics (1933, 1940) [This is not the more famous John A. Ryan]; Thurber Smith, The Unemployment Problem: A Catholic Solution From the Viewpoints of Ethics, History, and Social Science (1932); to Thomas Schwertner, The Rosary, A Social Remedy (1934, 1952). A Commonweal review by Virgil Michel described Henry Schumacher’s, Social Message of the New Testament (1937): Topical expositions go progressively from personality to family, property and wealth, the state and authority, on the basis of the true Christian concepts of the new creature, the kingdom of God, the fatherhood of God, the brotherhood of man, the whole scale of virtues emphasized in the New Testament—all with abundant textual quotations. Many pages are truly enlightening, . . . Without a deep biblical knowledge and without a sympathetic feeling for
136
Stephen A. Werner human needs and social ills, the book could not have been written.11
Twenty-four books dealt with Christian history including five by Donald Attwater: The Christian Churches of the East (1947, 1948); The Golden Book of Eastern Saints (1938); St. John Chrysostom: The Voice of God (1939); The Catholic Eastern Churches (1935); The Dissident Eastern Churches (1937). Describing the last two, The Dublin Review stated: “Single volumes on so large a subject could hardly be more complete, and they supply a need which a number of people in England and America have felt for a long time.”12 Other historical works were M. W. Burke-Gaffney, Kepler and the Jesuits (1944); and four books by Joseph Clayton Pope Innocent III and His Times (1941); The Protestant Reformation in Great Britain (1934); Saint Anselm: A Critical Biography (1933); and Luther and His Work (1937). Regarding Joseph Clayton’s book on Luther a New York Times review described it as “a just and temperate view of Luther,” and “a valuable piece of work.”13 Hilaire Belloc’s, The Crusades: The World’s Debate (1937) received the following New York Times review: Mr. Belloc brings all this to life in a book of straight-forward narrative and exposition which rises every now and then to heights of beauty and dramatic visualization, which grows naturally from the soil of his own scholarship and insight, and beneath which the current of his own earnestness flows deep and strong.14
Two books reflected the Catholic reappraisal of the Middles Ages: Roy Cave and Herbert Coulson, A Source Book for Medieval Economic History (1936) and James J. Walsh, High Points of Medieval Culture (1937). Two dealt with the history of the American West: Mabel Farnum, The Seven Golden Cities (1943) and Gilbert Garraghan, Chapters in Frontier History: Research Studies in the Making of the West (1934). The Catholic interest in the conversion of non-Catholics can be seen in several works, three of which are autobiographical descriptions of the movement to Catholicism: Herbert Cory, The Emancipation of a Freethinker (1941); Theodore Maynard, The World I Saw (1938, 1939); and Dorothy Wayman, Bite the Bullet (1948). One book told the stories of 40 converts from Knute Rockne to Shane Leslie: Severin Lamping, Through Hundred Gates, by Noted Converts from Twenty-Two Lands (1939). These books would have been contemporary with Merton’s The Seven Storey Mountain. Husslein had his own disbe-
6 ~ Husslein’s Other Work
137
liever turned Cistercian: Father Raymond, The Man Who Got Even with God: The Life of an American Trappist (1941) about a cowboy called “the Kentuckian” who joins the Abbey of Gethsemane. Two books on the Oxford Movement reflect the interest in converts: Shane Leslie, The Oxford Movement, 1833-1933 (1933, 1935) and William Lamm The Spiritual Legacy of Newman (1934). A review in America describe Leslie’s book: Shane Leslie has probably written one of his finest pieces of prose in this history. On a vast canvas he has attempted, and with conspicuous success, to give a picture of the Oxford Movement with the lights and shades of its historic background. With both hands, as it were, he has dipped deep into the tone coloring of literary artistry, and slapped on his colors in a startlingly brilliant ensemble that makes the Movement stand out with an intense vividness.15
Although Husslein’s series had the goal of promoting Roman Catholic faith it still allowed for an honest and sympathetic look at world religions as seen in two works by George Cyril Ring: Religions of the Far East: Their History to the Present Day (1950) and Gods of the Gentiles: Non-Jewish Cultural Religions of Antiquity (1938) and the five works by Donald Attwater on the Eastern Christian tradition. Four books dealt with Catholic education: Francis Crowley, The Catholic High-School Principal: His Training, Experience, and Responsibilities (1935); Daniel Lord, Religion and Leadership (1933); William McGucken, The Catholic Way in Education (1934-1937) and The Jesuits and Education: The Society’s Teaching and Practice, Especially in Secondary Education in the United States (1932). The series included two books in French and one in Spanish. These were to be used in foreign language courses as readers with religious themes: Luis Coloma, Boy (1934); Lucille Franchère and Myrna Boyce, L’aurore de la Nouvelle France (1934) telling the adventures of French Jesuits in early America, and Mary St. Francis, Loutil, Edmund (1937). Six books dealt with the threat of Communism including: Hamilton Fish, The Challenge of World Communism (1946); Christopher Hollis, Lenin (1938); Robert Ingrim, After Hitler, Stalin? (1946); Edmund Walsh, Total Empire: The Roots and Progress of World Communism (1951). Over two dozen book dealt with Christian saints and heroes. The long list included Albert the Great, Charles Borromeo, John Baptist
138
Stephen A. Werner
de La Salle, Boniface, Bridget of Sweden, Gemma Galgani, Joan of Arc, Margaret Mary, Philip Neri, Pius V, Teresa of Avila, Thérèse of Lisieux. Hugh De Blacam contributed Saint Patrick, Apostle of Ireland (1941) and The Saints of Ireland: The Life-Stories of SS. Brigid and Columcille (1942). Theodore Maynard added three works: Too Small a World: The Life of Francesca Cabrini (1945); Mystic in Motley: The Life of St. Philip Neri (1946); and A Fire Was Lighted: The Life of Rose Hawthorne (1948). These books were not merely pious saint stories as is seen in a Saturday Review of Literature review of Margaret Routledge Yeo’s, The Greatest of the Borgias, (1936). What qualifies the historical value of this well-written biography is that it is written from the Catholic point of view, in a science and culture series edited by Joseph Husslein, S.J. That need not, however, interfere with one’s pleasure in Mrs. Yeo’s vivid descriptions, her excellent painting in of background, and her knowledge of the Italian Renaissance in all its blood and mysticism. . . . It is the book of deft research student and of an author who can write with vividness and charm.16
Within the category of saints and heroes came several works on Jesuit figures: Robert North, The General Who Rebuilt the Jesuits (1944); a translation of Paul Dudon, St. Ignatius of Loyola (1949); Francis J. Corley and Robert J. Williams, Wings of Eagles: The Jesuit Saints and Blessed (1941); and Robert Harvey, Ignatius Loyola: A General in the Church Militant (1936). Other works on famous Jesuits described Peter Claver, John Francis Regis and Father Tim Dempsey, famous for his work among the poor in St. Louis. The single largest category was religious living or devotional. This included a translation of Chanoine Casimir Barthas, Our Lady of Light (1947); Hugh Blunt, Life With the Holy Ghost: Thoughts on the Gifts of the Holy Spirit (1945); The Quality of Mercy: Thoughts on the Works of Mercy (1945); The Heart Aflame: Thoughts on Devotion to the Sacred Heart (1947); translations of Alexandre Brou’s Ignatian Methods of Prayer (1949) and The Ignatian Way to God (1952); and a translation of Leonard Lessius, My God and My All: Prayerful Remembrances of the Divine Attributes (1948). Several works dealt with the Holy Family: Francis Filas, The Family for Families: Reflections on the Life of Jesus, Mary, and Joseph (1947); The Man Nearest to Christ: Nature and Historic Development of the Devotion to St. Joseph (1944); and Husslein’s The Golden Years (1945).
6 ~ Husslein’s Other Work
139
Six books covered Latin America: Edwin Ryan, The Church in the South American Republics (1932); James Magner, Men of Mexico (1942); John White, Our Good Neighbor Hurdle (1943); Joseph Privitera, The Latin American Front (1945); Peter Dunne, A Padre Views South America (1945); John Bannon and Peter Dunne, Latin America, an Historical Survey (1947). Four books covered history: a translation of Joaquin Arraras, Francisco Franco, the Times and the Man (1938-39); Daniel Sargent, Christopher Columbus (1941); Richard Pattee, This is Spain (1951); and Mariadas Ruthnaswamy, India From the Dawn: New Aspects of an Old Story (1949). The Series included twelve books on Philosophy with Vernon Bourke’s, Augustine’s Quest of Wisdom: Life and Philosophy of the Bishop of Hippo (1945) the most important. The width of Dr. Bourke’s Augustinian scholarship is seen in this, that he takes up the Saint’s thought on several topics in the passages where the primary discussions are found, not in those where they are conveniently gathered together. This gives a fresh vividness and clarity to many matters which the casual reader of a few of the writings has come across. The merit of the book is in part that of good selection, both of incidents for biographical treatment and of passages for analysis. The analyses are clear and never too heavily loaded. It is by means of the them chiefly that the author opens St. Augustine’s mind to the reader.17
Other works included Charles Bruehl, This Way Happiness. Ethics: The Science of the Good Life (1941); Louis Mercier, American Humanism and the New Age (1948); Thomas Neill, Makers of the Modern Mind (1949); four books by Henri Renard: The Philosophy of Being (1943); The Philosophy of God (1951); The Philosophy of Man (1948); and The Philosophy of Morality (1953) prefaced by Jacques Maritain; and Fulton Sheen, Philosophy of Science (1934). The Dublin Review described André Bremond’s, Religions of Unbelief (1939) as “profoundly interesting, and very easy to read. [Bremond] deserves congratulations on the result.”18 Twelve books on psychology and psychiatry included Hubert Gruender, Experimental Psychology (1932); Francis Harmon, Principles of Psychology (1938, 1951, 1953) and Understanding Personality (1948); William Kelly, Educational Psychology (1933, 1945) and Introductory Child Psychology, (1938); Charles McCarthy, Training
140
Stephen A. Werner
the Adolescent (1934) and Safeguarding Mental Health (1937); John Cavanagh and James McGoldrick, Fundamental Psychiatry (1953). Nine books dealt with sociology and social work. Works of note included Charles McKenny, Moral Problems in Social Work (1951) and two works by Clement Mihanovich, Current Social Problems (1950) and Principles of Juvenile Delinquency (1950). Eva Ross provided four works in the early period of “A University in Print”: A Survey of Sociology (1932); Rudiments of Sociology (1934); and Fundamental Sociology (1939). A work from the later period is Nicholas Timasheff and Paul C. Facey, Sociology: An Introduction to Sociological Analysis (1949). These books on sociology were regularly reviewed by such journals as American Journal of Sociology, Sociological Analysis, Sociology and Social Research, and Social Forces. A review of James F. Walsh, Facing Your Social Situation (1946) in Sociology and Social Research states: It is very well written and is successful in making the psychologic thought of real value to the student. There is ample evidence that the author has a scholarly grasp of the field. . . . The injection of Catholic theology into the subject matter has been accomplished with considerable tact and unobstrusiveness, although in several instances the author chides some social psychologists for their ignorance on certain religious and church matters. . . . The book is engagingly written too, . . . .19
Eight works dealt with living a devout Christian life: M. D’Arcy, Pain and the Providence of God (1935); Marguerite Duportal, A Key to Happiness: The Art of Suffering (1944); and five works by Bakewell Morrison: Marriage (1934); Revelation and the Modern Mind: Teachings from the Life of Christ (1936); Character Formation in College (1938); In Touch With God: Prayer, Mass, and the Sacraments (1943); Personality and Successful Living (1945); God Is Its Founder: a Textbook on Preparation for Catholic Marriage Intended for College Classes (1946). Husslein included four religious novels: Marie Buehrle, Out of Many Waters (1947); Alice Curtayne, “House of Cards” (1939); Arthur McGratty, Face to the Sun (1942); Helene Margaret Who Walk in Pride (1945). In the miscellaneous category are the influential work of the Rural Parish Worker Movement: Luigi Ligutti and John Rawe, Rural Roads to Security: America’s Third Struggle for Freedom (1943); Albert Muntsch, Cultural Anthropology (1934-36); Herbert Thurston, The
6 ~ Husslein’s Other Work
141
Church and Spiritualism (1933). Helen Eden’s, Whistles of Silver and Other Stories (1933) a collection of medieval stories was reviewed by the New York Times: Mrs. Eden has the pen of a poet, the finish of a scholar, and she is acquainted with the magic of words. . . . A sparkling contribution to literature alike of priest and layman.20
According to The Saturday Review of Literature: For those whose taste demands something delicate and lots of it, “Whistles of Silver” will provide a feast. A feast, too, served up in admirable style, with side-dishes elegant and appetizing.21
Also in the miscellaneous group would be two works on religion and culture: John Bannon, Epitome of Western Civilization (1942) and Ross Hoffman, Tradition and Progress, and Other Historical Essays in Culture, Religion, and Politics (1938). Husslein began this work at the age of 58 and continued it during his 60s and 70s. Five of the books in “A University in Print” were written by Husslein: The Christian Social Manifesto (1931), The Spirit World About Us (1934), Heroines of Christ (1940), Social Wellsprings (1940-42), and The Golden Years (1945). Unfortunately Husslein did not groom a successor, although the Jesuit historian William Barnaby Faherty was recommended for the task. “A University in Print” died with Husslein.
Evaluation of “A University in Print” Hundreds of reviews were made of Husslein’s books. Over 18 books were reviewed by the New York Times, several were reviewed in The [London] Times London Literary Supplement and The Dublin Review. Series books were reviewed in Time, The New Yorker, and frequently in academic journals in history, economics, sociology, philosophy, and psychology. Of course the books were reviewed extensively by Catholic journals and magazines such as Commonweal, Catholic Historical Review, America. The majority of Husslein’s books were given serious consideration when they were published. Five or more reviews for a book was not uncommon. Few books were not reviewed at all. According to William Barnaby Faherty, the best selling book in “A University in Print” was The New Testament by James Kleist and
142
Stephen A. Werner
Joseph Lilly. The most influential books were Christian Life and Worship by Gerald Ellard and Husslein’s The Christian Social Manifesto. Theodore Maynard’s Queen Elizabeth and Henry the Eighth received high praise in the secular press (Faherty, Dream by the River 299) William Holub, President of the Catholic Press Association gave this evaluation of Husslein’s work: The average Catholic’s interpretation of the purpose of a university is essentially different from that which was prevalent several decades ago; the contribution of Catholic letters to the treasury of the world’s great literature is being recognized today; social service is being stressed in the United States as a study important to cultural and economic progress. These accomplishments are traceable, in various degrees to the activities of Father Husslein. (Faherty, Dream by the River 300)
This assessment by Holub may be a bit exaggerated. George Higgins suggested “none of his books will be required reading a generation hence, but all of them are characterized by solid scholarship” (Higgins 53). That only a few of these books would be read sixty years later is not surprising. That is the lot of the vast majority of all books. Husslein shared the fate of most publishers, some of his books did well, some didn’t, and a few books deserved more recognition than they received. As one looks at the individual books in “A University in Print,” a few seem dated or overly enthusiastic in their Catholicism, but only a few. Even today, none of the books published seem embarrassing or silly. The thing that makes some of these books, especially the devotional works, seem dated is that they were written for their time. Their very timeliness in the 1930s or 1940s guarantees their lack of appeal sixty or more years later. As for the high quality books, most were simply superseded in later generations with equal, better, or more up-to-date books. Husslein described in effort of over twenty years with “A University in Print”: This was my contribution to the Catholic Literary Revival throughout the world. It consists of a series of original volumes, written at my request or voluntarily submitted by competent literary men or authorities in their various fields, thus carrying on the Catholic tradition in letters and in the various scientific and cultural areas.
6 ~ Husslein’s Other Work
143
Its object is to present to the world this tradition in its best and highest modern interpretation. (Romig 137)
At the same time Husslein edited his “A University in Print” he established the School of Social Service at Saint Louis University.
The School of Social Service at Saint Louis University The Saint Louis University 1935 yearbook, Archive, described Catholic social work: Out of the difficulties and turmoil of the time, out of its problems and perplexities, out of its material wants and needs, as out of the frothing wastes of the sea, a new profession has arisen, vaguely at first, but taking shape, and constantly growing into more perfect proportion. Steadily it has sought, during recent years, to fit itself for the gigantic tasks the times require of it. Calmly it has watched the trends of the world’s changing order, and, measuring the needs of the day, is prepared to meet them. Rapidly too, it has been gaining strength, prestige and influence. (80-81)22
Husslein wanted to promote Catholic answers to social problems and to train social workers to carry out these answers. He helped establish the School of Philanthropy and Social Service at Fordham. In 1930 he established the School of Social Service at Saint Louis University as part of a larger movement to meet the growing demand, created by the devastation of the Great Depression, for trained social workers. In the 1890s and early 1900s, many training programs were established.23 Initially independent, most became affiliated with universities. By 1930 over forty schools existed. Many Catholic Universities established programs. Catholic social service proved the most successful area of Catholic social effort after World War I (Abell, American 228). In the early years the role of the social worker had to be defined and the professional status of the social worker had to be established. Initially no clear distinction existed between social science, social work, and sociology (Tome 50). Even a debate on the legitimacy of paid social work took place. Lastly, educational issues, such as the relationship of practical training to academic training, had to be resolved.
144
Stephen A. Werner
In Catholic circles, many priests and the Catholic press often resisted paid social workers who were even called “cold blooded mercenaries” for wanting pay for helping others. Husslein responded: There are the cases, lastly, where salaried social workers are employed to perform duties that call for such undivided attention as can only be given by those who make this labor their life-work, yet for good reasons cannot serve without some remuneration. These workers are worthy of their hire. The general purpose in calling for their help is not to relieve Catholics from the task of personally interesting themselves in the poor and the afflicted, but rather to make this personal attention more fruitful and to prevent all interruptions in the systematic service of those urgently in need of assistance. (WWW 147-48)
For Catholics the relation of professional social work to charity work proved problematic. Some thought Catholic agencies should be strictly charitable and religious, others stressed professional methods. Catholic schools of social work helped resolve these tensions. Husslein described Catholic social science: The Church was not instituted to teach social science, but she was instituted to save souls, and study of social science from a Catholic point of view is one of the most necessary means to compass this end, in our day. By this study souls will be saved from the contagious and all-pervasive influences of modern radicalism, which ultimately means godlessness. Catholic schools of social science are a necessity of our times. (CW 190)
Husslein founded the School of Social Service at Saint Louis University in 1930, incorporating the existing department of sociology.24 Thirty-six students registered in the first year. From 1930 to 1933 Husslein called his program the “School of Sociology” and the “School of Sociology and Science.” Two separate curricula were offered: sociology, an academic subject with practical applications; and social work, a purely technical field. In the beginning the school consisted of the Dean and part-time faculty. In 1933, Miss Weltha M. Kelley, A.M., Ph.D., became the first full-time faculty member. In 1933 the school was admitted to membership in the American Association of Schools of Social Work and became the “Saint Louis University School of Social Service.” By 1934 the school offered a Bachelor’s Degree in Social Work and a two year graduate program in both Family Case Work and Medical Social Work.
6 ~ Husslein’s Other Work
145
In 1935 the American Association of Schools of Social Work decided that all accredited schools should only offer graduate programs. Thus, Saint Louis University gave its last Bachelor’s degrees in Social Work to nine graduates in June, 1936. The School of Social Service became part of the graduate school and offered only the degree of Masters of Science in Social Work. The first year of the master’s degree involved a general education, the second consisted in specialized education in family casework, child welfare, medical social work, psychiatric social work, or social welfare administration. The program included field work—two full days each week supervised by an agency field guide and the director of family case work at the school. Sociology remained part of the School of Social Service until 1936 when sociology became a regular part of the Arts division. The School of Social Service became the first department at Saint Louis University to accept African-American students in 1939. The school offered late afternoon and evening classes not available in the Arts, Education, or the Graduate schools. The school drew students from all over the country. Husslein promoted the field of social work for men and women. In the early years the program was about half male, although some of these men were athletes seeking a less demanding academic program. In 1940, as he became more involved with his “A University in Print,” Husslein stepped down as director of the School of Social Service. Aloysius Scheller, S.J., took over the position. Social work and sociology in these early programs, particularly at Catholic universities, often resembled social ethics more than empirical social sciences. As Husslein stated: True Christian sociology is neither more nor less than the science of Christian justice and charity applied to the complex social problems of our modern civilization. It is based upon the principles of Catholic doctrine and the Gospel of Christ, and in practice must be supernaturalized in every action by the love of God. Surely a worthy theme for the Catholic teacher! There is a famous equation which briefly summarizes all that has been said thus far. It is put in the following form: “Social” = “Moral”; “Moral” = “Religious”; therefore “Social” = “Religious”. No course in Algebra or logic is required to bring home the force of this argument. (“Social Duties of the Teacher” 285-86)25
146
Stephen A. Werner
Melvin Williams described this as the Catholic orthodox position in social thought: that economic activity must be based on a moral foundation. Williams named Husslein and Ryan as two leading American advocates of this position (244). However, the new development in Catholic social thought in Husslein’s time was the combination of principles based on Christian philosophy with observational research. William J.Kerby—”the father of American Catholic sociology,” Husslein, and their contemporaries developed this approach (Melvin Williams 61, 389; Murray 792). Husslein viewed secular social science as pagan. He suggested that Catholics take from it what they could, just as Christians built churches with stones from pagan temples. Husslein feared social science not grounded in ethical and religious principles. In particular he feared that non-Catholic social science promoted contraception, and that protestant organizations of social work, such as the YMCA, were proselytizing (CW 187-90). Husslein eventually differentiated sociology from social work: Sociology is distinguished from social work in that it really is an academic and not a professional study. Much as it can aid in practical efforts, and surely as it must ultimately lead to practical results, it is not in itself an applied science. It is concerned with great facts, institutions and problems related to man’s social life, as viewed in their social aspect. It ranges through history and goes back to man’s earliest beginnings with this objective in view. It studies the social issues of the day in all their many forms, and lays down—if rightly taught—the principles by which they should be solved. It analyzes and dissects the world’s social theories and builds up its ideal system. In the great Encyclicals of Leo XIII and Pius XI it points out the Church’s own solution for the problems that today perplex the world and proposes a reconstruction of the social order along Christian lines. (Archive: 1935 80-81)
Husslein saw Catholic social work as superior due to its purity of motive—being done for the love of God. The Catholic social worker pursued his or her own spiritual perfection and the salvation or greater perfection of the souls of others. This view contrasted with the socialist view that hope for an afterlife prevented people from solving this world problems. Husslein upheld the afterlife as the only true motivation for social reform (CW 184-185).26 Husslein’s emphasis on morality represented an important shift from previous social thought. In the late 1800s and early 1900s social
6 ~ Husslein’s Other Work
147
thinkers commonly stressed the immorality of the poor as the source of social problems. With the later change to a scientific analysis of social conditions, the emphasis on morality was downplayed. Husslein, however maintained the emphasis on morality, but attacked the immorality of social conditions and structures rather the morality of the poor. Husslein described social work as the science of charity, tracing poverty to its root causes in order to provide remedies. Charity worked for long-term solutions since temporary relief was sometimes harmful. There would always be need for the work of charity, for as Jesus said, “the poor will always be with you.”27 In establishing the School of Social Service Husslein sought a forum to disseminate and develop Catholic social teaching. At the same he edited his “A University in Print.” In addition, he continued his devotional writing.
Devotional Writings There is, indeed, no reason why spiritual literature ever should be dull. No prescription exists to that effect. Spirituality itself is the greatest of all possible adventures. (Husslein, Heroines of Christ vii)
Husslein’s devotional writing flowed from the fundamental premise of Leo XIII. For if the Church had the answers to social problems, it was necessary to promote the Church, its teaching, and its devotional life. “Social renovation is ineffective unless based on a renewal of the individual” (SW 1:216). Husslein’s devotional writing formed part of a larger movement in America. But on the whole the great religious advances within the Church were in the devotional rather than the theological spheres; the twenties saw a great surge in more frequent communions, increased devotions to the Eucharist, a growth of devotions to the Sacred Heart, the Blessed Virgin and St. Joseph, and an upsurge of missionary fervor and interest in devotional literature. (Callahan 83)
Husslein wrote ten books, over fifty articles, and numerous pamphlets on religious devotion. Husslein’s writings, well-crafted examples American Catholic devotional literature, were well-received in their time. Many of his writings responded to developments in the Church, such as Pius X’s decree on frequent communion and Pius
148
Stephen A. Werner
XI’s decree on the feast of Christ the King. After 1931, the bulk of Husslein’s writings was devotional.
Husslein’s Devotional Books Husslein’s first devotional book, The Little Flower and the Blessed Sacrament, published by Benziger Brothers in 1925, commemorated the XXVII International Eucharistic Congress in Chicago in 1926. The pocket-size book, distributed at the Congress, detailed the writings of Thérèse of Lisieux on the Eucharist. Thérèse had been recently canonized, on 17 May 1925, by Pius XI. For his second devotional work Husslein wrote a silent movie script on the Eucharist entitled, The Hidden God; the Eucharist in Scripture, History and the Church’s Teaching Throughout the Ages; Synopsis of the Screen Portrayal, published by the National Film Producers in New York to be produced for the National Catholic Welfare Conference. Although endorsed by three bishops, no evidence exists that the movie was produced. This script traced the development of the Eucharist in scripture and history, starting with a scene of Melchezidek offering bread and wine, then fading to the Israelites in the desert receiving manna. Husslein followed the Eucharist through the New Testament, the catacombs, to the Jesuit martyrs in America, to a Mass at Mundelein Seminary near Chicago, Illinois. The Reign of Christ, published by P. J. Kenedy & Sons in 1928, explored the Kingship of Christ as presented in three papal documents: Annum sacrum (1899) of Leo XIII, on the universal sovereignty of Christ; Quas primas (1925) of Pius XI, establishing the feast of Christ the King; and Miserentissimus redemptor (1928) of Pius XI, on the reparation due the Sacred Heart. Husslein traced the Kingship of Christ from its Old Testament roots, through the New Testament, to contemporary devotions. Husslein made extensive use of biblical texts. He also cited such Christian writers as Ignatius of Antioch, Teresa of Avila, Catherine of Siena, and John Henry Newman. In The Reign of Christ and related writings Husslein promoted the concept of Christ the King as an alternative to the Christian socialist emphasis on the kingdom of God. For Husslein, Christ as King reigned through the visible Church. Thus, the Christian answer to world problems lay, not in an unrealized future kingdom, but in the moral teaching of the Church. In addition, Husslein’s emphasis on the reigning kingship of Christ followed “A Meditation on Two Standards” from the Spiritual Exercises of St. Ignatius.
6 ~ Husslein’s Other Work
149
Husslein’s described his next devotional book, The Mass of the Apostles; the Eucharist: Its Nature, Earliest History and Present Application, published by P. J. Kenedy & Sons in 1929: No pains have been spared to secure historic accuracy. The Scriptures of the New Testament, the most primitive Christian documents and patristic writings, ancient inscriptions and monuments, as well as the earliest catacomb paintings, were studied exhaustively in their bearing upon this subject, and the conclusions set down in a way that is hoped will prove both popular and convincing. Citations are almost exclusively from original sources. (vii)
The book employed extensive citations from the Old Testament and the New Testament. In addition, Husslein cited Cyprian and Irenaeus, as well as the Didache, Midrash, and Apostolic Constitutions. Husslein also wrote a dozen articles on the Eucharist. Bruce Publishing Company published The Spirit World About Us in 1934 as part of the Religion and Culture Series. Making extensive use of scripture, this book defended the existence of the spirit world of angels and archangels which had been denied by many rationalist thinkers.28 In 1939 Bruce Publishing released Heroines of Christ which Husslein edited as part of the Science and Culture Series. Each chapter, written by a Jesuit in Husslein’s community, described a different woman saint such as Joan of Arc and Catherine of Siena. Many of these women had been recently beatified or canonized. Husslein promoted these new Catholic heroines as models for women as an alternative to radical feminism and socialism. No one has been so consistently devoted to the unfolding of woman’s powers and the promotion of her temporal and spiritual welfare as the Catholic Church. We need but point to the brilliant galaxy of learned women who flourished in the cloisters of the Middle Ages or to the marvelous activities displayed by such great Catholic heroines as St. Catherine of Sienna, Blessed Joan of Arc or St. Teresa to whom even the non-Catholic world turns for inspiration and encouragement. (WP 241)
Also as part of the Science and Culture Series Bruce published The Golden Years: A Story of the Holy Family by a Wife, Mother, and Apostle of Christian Charity and Joseph Husslein, in 1945. The book fit Husslein’s social thought by upholding the Holy Family as a model
150
Stephen A. Werner
for workers and employers of a family living simply and religiously. For Leo XIII had stated: Let us take our stand in front of that earthly and divine home of holiness, the house of Nazareth. How much we have to learn from the daily life which was led within its walls! What an all-perfect model of domestic society! Here we behold simplicity and purity of conduct, perfect agreement and unbroken harmony, mutual respect and love—not of the false and fleeting kind—but that which finds both its life and its charm in devotedness of service. Here is the patient industry which provides what is required for food and raiment; which does so in the sweat of the brow (Gen. iii, 19), which is contented with little, and which seeks rather to diminish the number of its wants than to multiply the sources of its wealth. (Laetitiae sanctae 3)
This book was originally a journal written by a woman from a prominent American literary family to which Husslein added several chapters. Husslein never met the woman and did not identify her. This book sentimentalized the life of the Holy Family going about their daily chores enraptured in spiritual contemplation. Bruce published Husslein’s final devotional work, Channels of Devotion, in 1953 after his death. It summarized the major themes of Husslein’s devotional writing.
Husslein’s Devotional Themes Husslein wrote extensively on Thérèse of Lisieux (1873-1897) who was born just six months before him. Thérèse received her habit in 1890, Husslein entered the Jesuits in 1891. Her autobiography, Story of a Soul, published during Husslein’s years of education, had a great impact on him. Husslein devoted a chapter of Channels of Devotion and numerous articles Thérèse. Husslein wrote articles in response to Pius X’s writings: Sacra tridentina synodus (1905) on frequent communion, and Quam singulari (1910) on early communion. Husslein promoted early and frequent communion as important for the moral development he saw as the only solution to social problems. The arm of God is not shortened and the wonders of the Eucharist in the Church of the early centuries shall repeat themselves to-day. The same power that conquered the paganism of old can triumph over the godlessness of the modern world. What was the source of
6 ~ Husslein’s Other Work
151
strength to the early Christian in days like our own if not the Holy Eucharist, . . . Thus to the rationalism and materialism about us we shall oppose the purely spiritual and invisible armor of the Eucharistic God. To the Socialistic destruction of authority and promotion of class-hatred we shall present the invincible charity of Christ, the Judge and Saviour of the World. (CSP 202-203)
Husslein even proposed Frequent Communion Guilds (“Frequent Communion Guild”). He quoted statistics on the increase in communion of guild members. Husslein described the Divine Remedy for the problem of socialism: “The weapons which first and foremost we must therefore have in readiness are those of the spirit, and the mightiest among these is the Holy Eucharist” (CSP 202). Husslein also wrote on the Holy Name Association. Husslein wrote on the Chalice of Antioch discovered in 1910. The chalice consisted of a simple inner cup inside an elaborate outer cup. Many speculated that the inner cup was the holy grail. In his articles Husslein remained skeptical about claims for the chalice, but he traced the history of the grail legend and explained the eucharistic symbols on the outer cup. Husslein was permitted a special viewing of the chalice in New York (“Holy Grail in New York?”). Husslein, untypical for his time, made extensive use of scripture in his writings. In addition to Bible and Labor, Husslein wrote many articles trying to build a social ethics on biblical, especially Old Testament principles. Many of his devotional books made extensive arguments based on Old Testament texts: The Hidden God, The Reign of Christ, The Mass of the Apostles, The Spirit World Around Us. Husslein undertook three projects in light of the fundamental premise of Leo XIII. In his “A University in Print” Husslein sought to provide scholarly but readable Catholic literature. He established the School of Social Service to provide for the teaching and development of Catholic social thought. In his devotional work Husslein promoted religious renewal as the foundation for all positive social change.
152
Stephen A. Werner
Notes 1
Descriptions of Husslein’s “A University in Print” can be found in Husslein, “A University in Print,” The Jesuit Bulletin 15; “A University in Print,” The Jesuit Bulletin 26; Holubowicz; Faherty, Better the Dream 298-300; Faherty, Dream by the River 173. 2 Sparr also described the important role the Jesuits played in this revival, although he made no mention of Husslein’s “A University in Print.” Prior to this study little was known about Husslein. 3 See WP 169-70; CSP 201, 206. Husslein also stated, “As Catholics we have relied too exclusively on the immediate influence exercised within the walls of our churches and the priestly ministrations in the home. The time has come when natural prudence, whose demands can never be safely disregarded, calls for a wider apostolate. The facts we have quoted show the truth of Bishop Ketteler’s famous saying, that were St. Paul living to-day he would be conducting a paper” (“Financing Socialist Literature” 6). 4 Husslein to the Father General [Wlodomir Ledochowski, S.J., Rome], February, 1938, p. 3, Jesuit Archives. See WP 4. 5 Husslein labored throughout his life to improve the intellectual standing of Catholics, yet McDonough stated, “At times Husslein tended toward the rhapsodic, and he lapsed into a florid anti-intellectualism” (54). McDonough then quoted Husslein: “More can be accomplished by the pure preaching of the Gospel than by all the wisdom of our social experts. . . . A Saint Francis of Assisi is of more avail for the true regeneration of mankind than a host of sociologists, and a Saint Teresa of Carmel than a hundred social institutes.” McDonough quoted Husslein out of context ignoring the rest of the passage where Husslein stated, regarding social experts: “The Church does not repudiate their labors, she encourages her children to aid in this work to the utmost of their power wherever it is conducted on righteous and charitable principles.” Husslein followed the reference to sociologists and social institutions with, “It is not to discredit social work, but to motive it aright, that these lines have been written” (WP 152-53). Husslein was aware that his statements could be easily misunderstood. Husslein played a significant role in the 1930s and 1940s promoting Catholic social work, sociology, and scholarship. 6 Husslein to the Father General [Wlodomir Ledochowski, S.J., Rome], February, 1938, p. 1, Jesuit Archives. See Tome 91. 7 Undated letter draft in Husslein correspondence files (1946) in Saint Louis University Archives. 8 Joseph Husslein, preface to The Question and the Answer, by Hilaire Belloc (Milwaukee, Wis.: Bruce, 1932), ix-x. 9 Saint Louis University press release, 8 August 1941, Jesuit Archives. 10 Betty Drury, review of From Dante to Jeanne d’Arc: Adventures in Medieval Life and Letters, by Katherine Brégy, The New York Times Book Review, 7 January 1934, p. 19. 11 Virgil Michel, review of Social Message of the New Testament, by Henry Schumacher, Commonweal 26 (21 May 1937): 108. 12 Review of The Catholic Eastern Churches and The Dissident Eastern Churches, by Donald Attwater, The Dublin Review 203 (December 1939): 386.
6 ~ Husslein’s Other Work 13
153
Charles F. Ronayne, review of Luther and His Work, by Joseph Clayton, The New York Times Book Review, 8 September 1947, p. 9. 14 Katherine Woods, “Hilaire Belloc on the ‘True Crusade’, review of The Crusades: The World’s Debate, by Hilaire Belloc, The New York Times Book Review, 13 June 1937, p. 9. 15 Review of The Oxford Movement, 1833-1933, by Shane Leslie, America 50 (30 December 1933): 306. 16 Review of The Greatest of the Borgias, by Margaret Routledge Yeo, The Saturday Review of Literature 14 (18 July 1936): 21. 17 "The Adam of Christendom,” review of Augustine’s Quest of Wisdom: Life and Philosophy of the Bishop of Hippo by Vernon Bourke, The [London] Times Literary Supplement, 27 October 1945, p. 415. 18 Review of Religions of Unbelief, by André Bremond, The Dublin Review 206 (June 1940): 384. 19 Melvin J. Vincent, review of Facing Your Social Situation, by James F. Walsh, Sociology and Social Research 31 (September-October 1946): 71. 20 Laura Benet, “Helen Parry Eden’s Stories and Poems” review of Whistles of Silver and Other Stories, by Helen Eden, The New York Times Book Review, 6 August 1933, p. 8. 21 Aline Kilmer, “Delicate Erudition,” review of Whistles of Silver and Other Stories, by Helen Eden, The Saturday Review of Literature 10 (9 December 1933): 334. 22 This unsigned article appears to be in Husslein’s writing style. 23 Several works describe this development: Cohen, Social Work in the American Tradition ; Bruno, Trends in Social Work, 1874-1956: A History Based on the Proceedings of Conference of Social Work; Pumphrey and Pumphrey, The Heritage of American Social Work: Readings in Its Philosophical and Institutional Development. 24 The founding of the School of Social Service was described in Faherty, Better the Dream 318-21. Articles in the St. Louis University Yearbook, The Archive from 1930 to 1940 described the early years of the program. See also Boylan, Social Welfare in the Catholic Church: Organization and Planning Through Diocesan Bureaus 203-204. 25 Husslein described social work: “The greatest social worker of all times was Christ Himself. He went about doing good, not only spiritual but temporal good as well, curing the infirmities of the body and giving strength to the palsied limbs. Yet He had come to save the souls of men. The cry in our day is for preventive social work, which consists in not merely healing the evils that follow from human ignorance, indifference or injustice, but in removing the causes of them. Here, too, Christ is our Leader. He has laid down a code of morality for rich and poor which has given the world the only final means of removing temporal as well as spiritual ills, in as far as may be in accordance with God’s holy will. This code is the unfailing guide of the Catholic social worker” (CW 185). 26 Husslein’s emphasis on working towards one’s salvation followed the Spiritual Exercises of St. Ignatius. See, for example, sections 23, 152, 177, in Puhl, 12, 64, 74. 27 According to Husslein, this disproved Marxist predictions of a future ideal society (WWW 142-146). Husslein argued that the Church provided an element of efficiency in providing charity. See SW 1:185.
154 28
Stephen A. Werner
Leo XIII used the existence of a heavenly hierarchy as proof of the hierarchical ordering of society (Quod apostolici muneris 6). See WWW 105. Doherty cited Cardinal Gibbons’ use of this hierarchical argument (58).
Conclusion
155
Conclusion Joseph Casper Husslein, S.J., based his life’s work on the fundamental premise of Leo XIII that the Roman Catholic Church had the answers to social problems. He found this premise and the principles for solving social problems in Leo XIII’s Rerum novarum (1891): the single most important influence on Husslein. In applying Leo XIII’s thought Husslein often anticipated Pius XI’s Quadragesimo anno (1931). Several American experiences also influenced Husslein. Immigration, industrialization, and socialism acted as catalysts for Husslein’s social thought. The controversies of the George/McGlynn affair, the Knights of Labor, and Americanism led Husslein to develop a social teaching based largely on papal thought. World War I, the decline of nativism, and the American bishops’ pastoral, “Social Reconstruction,” led to an active period for American Catholic social thought. Husslein’s work must be understood as part of the American Catholic Social Movement of the early 1900s. Husslein was one of several pioneers who sought to develop Catholic social teachings: John A. Ryan, Frederick P. Kenkel, William J. Kerby, William J. Engelen, S.J., Peter E. Dietz, and the Jesuit writers at America. To prove the premise of Leo XIII, Husslein provided an explanation of history in answer to criticism that the Catholic Church had historically neglected the poor and workers. Starting with the Old Testament, Husslein surveyed history to show the Church as a protector of workers. He argued that true religion led to just treatment of workers while paganism did not. From the early Christian centuries to the Middle Ages the Church worked to abolish slavery, to humanize serfdom, and to protect labor. The high point of the Church’s effort was the medieval guilds which were destroyed during the Reformation. The protestant rejection of the Church as the source of moral teachings led to the disastrous consequences of the Industrial Revolution under laissez faire capitalism. In making his argument, Husslein shaped his views of history around his polemical position. Husslein used the principles of Rerum novarum to build his social teaching which consisted of two parts: the major themes of Rerum novarum, and minor themes found in his “A Catholic Social Platform.” In the first, Husslein rejected socialism, Christian socialism, and liberal (laissez faire) capitalism as inadequate to solve social problems. According to Husslein, both socialism and liberal capital-
156
Stephen A. Werner
ism were based on irreligion and materialism. He saw Christian socialism as a contradiction. As an alternative, Husslein proposed Democratic Industry which combined an application of medieval guild principles with Leo XIII’s call for a wider distribution of property. Husslein felt that, although guilds could not be restored, the principles that guided them could be applied to modern industrial situations. Husslein described five types of cooperatives as achieving, in various degrees, the goal of Democratic Industry: profit sharing, cooperative banks, cooperative stores, copartnership, and co-production. In his “A Catholic Social Platform” Husslein addressed a broad range of issues: the role of the state, labor unions, strikes, working women, and farm labor. In sixty principles Husslein showed how papal social teaching applied to the American setting. For Husslein this provided further proof of the fundamental premise. Husslein’s mission of promoting and developing Catholic social teaching had two dimensions: first, to promote Catholic social teaching to the world at large; second, to promote Catholic social teaching among Roman Catholics. Husslein was far more effective in the latter. Rather than converting the world to Catholic social teaching, he converted American Catholics. Throughout his life, Husslein worked to promote and disseminate Catholic teaching, especially Catholic social teaching. He published readable English translations of papal social documents and developed an imaginative literary style to popularize Catholic teaching. Husslein made a significant contribution to American Catholicism. He wrote ten books and hundreds of articles on social issues, producing the largest corpus of Catholic social writings of his day. Several of his books, especially Bible and Labor and Christian Social Manifesto, are still relevant today. He worked out the medieval guild model in detail and applied it to the cooperative movement. In Bible and Labor he attempted to develop a biblically based social ethics. In his social writing, culminating in The Christian Social Manifesto, Husslein followed the Old Testament prophets in using metaphor, image, and language to attack social injustice and call for a return to authentic religion. Thus Husslein, standing as an American Amos, can be fittingly called the Prophet of The Christian Social Manifesto. For several reasons this contribution of Husslein has been largely forgotten. First, the bulk of his social writing was done between 1909 and 1931. He wrote about specific social problems that became less crucial in later years. After 1931, he concentrated on writing devotional works, establishing the School of Social Service at Saint Louis
Conclusion
157
University, and starting his “A University in Print.” He moved away from social writing during the crucial years of the New Deal. Second, John A. Ryan, who was much more visible and who stayed involved in Catholic social teaching until his death in 1945, overshadowed Husslein. Fourth, Husslein’s Democratic Industry never became a significant movement. Fifth, Husslein’s style and method of calling for a return to Christian principles seemed naive in later years. Lastly, Husslein lived at the confluence of a number of unique factors coming both from the papacy and from the American experience. Husslein’s life and work only made sense at this time. In addition to writing on social issues Husslein undertook three projects. In his “A University in Print” he sought to provide a broad range of readable Catholic literature to the general public. Husslein wanted to promote American Catholic scholarship and literature, and also to promote religion as an essential element in resolving social issues. Husslein edited some 213 books in three series: Science and Culture Series, Science and Culture Texts, and Religion and Culture Series. With the establishment of the School of Social Service at Saint Louis University, Husslein sought an organization to promote and develop Catholic social science and to train professional social workers. Husslein founded the School in 1930 and directed it until 1940. In his devotional writings—eight books and numerous articles— Husslein sought to promote the Church, its teaching, and its devotional life. Husslein wrote about early and frequent communion, the biblical and historical roots of the Eucharist, the kingship of Christ, the spirit world, and women saints. All of Husslein’s work flowed from the premise of Leo XIII. Husslein labored throughout his life to disseminate Catholic teaching and to prove the viability of Leo XIII’s fundamental premise. In doing so, he brought the premise closer to being realized. In the latter years of his life did Husslein wonder how much the world had changed due to his efforts? Was there a little more justice in the world? Did Husslein even ponder such questions? For all his writings Husslein said very little about his inner thoughts and feelings. There is no way to know how he assessed his life’s work. But his vision of a better world kept him working at his typewriter until the day he died. Husslein had lived through the coming of age of American Catholics. He has seen great progress for workers. Despite notable gaps, workers saw numerous improvements: child labor laws, minimum wages laws, basic safety standards, effective unions, rising wages.
158
Stephen A. Werner
Fewer women were forced by economic necessity to work in factories. Husslein also saw great advances for American Catholics. Catholic social work had been firmly established, and Roman Catholics were better educated. Catholic social teaching, though not always followed, was at least acknowledged. Perhaps Husslein’s did not assess his work but rather trusted to his religious faith, that he had done what he was called to do. Results were not his to judge. And so each day he said mass—often at his favorite place, a small marble side altar dedicated to St. Thérèse of Lisieux in St. Francis Xavier Church of Saint Louis University—and then he went to work.
Appendix ~ “A University in Print”
159
Appendix “A University in Print” The following list of books in Husslein’s “A University in Print” is based on Dorothy H. Claybourne and C. S. Mihanovich, “The Science and Culture Series,” Social Justice Review 73 (November-December 1982): 179-82, and the collection of Husslein’s books in the Archives of Saint Louis University. As no complete list from Husslein’s time exists, there is some uncertainty as to which books he edited. Those books with series notation and/or a preface by Husslein present no problem. But some books did not have such indicators. The following list includes all such unidentified books found either on the Claybourne list or in the archive collection. Husslein considered these books also as part of his “A University in Print.” The following list contains 213 books. Most likely the following list is very accurate although it does not list all printings and editions of particular books. All books were published by the Bruce Publishing Company of Milwaukee, Wisconsin. The following abbreviations will be used in describing these books: Science and Culture Series—SCS Religion and Culture Series—RCS Science and Culture Series Texts—SCST Books of uncertain category—SCS? Books with series notation—SN Books without series notation—NSN Books with preface by Husslein—HP Books without preface by Husslein—NHP Alexander, Calvert, S.J. The Catholic Literary Revival: Three Phases in its Development from 1845 to the Present. SCS, 1935. (SN, HP). Allen, Victor T. This Earth of Ours. SCS, 1939. (SN, HP). Arraras, Joaquin. Francisco Franco, the Times and the Man. Enlarged Edition. Translated by J. Manuel Espinosa. SCS, 1938-39. (SN, HP). Attwater, Donald. The Catholic Eastern Churches. RCS, 1935. (SN, HP). ———. The Christian Churches of the East. 2 vols. RCS, 1935, 1937, 1947, 1948. (SN, NHP). ———. The Dissident Eastern Churches. RCS, 1937. (SN, HP). ———. The Golden Book of Eastern Saints. RCS, 1938. (SN, HP). ———. St. John Chrysostom: The Voice of God. SCS, 1939. (SN, HP).
160
Stephen A. Werner
Brannach, Frank. [Francis Edward Walsh]. Church Architecture: Building for a Living Faith. SCS, 1932. (SN, HP). Bannon, John Francis. Epitome of Western Civilization. SCST, 1942. (SN, NHP). ———. and Peter Masten Dunne. Latin America, an Historical Survey. SCST, 1947. (SN, NHP). Barrett, James Francis. This Creature, Man. SCS, 1936. (SN, HP). Barthas, Chanoine Casimir. Our Lady of Light. Translated/abridged from French of Chanoine C. Barthas and Pere G. da Fonseca, S.J. SCS, 1947. (NSN, HP). Belloc, Hilaire. The Crusades: The World’s Debate. SCS, 1937. (SN, NHP). ———. The Question and the Answer. SCS, 1932. (SN, HP). Blunt, Hugh F. The Heart Aflame: Thoughts on Devotion to the Sacred Heart. RCS, 1947. (SN, NHP). ———. Life With the Holy Ghost: Thoughts on the Gifts of the Holy Spirit. RCS, 1945. (SN, HP). ———. The Quality of Mercy: Thoughts on the Works of Mercy. RCS, 1945. (SN, HP). Bourke, Vernon J. Augustine’s Quest of Wisdom: Life and Philosophy of the Bishop of Hippo. SCS, 1945. (SN, HP). Brégy, Katherine Marie Cornelia. From Dante to Jeanne d’Arc: Adventures in Medieval Life and Letters. SCS, 1933. (SN, HP). Bremond, André. Religions of Unbelief. SCS, 1939. (SN, HP). Brou, Alexandre. Ignatian Methods of Prayer. Translated by William J. Young. RCS, 1949. (SN, HP). ———. The Ignatian Way to God. Translated by William J. Young. RCS, 1952. (NSN, NHP). Brown, Stephen James Meredith and Thomas McDermott. A Survey of Catholic Literature. SCS, 1945. (SN, HP). Bruehl, Charles Paul. This Way Happiness. Ethics: The Science of the Good Life. SCS, 1941. (SN, NHP). Buehrle, Marie Cecilia. Out of Many Waters. RCS, 1947. (NSN, NHP). Burke-Gaffney, M. W. Kepler and the Jesuits. SCS?, 1944. (NSN, NHP). Campbell, Francis Stuart. The Menace of the Herd. SCS, 1943. (SN, HP). Carver, George. Alms for Oblivion: Books, Men and Biography. SCS, 1946. (SN, HP). Cavanagh, John R. and James B. McGoldrick. Fundamental Psychiatry. SCS, 1953. (NSN, NHP). Cave, Roy C. and Herbert H. Coulson. A Source Book for Medieval Economic History. SCST, 1936. (SN, NHP) de la Chevasnerie, R. P. No Other Way: “Whosoever Shall not Receive the Kingdom of God as a Child, Shall not Enter into it”. SCS?, 1940. (NSN, HP). Clayton, Joseph. Luther and His Work. SCS, 1937. (SN, HP). ———. Pope Innocent III and His Times. SCS, 1941. (SN, HP). ———. The Protestant Reformation in Great Britain. SCS, 1934. (SN, HP). ———. Saint Anselm: A Critical Biography. SCS, 1933. (SN, HP). Colby, Elbridge. English Catholic Poets, Chaucer to Dryden. SCS, 1936. (SN, HP). Coloma, Luis. Boy. Edited by Myron B. Deily. SCS, 1934. (SN, HP). Connolly, Terence L. Francis Thompson: In His Paths: A Visit to Persons and Places Associated with the Poet. SCS, 1944. (SN, HP). Corley, Francis J. and Robert J. Williams. Wings of Eagles: The Jesuit Saints and Blessed. SCS, 1941. (SN, HP). Corrigan, Raymond. The Church and the Nineteenth Century. SCS, 1938. (SN, HP).
Appendix ~ “A University in Print”
161
Cory, Herbert Ellsworth. The Emancipation of a Freethinker. SCS, 1941. (SN, HP). Crowley, Francis M. The Catholic High-School Principal: His Training, Experience, and Responsibilities. SCS, 1935. (SN, HP). Curtayne, Alice. “House of Cards.” SCS, 1939. (SN, NHP). Daly, James J. Boscobel and Other Rimes. SCS, 1934. (SN, HP). ———. A Cheerful Ascetic and Other Essays. SCS, 1931. (SN, HP). ———. The Jesuits in Focus. SCS, 1940. (SN, NHP). ———. The Road to Peace. RCS, 1936. (SN, HP). D’Arcy, M. C. Pain and the Providence of God. SCS, 1935. (SN, HP). De Blacam, Hugh. Gentle Ireland: An Account of a Christian Culture in History and Modern Life. SCS, 1935. (SN, HP). ———. Saint Patrick, Apostle of Ireland. SCS, 1941. (SN, HP). ———. The Saints of Ireland: The Life-Stories of SS. Brigid and Columcille. SCS, 1942. (SN, HP). Delany, Selden Peabody. Rome From Within. RCS, 1935. (SN, HP). Dempsey, Martin. John Baptist de La Salle: His Life and His Institute. SCS, 1940. (SN, HP). Dinnis, Enid. Bess of Cobb’s Hall: The Holy Maid of Kent. SCS, 1940. (SN, NHP). Dowd, William Aloysius. The Gospel Guide: A Practical Introduction to the Gospels. SCS, 1932. (SN, HP). Dudon, Paul. St. Ignatius of Loyola. Translated by William J. Young. SCS, 1949. (SN, HP). Dunne, Peter Masten. A Padre Views South America. SCS, 1945. (SN, HP). Duportal, Marguerite. A Key to Happiness: The Art of Suffering. RCS, 1944. (SN, HP). Earls, Michael. Manuscripts and Memories: Chapters in Our Literary Tradition. SCS, 1935. (SN, HP). Eden, Mrs. Helen (Parry). Whistles of Silver and Other Stories. Illustrated by Denis Eden. SCS, 1933. (SN, HP). Edmunds, Sterling Edwin. Struggle for Freedom: The History of Anglo-American Liberty From the Charter of Henry I to the Present Day. SCS, 1946. (SN, HP). Edwards, Edward J. Thy People, My People. RCS, 1941. (NSN, NHP). Eleanore, Sister. Mary. RCS, 1939. (SN, HP). Ellard, Gerald. Christian Life and Worship: A Religion Text for Colleges. SCST, 1933-34. (SN, NP). Farnum, Mabel. The Seven Golden Cities. SCS, 1943. (SN, HP). ———. Street of the Half-Moon: An Account of the Spanish Noble, Pedro Claver. SCS, 1940. (SN, HP). Filas, Francis L. The Family for Families: Reflections on the Life of Jesus, Mary, and Joseph. RCS, 1947. (SN, NHP). ———. The Man Nearest to Christ: Nature and Historic Development of the Devotion to St. Joseph. RCS, 1944. (SN, HP). Fish, Hamilton. The Challenge of World Communism. SCS?, 1946. (NSN, NHP). Foley, Albert S. A Modern Galahad: St. John Berchmans. SCS, 1937. (SN, HP). ———. St. Regis: A Social Crusader. RCS, 1941. (SN, HP). Franchère, Lucille Corinne and Myrna Boyce, eds. L’aurore de la Nouvelle France. SCS, 1934. (SN, HP). Garraghan, Gilbert Joseph. Chapters in Frontier History: Research Studies in the Making of the West. SCS, 1934. (SN, HP). Gregory, Padraic. When Painting Was in Glory, 1280-1580. SCS, 1941. (SN, NHP).
162
Stephen A. Werner
Gruender, Hubert. Experimental Psychology. SCS, 1932. (SN, HP). Harmon, Francis Lelande. Principles of Psychology. SCS, 1938. (SN, HP). ———. Principles of Psychology. Rev. ed. SCS, 1951, 1953. (SN, NHP). ———. Understanding Personality. SCST, 1948. (SN, NHP). Harvey, Robert. Ignatius Loyola: A General in the Church Militant. SCS, 1936. (SN, HP). Herr, Vincent V. How We Influence One Another: The Psychology of Social Interaction. SCS, 1945. (SN, HP). Hoffman, Ross John Swartz. Tradition and Progress, and Other Historical Essays in Culture, Religion, and Politics. SCS, 1938. (SN, HP). Hollis, Christopher. Erasmus. SCS, 1933. (SN, HP). ———. Lenin. SCS, 1938. (SN, HP). ———. Thomas More. SCS, 1934. (SN, HP). Husslein, Joseph. The Christian Social Manifesto: An Interpretative Study of the Encyclicals Rerum Novarum and Quadragesimo Anno of Pope Leo XIII and Pope Pius XI. SCS, 1931. Rev. ed. (Fifth printing 1939). (SN, NHP). ———. The Golden Years: A Story of the Holy Family, by a Wife, Mother, and Apostle of Christian Charity and Joseph Husslein, S.J., Ph. D., Co-author and Editor. SCS, 1945. (SN, NHP). ———. Social We1lsprings. 2 vols. SCS, 1940-1942. (NSN, NHP). ———. The Spirit World About Us. RCS, 1934. (SN, HP). ———. ed. Heroines of Christ. SCS, 1939, 1940, 1949. (SN, HP). Ingrim, Robert. After Hitler, Stalin? SCS, 1946. (SN, HP). Janelle, Pierre. The Catholic Reformation. SCS, 1949. (SN, NP). Julian, Constance. Shadows Over English Literature. SCS, 1944. (SN, HP). Keener, Mary Jerome. Catholic Literary France from Valance to the Present Time. SCS, 1938. (SN, HP). Kelley, Francis Clement. The Forgotten God. RCS, 1932. (SN, HP). ———. Pack Rat: A Metaphoric Phantasy. SCS?, 1942. (NSN, NHP). ———. Tales From the Rectory. SCS, 1943. (NSN, NHP). Kelly, William Anthony. Educational Psychology. SCST, 1933. (SN, HP). ———. Educational Psychology. 3d ed., rev and enlarged. SCST, 1945. (SN, HP). ———. Introductory Child Psychology. SCST, 1938. (SN, HP). Kenny, Michael. The Romance of the Floridas: The Finding and the Founding. SCS, 1934. (SN, HP). Kent, Michael. [Brown, Beatrice Bradshaw]. The Bond of Peace. RCS, 1945. (SN, HP). Kleist, James Aloysius. The Gospel of Saint Mark: Presented in Greek Thought- units and Sense-lines With a Commentary by James A. Kleist. SCST, 1936. (SN, HP). ———. The Memoirs of St. Peter, or the Gospel According to St. Mark. SCS, 1932. (SN, HP). Kleist, James and Joseph Lilly. The New Testament: Rendered From the Original Greek with Explanatory Notes. SCS?, 1956. (NSN, HP). Knoebber, M. Mildred. The Self-Revelation of the Adolescent Girl: An Analysis of the Attitudes, Ideals, and Problems of the Adolescent Girl From the Viewpoint of the Girl Herself. SCS, 1937. (SN, HP). Krenz, Leo M. Our Way to the Father: A Year’s Course of Meditations for Religious, with Additional Readings, Instructions, Explanations, and Suggestions Directed to Extol the Purpose and Nature, the Ideals and Principles, the Spirit and Practice of Religious Community Life. All as Formally Approved by Holy Church for Our Age
Appendix ~ “A University in Print”
163
and Day. Arranged and Developed in Close Harmony with the Progressive Movement of the Church’s Annual Liturgical Calendar. 4 vols. SCS, 1950. (SN, HP). Kurth, Godrey. Saint Boniface. Translated by Victor Day. SCS, 1935. (SN, NHP). Lamm, William R. The Spiritual Legacy of Newman. RCS, 1934. (SN, HP). Lamping, Severin. Through Hundred Gates, by Noted Converts from Twenty-Two Lands. Translated by Severin Lamping and Stephen Lamping. RCS, 1939. (SN, HP). Lattey, C. Paul. RCS, 1939. (SN, HP). Leslie, Shane. The Oxford Movement, 1833-1933. SCS, 1933, 1935. (SN, HP). Lessius, Leonard. My God and My All: Prayerful Remembrances of the Divine Attributes. Translated by John L. Forster. RCS, 1948. (SN, HP). Ligutti, Luigi G and John C. Rawe. Rural Roads to Security: America’s Third Struggle for Freedom. SCS, 1940. (SN, HP). Lord, Daniel Aloysius. Religion and Leadership. SCST, 1933. (SN, HP). ———. Teacher’s Manual for Religion and Leadership. SCST 1934. (NSN, NHP). McAuliffe, Harold J. Father Tim [Dempsey]. SCS, 1944. (SN, HP). McCarthy, Raphael Charles. Safeguarding Mental Health. SCS, 1937. (SN, NHP). ———. Training the Adolescent. SCS 1934. (SN, HP). Macelwane, James Bernard. When the Earth Quakes. SCS, 1947. (SN, HP). McGarrigle, Francis. My Father’s Will. RCS, 1944. (SN, HP). McGratty, Arthur R. Face to the Sun. SCS, 1942. (NSN, HP). McGucken, William Joseph. The Catholic Way in Education. RCS, 1934-1937. (SN, HP). ———. The Jesuits and Education: The Society’s Teaching and Practice, Especially in Secondary Education in the United States. SCS, 1932. (SN, HP). MacLean, Donald Alexander. A Dynamic World Order. SCS, 1945. (SN, HP). McKenny, Charles R. Moral Problems in Social Work. SCS, 1951. (SN, NHP). Magner, James Aloysius. Men of Mexico. SCS, 1942. (NSN, NHP). Margaret, Helene. Who Walk in Pride. SCS, 1945. (SN, NHP). ———. Personality and Successful Living. SCS, 1945. (SN, HP). Martin, Paul. The Gospel in Action: The Third Order Secular of St. Francis and Christian Social Reform. SCS, 1932. (SN, HP). Maynard, Theodore. A Fire Was Lighted: The Life of Rose Hawthorne. SCS?, 1948. (NSN, NHP). ———. Henry VIII. SCS?, 1949. (NSN, NHP). ———. Mystic in Motley: The Life of St. Philip Neri. SCS, 1946. (SN, HP). ———. Queen Elizabeth. SCS, 1940. (SN, HP). ———. Too Small a World: The Life of Francesca Cabrini. SCS, 1945. (SN, HP). ———. The World I Saw. SCS, 1938, 1939. (SN, HP). Mercier, Louis Joseph Alexandre. American Humanism and the New Age. SCS, 1948. (SN, NHP). Mersch, Emile. The Whole Christ: the Historical Development of the Doctrine of the Mystical Body in Scripture and Tradition. RCS, 1938. (SN, HP). Mihanovich, Clement Simon. Current Social Problems. SCS, 1950. (SN, HP). ———. Principles of Juvenile Delinquency. SCS, 1950. (SN, HP). Morrison, Bakewell. The Catholic Church and the Modern Mind. SCS, 1933. (SN, HP). ———. Character Formation in College. SCST, 1938. (SN, HP). ———. God Is Its Founder: a Textbook on Preparation for Catholic Marriage Intended for College Classes. SCST, 1946. (SN, HP).
164
Stephen A. Werner
———. In Touch With God: Prayer, Mass, and the Sacraments. RCS, 1943. (SN, HP). ———. Marriage. SCST, 1934. (SN, HP). ———. Revelation and the Modern Mind: Teachings from the Life of Christ. SCST, 1936. (SN, HP). Morrison, Bakewell and Stephen Rueve. Think & Live. SCS, 1937. (SN, NHP). Morteveille, Blanche. The Rose Unpetaled, Saint Thérèse of the Child Jesus. SCS, 1942. (NSN, HP). Mueller, Francis John. Christ. RCS, 1935. (SN, HP). Muntsch, Albert. The Church and Civilization. RCS, 1936. (SN, HP). ———. Cultural Anthropology. SCS, 1934-36. (SN, HP). Neill, Thomas Patrick. Makers of the Modern Mind. SCS, 1949. (SN, HP). ———. They Lived the Faith; Great Lay Leaders of Modern Times. SCS, 1951. (SN, NHP). North, Robert. All-Stars of Christ. SCS, 1949. (SN, HP). ———. The General Who Rebuilt the Jesuits. SCS, 1944. (SN, HP). Olf, Lillian (Browne). The Sword of Saint Michael: Saint Pius V, 1504-1572. SCS, 1943. (SN, HP). ———. Their Name Is Pius: Portraits of Five Great Modern Popes. SCS, 1941. (SN, HP). O’Mahony, James Edward. A Preface to Life. RCS, 1936. (SN, HP). O’Neill, George. The Psalms and the Canticles of the Divine Office. SCS, 1937. (SN, HP). ———. The World’s Classic: Job. RCS, 1938. (SN, HP). Orchard, William Edwin. Humanity: What? Whence? Whither?. SCS, 1944. (SN, HP). Pattee, Richard. This is Spain. SCS, 1951. (SN, HP). Perez de Urbel, Justo. A Saint Under Moslem Rule. Adapted by Joseph Husslein. SCS, 1937. (SN, HP). Poage, Godfrey Robert. Recruiting for Christ. SCS, 1950. (SN, HP). Ponvert, Simone (de Noaillat). The King’s Advocate. Translated by Mary Golden Donnelly. SCS, 1942. (SN, HP). Prat, Ferdinand. Jesus Christ: His Life, His Teaching and His Work. 2 Vols. Translated by John J. Heenan. SCS, 1950. (SN, HP). Prince, John Francis Theodore. Creative Revolution. SCS, 1937. (2nd printing 1938.) (SN, HP). Privitera, Joseph F. The Latin American Front. SCS, 1945. (SN, NHP). Proserpio, Leo. St. Gemma Galgani. Forward by Leo Peter Kierkels. SCS, 1940. (SN, NHP). Rachel, Maria. The Divine Pursuit: From the Abyss of Unbelief to the Splendors of Faith. RCS, 1945. (SN, HP). Raymond, Father. The Man Who Got Even with God: The Life of an American Trappist. RCS, 1941. (SN, NHP). Redpath, Helen Mary Dominic. St. Bridget of Sweden, God’s Ambassadress. SCS, 1947. (SN, NHP). Reinhardt, Kurt Frank. A Realist Philosophy: The Perennial Principles of Thought and Action in a Changing World. SCS, 1944. (SN, HP). Renard, Henri. The Philosophy of Being. SCS, 1943. (NSN, HP). ———. The Philosophy of God. SCST, 1951. (SN, NHP). ———. The Philosophy of Man. SCS, 1948. (NSN, NHP).
Appendix ~ “A University in Print”
165
———. The Philosophy of Morality. Preface by Jacques Maritain. SCS, 1953. (SN, NHP). Riggs, Thomas Lawrason. Saving Angel, the Truth About Joan of Arc and the Church. SCS, 1944. (SN, HP). Ring, George Cyril. Gods of the Gentiles: Non-Jewish Cultural Religions of Antiquity. SCS, 1938. (SN, HP). ———. Religions of the Far East: Their History to the Present Day. SCS, 1950. (NSN, HP). Ring, Mary Ignatius. Villeneuve-Bargemont, Precursor of Modern Social Catholicism, 1784-1850. SCS, 1935. (SN, HP). Ross, Eva Jeany. Fundamental Sociology. SCST, 1939. (SN, NHP). ———. Rudiments of Sociology. SCST, 1934. (SN, HP). ———. Teacher’s Manual for Rudiments of Sociology. SCST, 1935. (NSN, NHP). ———. A Survey of Sociology. SCST, 1932. (SN, HP). Rousseau, Achille. The Church of Christ. RCS, 1936. (SN, HP). Ruthnaswamy, Mariadas. India From the Dawn: New Aspects of an Old Story. SCS, 1949. (SN, HP). Ryan, Edwin. The Church in the South American Republics. SCS, 1932. (SN, HP). Ryan, John K. Modern War and Basic Ethics. SCS?, 1933, 1940. (NSN, NHP). St. Francis, Mary, ed. Loutil, Edmond. SCST, 1937. (SN, HP). Sargent, Daniel. Christopher Columbus. SCS, 1941. (SN, HP). Schumacher, Henry. Social Message of the New Testament. RCS, 1937. (SN, HP). Schwertner, Thomas Maria. The Rosary, A Social Remedy. RCS, 1934. (SN, HP). ———. The Rosary, A Social Remedy. 2nd ed. SCS, 1952. 2nd ed. prepared by Vincent M. Martin. (SN, HP). ———. St. Albert the Great. SCS, 1932. (SN, HP). Shannon, James Ignatius. The Amazing Electron. SCS, 1946. (SN, HP). Sheen, Fulton John. Freedom Under God. SCS, 1940. (NSN, NHP). ———. Philosophy of Science. Preface by Leon Noel. SCS, 1934. (SN, HP). Skarga, Piotr. The Eucharist. Translated by Edward J. Dworaczyk. RCS, 1939. (SN, HP). Smith, Thurber M. The Unemployment Problem: A Catholic Solution From the Viewpoints of Ethics, History, and Social Science. SCS, 1932. (SN, HP). Sontag, Peter J. Meditations for Every Day. 2 vols. SCS, 1951. (SN, HP). Specking, Inez. Literary Readings in English Prose. SCST, 1935. (SN, HP). Thurston, Herbert. The Church and Spiritualism. SCS, 1933. (SN, HP). Timasheff, Nicholas Sergeyevitch. Three Worlds: Liberal, Communist, and Fascist Society. SCS, 1946. (SN, HP). Timasheff, Nicholas Sergeyevitch and Paul C. Facey. Sociology: An Introduction to Sociological Analysis. SCST, 1949. (SN, NHP). Walsh, Edmund Aloysius. Total Empire: The Roots and Progress of World Communism. SCS, 1951. (SN, HP). Walsh, Gerald Groveland. Dante Alighieri: Citizen of Christendom. SCS, 1946. (NSN, NHP). Walsh, James F. Facing Your Social Situation: An Introduction to Social Psychology. SCS, 1946. (SN, HP). Walsh, James J. High Points of Medieval Culture. SCS, 1937. (SN, HP). Walsh, William Thomas. Saint Teresa of Avila: A Biography. SCS, 1943. (SN, NHP). Wayman, Dorothy (Godfrey). Bite the Bullet. SCS, 1948. (NSN, NHP). White, John W. Our Good Neighbor Hurdle. SCS, 1943. (NSN, HP).
166
Stephen A. Werner
Yeo, Margaret Routledge. The Greatest of the Borgias. SCS, 1936. (SN, HP). ———. Reformer: St Charles Borromeo. SCS, 1938. (SN, HP). ———. These Three Hearts: Blessed Claude de la Colombière, Saint Margaret Mary, and the Sacred Heart: “My Pure Love Unites Forever These Three Hearts. SCS, 1940, 1941. (SN, HP).
Bibliography
167
Select Bibliography Archival Sources The Jesuit Archives: 4517 West Pine Boulevard, St. Louis, Missouri 63110. Central Bureau of the Central-Verein: 3717 Westminster Place, St. Louis, Missouri 63110. Saint Louis University Archives: Pius XII Library, Saint Louis University, 3640 Lindell Boulevard, St. Louis, Missouri 63108.
Books by Husslein Husslein, Joseph Casper, S.J. Athol; or, Near the Throne: A Drama of the Days of Antoninus Pius, Emperor of Rome. Cleveland: N.p., 1910. ———. The Church and Social Problems. New York: America, 1912. ———. The Catholic’s Work in the World: A Practical Solution of Religious and Social Problems of To-day. New York: Benziger, 1917. ———. The World Problem: Capital, Labor and the Church. New York: P. J. Kenedy, 1918. ———. Democratic Industry : A Practical Study in Social History. New York: P. J. Kenedy, 1919. ———. “A Catholic Social Platform.” In A Brief Text-book of Moral Philosophy by Charles Coppens. New York: Schwartz, Kirwin & Fauss, 1920. ———. Evolution and Social Progress. New York: P. J. Kenedy, 1920. ———. Work, Wealth and Wages. Chicago: Matre, 1921. ———. Bible and Labor. New York: Macmillan Co., 1924. ———. The Little Flower and the Blessed Sacrament. New York: Benziger, 1925. ———. The Hidden God; the Eucharist in Scripture, History and the Church’s Teaching Throughout the Ages; Synopsis of the Screen Portrayal. New York: National Film Producers, 1927. ———. The Reign of Christ: The Immortal King of Ages. New York: P. J. Kenedy, 1928. ———. The Mass of the Apostles; the Eucharist: Its Nature, Earliest History and Present Application. New York: P. J. Kenedy & Sons, 1929. ———. The Christian Social Manifesto: An Interpretative Study of the Encyclicals Rerum Novarum and Quadragesimo Anno of Pope Leo XIII and Pope Pius XI. Milwaukee, Bruce, 1931. ———. The Spirit World About Us. Milwaukee: Bruce, 1934. ———. ed. Heroines of Christ. Milwaukee, Bruce, 1939. ———. Social Wellsprings. 2 vols. Milwaukee: Bruce, 1940-1942. ———. The Golden Years: A Story of the Holy Family, by a Wife, Mother, and Apostle of Christian Charity and Joseph Husslein, S.J., Ph. D., Co-author and Editor. Milwaukee: Bruce, 1945. ———. Channels of Devotion. Milwaukee: Bruce, 1953.
Books Co-authored by Husslein Joseph Husslein and John C. Reville. What Luther Taught. London: R. & T. Washbourne, 1918.
168
Stephen A. Werner
John Ryan and Joseph Husslein. The Church and Labor. New York: Macmillan, 1920.
Husslein Articles Cited “The American Bishops’ Message.” America 22 (1920): 430-31. “Anglo Saxon Gilds.” America 10 (1914): 343-45. “Central Verein and the Pillars of Hercules.” America 15 (1916): 505-506. “Christian Democracy and Politics.” America 12 (1914): 58-59. “The Church and Slavery in England.” America 10 (1914): 390-92. “The Eight Hour Day.” Homiletic and Pastoral Review 21 (1921): 926-30. “F. P. Kenkel, the Laetare Medalist.” America 43 (1930): 41-42. “Financing Socialist Literature.” America 6 (1912): 391-93. “Forecast of General Strike.” America 8 (1912): 77-78. “Frequent Communion Guild.” America 5 (1911): 391-93. “Holy Grail in New York?” Columbia 17 (1937): 7-9. “The Invasion of Race Suicide and Socialism into our Fold.” Ecclesiastical Review 45 (1911): 276-90. “Ideals of the Central Verein.” America 9 (1913): 443-45. “Is the Law of the Jungle to Prevail?.” America 16 (1916): 9-11. “The Ketteler Centenary.” America 6 (1911): 247-49. “The Labor Spy at Work.” America 26 (1921): 142-43. “The Labor Spy in American Industry.” America 24 (1921): 510-11. “Launching a Great Enterprise.” America 11 (1914): 9-10. “Lilliputians at Work.” America 12 (1915): 382-83. “The Limits of Labor.” Homiletic and Pastoral Review 21 (1921): 822-26. “Luther and Freedom of Thought.” America 17 (1917): 157-59. “Luther and Social Life.” America 17 (1917): 260-62. “Luther and the State.” America 17 (1917): 210-12. “Luther and Woman.” America 17 (1917): 318-20. “Luther, Slaves and Peasants.” America 17 (1917): 287-89. “Luther’s Liberty of Conscience.” America 25 (1921): 55-57. “Medieval and Modern Economics.” Homiletic and Pastoral Review 24 (1923): 124. “The Menace of the Labor Spy.” America 25 (1921): 9-11. “The Message of Dynamite.” America 8 (1913): 413-14. “Moloch of Industrialism.” America 45 (1931): 159-60. “Origin of Medieval Gilds.” America 10 (1913): 198-200. “Popes’ and Bishops’ Labor Program.” America 21 (1919): 248-50. “The Priest and Social Problems.” Homiletic and Pastoral Review 24 (1924): 1033-37. “The Problem of the Hour.” America 10 (1914): 609-610. “The Promise of Socialism.” America 18 (1918): 352-53. “The Radical Woman.” America 8 (1913): 437-39. “A Rally for Christian Democracy.” America 18 (1917): 184-85. “The Rebel Poet.” America 14 (1915): 175-77. “The Reformation and Popular Liberty.” America 25 (1921): 125-27. “Rev. John J. Ming, S.J., Philosopher and Author.” America 3 (1910): 307-308. “Saving the World.” Homiletic and Pastoral Review 24 (1924): 469-72. “Socialist Equality.” America 18 (1918): 427-29. “Socialist Press Propaganda in the United States.” America 4 (1910): 127-29.
Bibliography
169
“The Story of Marxism.” Homiletic and Pastoral Review 24 (1924): 360-63. “Social Study of the Prophets.” Central-Blatt and Social Justice 17 (1924): 79-80. “The Social Duties of the Teacher I.—The Social Question and the Classroom.” Central-Blatt and Social Justice 9 (1917): 285-86. “Varieties of American Socialism.” America 9 (1913): 557-58. “What, Then, Remains of Luther?” America 9 (1913): 320-21. “What’s Wrong with the World?” America 11 (1914): 31-32. “The Womanly Woman.” America 8 (1913): 461-462.
Comprehensive List of Husslein Articles Articles by Husslein in America America Volume 1 (1909) In America Before Our Era 150-51 America and Ancient Voyages Before Our Era 668 America and the Geographers Before Our Era 689-91 America Volume 2 (1909-1910) Sociology 104 Socialism and the American Federation of Labor 113-14 America Volume 3 (1910) Rev. John J Ming, SJ, Philosopher and Author 307-308 America Volume 4 (1910-11) Alexander Baumgartner, SJ 9-12 Socialist Press Propaganda in the United States 127-29 Socialism in the Schools 221-22 A Great Social Problem 321-23 Christ or Anti-Christ 461-63 “Rational Education” 609-11 America Volume 5 (1911) Socialist Sunday Schools 176-78 Frequent Communion in Our Schools 344-45 Frequent Communion Guild 391-93 Obstacles to Frequent Communion 461-62 Daily Communion for Children? 486 Socialists in Office 513-14 Morocco 533-35 Central Verein Convention 563-64 The Age of First Communion 582-84 The Child and Frequent Communion 608-10 America Volume 6 (1911-1912) Catholics and Labor Unions 53-55 Religion and the Socialist Platform 79-81 A Socialist Concept of Truth 197-98 Socialist Doctrine of Violence 222-23
170 The Ketteler Centenary 247-49 Lesson of the German Elections 365-66 Financing Socialist Literature 391-93 Conservative Socialism 437-38 David and Goliath 485-86 The National Civic Federation 535-36 The Lawrence Strike 557-58 A Protest of Hungarian Catholics 564 Christian Socialism 582-84 The Christ of Socialism 608-10 America Volume 7 (1912) Early Church and Socialism 34-36 Aftermath of the Windthorst Centenary 55-56 Windthorst as Social Reformer 80-82 Windthorst and the Woman Problem 102-103 Catholic Church and Labor Organizations 149-51 Social Mission of Catholic Women 173-74 Economic Christianity 245-46 Social Concept of Christ’s Kingdom I. 293-95 Social Concept of Christ’s Kingdom II. 321-23 Scripture Thoughts on Wealth 341-42 Wage System in the Gospel 414-16 Spring Bank Social Study Course 479 Is Catechism Interesting? 489-91 The Church and Labor 509-ll Social Reform Literature 586-88 America Volume 8 (1912-1913) What is Syndicalism? 32-34 The General Strike 56-57 Forecast of General Strike 77-78 Pius X on Catholic Action 125-26 Equality, True and False 175-76 Spirit of the German Anti-Jesuit Law 246-48 The Holy Name 269 Papal Documents on Private Ownership 317-18 A Poet Saint 366-68 The Message of Dynamite 413-14 The Radical Woman 437-39 The Womanly Woman 461-62 Luther 489-91 Cremation 534-35 Genesis of Devotion to St. Joseph 559-60 Socialist View of Constantine’s Edict 605-606 America Volume 9 (1913) Land Versus Factory 5-7 What is Sabotage? 29-30 Sabotage and Socialism 78-80
Stephen A. Werner
Bibliography History of Sabotage 127-29 In This Sign Conquer! 221-22 A Leader of the People 295-96 What, Then, Remains of Luther? 320-21 The Kolping Centenary 342-44 Journeymen’s Unions 368-70 Monarchical Socialism 415-17 Ideals of the Central Verein 443-45 Catholic Federation Convention 466-67 Varieties of American Socialism 557-58 Ozanam on Liberalism and Socialism 609-11 America Volume 10 (1913-1914) Ozanam on Labor and Wages 8-10 Ozanam on Employers and Employed 29-30 Ozanam on Poverty and Wealth 55-57 The Science of Charity 77-78 Ancient Labor Organizations: I. Origin and Development 125-26 Ancient Labor Gilds: II. Politics in the Roman Gilds 150-51 Ancient Labor Gilds: III. Evil Fruits of State Paternalism 175-76 “Color-Hearing” in Francis Thompson’s Poetry 186 Origin of Medieval Gilds 198-200 The Little Laureate of the Infant Jesus 245-46 A New Year’s Gift to Labor 269-70 First Medieval Gilds 319-21 Anglo Saxon Gilds 343-45 The Church and Slavery in England 390-92 The Age of the Family System 414-15 Merchant Gilds 440-42 Ethics of the I.W.W. 533-34 The Church and the Unemployed 557-58 Solving the Problem of Unemployment 583-84 The Problem of the Hour 609-10 America Volume 11 (1914) Launching a Great Social Enterprise 9-10 What’s Wrong With the World? 31-32 Is It Superstition? 55-57 As an Angel of Light 129-30 A Canonized Teacher of Social Reform 150-151 The Social Reign of the Sacred Heart 198-99 The Ferrer Modern School 224-25 A Current Calumny 293-94 The Modern Peril 317-18 What Are Our Economic Problems? 406-07 Interstate Trade Commission 486-87 Civic Pageants and Plays 499-500 A Pillar of National Prosperity 520-21 Wages and Profits 538-39 Are Our “Public Schools” Public? 549-50
171
172 The Milestones of Civilization 569-70 Economics and Religion 590-91 The Scripture Lesson Regarding Wine 601-602 America Volume 12 (1914-1915) The Divine Test 50 Christian Democracy and Politics 58-59 The Church and Politics 140-41 The Wise Householder 162-63 A Modern Storm Centre 237-39 A Children’s Crusade 266 Ideal Union of State and Church 287-88 The First Christian Trade Unions 304 The Watchword of the New Pontificate 357-58 Lilliputians at Work 382-83 The Witches’ Cauldron 429-30 The Colossus of Terrorism 529-30 Three World Conquests 585-86 A Papal Document for Teachers 657-58 America Volume 13 (1915) The Church of the Revolution 33-34 The New Women After God’s Heart 91-92 Every Woman 218-19 Christ and Woman 247-48 Genesis and Woman’s Rights 416-18 Molten Calves and Modern Prophets 550-51 America Volume 14 (1915-1916) The Economic Fetish 46-47 The New Philosophy of Despair 57-58 A Challenge to Catholic Laymen 131-32 Child Legislation 166-68 The Rebel Poet 175-77 Let Wives be Subject 246-47 The Rights of the Child 390-91 Papal Bulls and the News Business 558-59 Conserving the Next Generation 574-75 The Three Marriage Rings 583-84 America Volume 15 (1916) The Silver Wedding Ring 105-107 Is Charity Work a Sinecure? 194-95 What is Economic Socialism? 217-19 The Iron Wedding Ring 442-43 Central Verein and the Pillars of Hercules 505-506 Is the Sympathetic Strike Justifiable? 602-603 America Volume 16 (1916-1917) Is the Law of the Jungle to Prevail? 9-11
Stephen A. Werner
Bibliography Superman and Superwomen 166-67 The Golden Wedding Ring 272-73 The Great Chalice of Antioch 396-97 High Prices in the Middle Ages 538-39 The Ethics of Just Prices 590-91 Morality of Monopolistic Prices 616-18 America Volume 17 (1917) The Evolution of a Monopoly 22-23 Luther and Freedom of Thought 157-59 The Coming Crusade 200-201 Luther and the State 210-12 Luther and Social Life 260-62 Luther, Slave and Peasants 287-89 Luther and Woman 318-20 Socialism and the War 482-83 State Control and Socialism 566-67 America Volume 18 (1917-1918) The System of Capitalism 9-11 A Rally for Christian Democracy 184-85 The Promise of Socialism 352-53 Socialist Equality 427-29 Rise and Fall of Protestant Prosperity 489-90 Suppressed Catholicism of Labor 533-34 The State and Property 574-76 The Children’s Year 586-87 The State and Labor 595-96 The State and Wages 621-23 America Volume 19 (1918) Catholics and Social Legislation 35-37 Protestantism, Catholicism and Democracy 58-60 Democratic Control of Industry 210-11 The System of Cooperation 232-33 The Possibilities of Cooperation 257-59 Democratic Conception of History 341-42 War Labor Recruiting 439-40 Distribution of War Labor 462-63 The Woman Worker 521-23 The Woman Labor Problem 596-98 America Volume 20 (1918-1919) Welfare of the Woman Laborer 8-10 The Socialist Class War 167-68 A Gentle Critic 301-302 The Dogma of Evolution 523-24 The Literature of Materialistic Sociology 635-36 From Egypt to the Bishops’ Labor Program 650-51
173
174 America Volume 21 (1919) The Greatest of Labor Movements 110-11 The Revaluaton of the Middle Ages 210-11 Popes’ and Bishops’ Labor Program 248-50 Democracy, a “Popish” Innovation 338-40 The Church and The People 483-84 An Autocratic Conspiracy 530-32 An Aristocratic Pillage 552-53 Labor Democracy 564-66 Live and Let Live 610-12 America Volume 22 (1919-1920) The Golden Rule in Practice 32-34 Cooperation and Copartnership 128-30 Success of Workingmen’s Cooperatives 154-56 Woman the Ultimate Buyer 382-83 Checking the High Prices 407 The American Bishops’ Message 430-31 America Volume 23 (1920) Is Society Reverting to Savagery? 141-42 The Course of Empire 215-16 The Ape-Man and University Circles 286-87 Promoting the zoological Family 310-11 The Antiquity of Man 335-36 Was Adam a Cave Man? 358-60 America Volume 24 (1920-1921) Natural Right of Labor Unionism 127-28 The Necessity of Collective Bargaining 178-80 Significance of Labor Unions 205-207 The Communist International in the United States 342-43 Unskilled Labor and the “Boss” 414-16 Industrial Democracy in the Clothing Trade 437-39 The Labor Spy in American Industry 510-11 The Twelve-Hour Day in Steel 523-25 America Volume 25 (1921) The Menace of the Labor Spy 9-11 Luther’s Liberty of Conscience 55-57 Luther and Canisius 78-80 Ignatian Centenary and the Counter-Reformation 104-106 Men or Machines? 119-20 The Reformation and Popular Liberty 125-27 Response to T. J. Neacy letter 132 Is Society Reverting to Savagery? 141-42 End of Dramatic Lock-Out in Clothing Trade 240-41 The Labor Detective Speaks 288-89 Is Co-operative Production Workable? 552-53
Stephen A. Werner
Bibliography The Violence of Capital 584-86 America 26 (1921-1922) The Terrorism of the Rich 8-10 A Tilt of Cooperative Production 22-23 Response to Cedric Long letter 84-85 The Labor Spy at Work 142-43 Response to Robert E. Shortall letter 180-81 The New Industrial Psychology 382-83 Industrial Psychology in Practise 430-32 A System of Wage Settlement 453-54 How Millions Were Made 487-89 “Bucketeering” and Railroad “Milking” 512-13 The Crux of the Coal Situation 621-22 America Volume 27 (1922) Contract Violation 46-47 The Jewish Workingmen’s Circle 262-63 The Three Social Systems 272-73 Failure of Compulsory Collectivism 317-18 The Perils of Restrictive Private Ownership 392-94 America Volume 28 (1922-1923) Distributive Private Ownership 33-34 For and By the School 141-42 Prejudice as a Profession 317-18 Catholic Conference on Industrial Problems 333-34 Tutankhamon and the Israelites 394-96 America Volume 29 (1923) The Zoological Concept of Matrimony 392-94 America Volume 30 (1923-1924) Wisdom Playing Before God 229-31 An Ancient Mass Relic 588-90 America Volume 31 (1924) Mass Symbols on the Antioch Chalice 82-83 America Volume 33 (1925) Gompers - Labor Chief 29-30 St. Canisius, the Man of Providence 127-29 St. Canisius and the Divine Heart 154-55 St. John Eudes, Man of Vision 249-50 The Catholic Industrial Conference 299-301 The Central Verein Meets 493-95 Mary, Mediatress of All Graces 586-87 America Volume 34 (1925-1926) A Jewel Ready for Mary’s Crown 11-13
175
176
Stephen A. Werner
The Kingship of Christ 394-96 The Kingdom of Christ 418-20 Feast of Christ the King 447-49 Liturgy for the Feast of Christ the King 469 America Volume 35 (1926) The Eucharist Previsioned and Prefigured 58-60 The Promise of the Eucharist 109-11 How the Eucharist Was Instituted 131-33 The Real Presence 154-55 From Cenacle to Chicago, 1926 224-26 America 36 (1926-1927) Catholic Industrial Convention 14-16 America 37 (1927) Catholic Association for International Peace 65-66 The Heart That Shall Reign 228-29 July the Fourth and Blessed Robert Bellarmine 272-74 Where Capital and Labor Meet 329-30 Are Americans Becoming Ultra-Monarchists? 344-45 Bishop Ketteler; A Catholic Social Ideal 541-42 Catholic Social Education 591-93 America 41 (1929) A Gospel Parable and a Modern School 13-15 America 43 (1930) F. P. Kenkel, the Laetare Medalist 41-42 America 44 (1930-1931) Christian Social Education 39-40 Centenary of Mary Immaculate 177-79 Century of the Immaculate Conception 209-10 America 45 (1931) Moloch of Industrialism 159-60
Articles by Husslein in Central-Blatt and Social Justice Central-Blatt and Social Justice Volume 7 (1914) Faith and Social Works 7-8 Central-Blatt and Social Justice Volume 8 (1915) Peace Gilds 7-9 A Great Social Work 42-43 Central-Blatt and Social Justice Volume 9 (1917) The Social Duties of the Teacher: I—The Social Question and the Classroom 285-86
Bibliography
177
The Social Duties of the Teacher: II— Practical Teaching of Social Topics 311-13 Central-Blatt and Social Justice Volume 10 (1918) The Fordham Social School 289-90 Central-Blatt and Social Justice Volume 12 (1919) The First Modern Labor Class: I 139-40 The First Modern Labor Class: II 173-75 Learning A Trade Under the Old Gild Regime: I 205-206 Learning A Trade Under the Old Gild Regime: II 247-48 Central-Blatt and Social Justice Volume 15 (1922-1923) The Business of Labor Espionage 4-5 Detected Labor Spies 375-76 Central-Blatt and Social Justice Volume 16 (1923) Scripture Studies in Social Evolution: I. The Nomad 113-15 Scripture Studies in Social Evolution: II. The Farmer 149-51 Scripture Studies in Social Evolution: II. The Farmer 185-87 Scripture Studies in Social Evolution: III. The Empire Builder 221-23 Scripture Studies in Social Evolution: IV. The Proletarian 257-59 Central-Blatt and Social Justice Volume 17 (1924) Social Study of the Prophets 79-80 Central-Blatt and Social Justice Volume 20 (1927) Fordham University Social School 271-73 Central-Blatt and Social Justice Volume 23 (1930) The Church and Industrial Associations: I The Church’s Right to Speak 3-5 The Church and Industrial Associations: II Papal Pronouncements 39-41 The Church and Industrial Associations: III Class War or Class Co-operation 75-76 The Church and Industrial Associations: IV Catholic, “Christian” and Neutral Unions 119-21 The Church and Industrial Associations: V United Social Action of Catholics 187-90
Articles by Husslein in The Homilectic and Pastoral Review Homiletic and Pastoral Review Volume 21 (1920-1921) The Corner Stone of Social Justice: A Living Wage 1-5 Christian Unionism or Red Radicalism 100-104 Jungle War or Christian Peace 198-202 Woman at the Wheel of Industry 292-96 Capitalism, Past and Present 401-405 Democracy in Industry 535-39 The Story of Shorter Working Hours 623-26
178
Stephen A. Werner
The Strain of Overwork 718-21 The Limits of Labor 822-26 The Eight-Hour Day 926-30 When Gildhood Was in Flower 1033-37 The Medieval Gild in Action 1120-23 Homiletic and Pastoral Review Volume 22 (1921-1922) Copartnership and Cooperation 30-34 Three Anti-Social Doctrines of Luther: I. Concerning Good Works 158-61 Three Anti-Social Doctrines of Luther: II. Concerning Sin 245-47 Three Anti-Social Doctrines of Luther: III. The Slave Will 364-67 The Labor-Spy System 484-87 The Labor Spy in the Labor Union 611-15 The Priest and Politics 742-45 God the Great Laborer 852-55 The Greatest Labor Document 963-66 “Hate Not Laborious Works” 1076-79 The Tabernacle in the Wilderness 1187-93 Wisdom and the Toiler 1299-1302 Homiletic and Pastoral Review Volume 23 (1922-1923) Forced Labor under Solomon 8-12 Workers and Works of Solomon 116-20 Servitude in the Old Testament 229-35 The Bondmen of the Jews 351-57 The Problem of Riches and Poverty 462-65 Labor in the Ancient Monarchies 575-78 Homiletic and Pastoral Review Volume 24 (1923-1924) In the Days of Jeremias 52-59 Medieval and Modern Economics 123-26 Financiers and Labor Banks 242-45 The Story of Marxism 360-63 Saving the World 469-72 Christ and the Labor World 584-88 The New Testament and the Industrial Problem 696-700 The Priest and Social Problems 1033-37 Homiletic and Pastoral Review Volume 26 (1925-1926) The Lure of the Eucharistic Congress 567-76 The Eucharistic Congress and Its Significance for Us 869-75
Other Journal Articles by Husslein “The Invasion of Race Suicide and Socialism into Our Fold.” Ecclesiastical Review 45 (September 1911): 276-90. “Children’s Early and Frequent Communion.” Catholic Mind 9 (1911): 345-60. “The Woman Question.” Catholic Mind 11 (1913): 343-57.
Bibliography
179
“The Association of the Holy Childhood.” Ecclesiastical Review 52 (May 1915): 588-592. “Training for Social Work.” Catholic Charities Review 13 (September 1929): 217-18. “Secrets of the Catacombs.” Columbia 9 (November 1929): 14-15, 41, 43. “Communion in the Early Church.” Ecclesiastical Review 81 (November 1929): 491-509. “Man or Ape Today.” Historical Bulletin 8 (November 1929): 6-7, 13. “Practical Aspect of the Evolution Theory.” Historical Bulletin 8 (January 1930): 21-22, 33. “Human Progress and Decline.” Historical Bulletin 8 (March 1930): 39-40, 52-53. “Spirit of Revolutionary Change.” Historical Bulletin 9 (November 1930): 4-5. “Elements of Conflict.” Historical Bulletin 9 (January 1931): 30-31, 38. “Factors That Make for World Revolution.” Historical Bulletin 9 (March 1931): 49-50, 53. “Socially Dark Ages.” Historical Bulletin 9 (May 1931): 74-75. “Social Apostolate.” Catholic Mind 29 (22 November 1931): 519-24. “Wages.” Catholic Action 14 (May 1932): 19-20. “A University in Print.” Jesuit Bulletin 15 (April 1936): 1-3, 8. “Holy Grail in New York?” Columbia 17 (September 1937): 7-9. “Holy Grail.” Catholic Digest 1 (October 1937): 87-91. “Democracy and Its Counterfeits.” Catholic Mind 37 (8 October 1939): 863-67. “Martha de Noaillat and the Feast of Christ the King.” Ecclesiastical Review 111 (October 1944): 241-49. “Labor Lesson From the Past.” Catholic Digest 10 (March 1946): 44-49. “A University in Print.” Jesuit Bulletin 26 (February 1947): 12-14.
Secondary Sources Abell, Aaron I. American Catholic Thought on Social Questions. Indianapolis: Bobbs-Merrill, 1968. ———. American Catholicism and Social Action: A Search for Social Justice, 1865-1950. New York: Doubleday, 1960. ———. “The Catholic Church and Social Problems in the World War I Era.” Mid-America 30 (July 1948): 139-51. ———. “Labor Legislation in the United States: The Background and Growth of the Newer Trends.” Review of Politics 10 (January 1948): 35-60. ———. “Origins of Catholic Social Reform in the United States: Ideological Aspects.” Review of Politics 11 (July 1949): 294-309. ———. “The Reception of Leo XIII’s Labor Encyclical in America, 1891-1919.” Review of Politics 7 (October 1945): 464-95. ———. “Monsignor John A. Ryan: An Historical Appreciation.” Review of Politics 8 (January 1946): 128-34. ———. The Urban Impact on American Protestantism, 1865-1900. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University, 1943. Bannon, John F. The Missouri Province. St. Louis, Mo.: Missouri Province, 1977. Barry, Colman J. The Catholic Church and German Americans. Milwaukee, Wis.: Bruce, 1953.
180
Stephen A. Werner
Batdorf, Sylvia M. “The Work of the Social Action Department of the National Catholic Welfare Conference in All Phases of Industrial Relations.” M.A. diss., Catholic University of America, 1933. Baumgartner, Apollinaris. Catholic Journalism: A Study of Its Development in the United States, 1789-1930. New York: Columbia University, 1932. Bebel, August. Women Under Socialism. Translated by Daniel DeLeon. New York: New York Labor News Press, 1904; reprint, New York: Source Book Press, 1970. Bell, Stephen. Rebel, Priest and Prophet: A Biography of Dr. Edward McGlynn. New York: Devin-Adair, 1937. Bowen, Ralph H. German Theories of the Corporative State: With Special Reference to the Period 1870-1919. New York: Whittlesey, 1947. Boylan, Marguerite T. Social Welfare in the Catholic Church: Organization and Planning Through Diocesan Bureaus. New York: Columbia University, 1941. Brauer, Theodore. “The Catholic Social Movement in Germany.” The Catholic Social Year Book. Oxford: Catholic Social Guild, 1932, 1-64. Broderick, Francis L. Right Reverend New Dealer: John A. Ryan. New York: Macmillan, 1963. Brophy, Mary Liguori. The Social Thought of the German Roman Catholic Central Verein. Washington, D.C.: Catholic University of America, 1941. Browne, Henry J. The Catholic Church and the Knights of Labor. Washington, D.C.: Catholic University of America, 1949. ———. “Peter E. Dietz, Pioneer Planner of Catholic Social Action.” The Catholic Historical Review 33 (January 1948): 448-56. Bruehl, Charles P. The Pope’s Plan for Social Reconstruction: A Commentary on the Social Encyclicals of Pius XI. New York: Devin-Adair, 1939. Bruno, Frank J. Trends in Social Work, 1874-1956: A History Based on the Proceedings of the National Conference of Social Work. New York: Columbia University, 1957. Burke, John. J. “The Right Reverend William J. Kerby: An Appreciation.” The Ecclesiastical Review 95 (1936): 225-33. Callahan, Daniel J. The Mind of the Catholic Layman. New York: Scribner, 1963. Calvez, Jean-Yves, and Jacques Perrin. The Church and Social Justice: The Social Teaching of the Popes from Leo XIII to Pius XII (1878-1958). Chicago, Ill.: Regnery, 1961. Camp, Richard L. The Papal Ideology of Social Reform: A Study in Historical Development 1878-1967. Leiden: Brill, 1969. The Catholic Encyclopedia and Its Makers. New York: Encyclopedia Press, 1917. Cathrein, Victor. Socialism: Its Theoretical Basis and Practical Application. New York: Benziger, 1904. Claybourne, Dorothy H. and C. S. Mihanovich. “The Science and Culture Series.” Social Justice Review 73 (November-December 1982): 179-82. Cohen, Nathan Edward. Social Work in the American Tradition. New York: Dryden, 1958. Coleman, John. “What is an Encyclical? Development of Church Social Teaching.” Origins 11 (4 June 1981): 33, 35-41. Cross, Robert D. The Emergence of Liberal Catholicism in America. Cambridge: Harvard University, 1958. Curran, Charles E. American Catholic Social Ethics: Twentieth-Century Approaches. Notre Dame, Ind.. Notre Dame, 1982. ———. Directions in Catholic Social Ethics. Notre Dame, Ind.: Notre Dame, 1985.
Bibliography
181
Curran, Charles E. and Richard A. McCormick, eds. Readings in Moral Theology No. 5: Official Catholic Social Teaching. New York: Paulist, 1986. Curran, Robert Emmett. “The McGlynn Affair and the Shaping of the New Conservatism in American Catholicism, 1886-1894.” The Catholic Historical Review 66 (April 1980): 184-204. Diamant, Alfred. Austrian Catholics and the Social Question 1918-1933. Gainesville, Fla, University of Florida, 1959. Dictionary of American Biography. 19 vols. New York: Scribner’s, 1936. Reprint, New York: Scribner’s, 1964-88. “Distinguished Jubilarians.” Social Justice Review 44 (September 1951): 177. Doherty, Robert E. “The American Socialist Party and the Roman Catholic Church, 1901-1917.” Ed.D. diss., Teachers College, Columbia University, 1959. Dolan, Jay P. The American Catholic Experience: A History From Colonial Times to the Present. Garden City, New York: Image, 1985. Dombrowski, James. The Early Days of Christian Socialism in America. New York: Octagon Books, 1966. Dye, Mary Elizabeth. By Their Fruits: A Social Biography of Frederick Kenkel, Catholic Social Pioneer. New York: Greenwich, 1960. Elliot, Walter. The Life of Isaac Thomas Hecker (New York: Arno, 1972). Ellis, John Tracy. American Catholicism. Chicago: University of Chicago, 1969. Faherty, William Barnaby. Better the Dream; St. Louis: University & Community, 1818-1968. St. Louis: St. Louis University, 1968. ———. The Destiny of Modern Women: in the Light of Papal Teaching. Westminster, Md.: Newman, 1950. ———. Dream by the River: Two Centuries of Saint Louis Catholicism, 1766-1980. St. Louis, Mo.: River City Publishers, 1981. ———. Rebels or Reformers? Dissenting Priests in American Life. Chicago: Loyola University, 1987. Flynn, George Q. American Catholics and the Roosevelt Presidency 1932-1936. Lexington, Kentucky: University of Kentucky, 1968. Fogarty, Gerald P. The Vatican and the American Hierarchy From 1870 to 1965. Willmington, Del.: Michael Glazer, 1985. Fogarty, Michael P. Christian Democracy in Western Europe, 1820-1953. Notre Dame, Ind.: University of Notre Dame, 1957. Fox, Mary H. Peter E. Dietz, Labor Priest. Notre Dame, Ind.: Notre Dame, 1953. “Fr. Joseph Husslein Dies of Heart Attack, Oct. 19.” The Alumni News of St. Louis University 23 (November 1952): 3. Furfey, Paul Hanley. A History of Social Thought. New York: Macmillan, 1942. Gargan, Edward T., ed. Leo XIII and the Modern World. New York: Sheed and Ward, 1961. Gearty, Patrick W. The Economic Thought of Monsignor John A. Ryan. Washington, D.C.: Catholic University of America, 1953. Gilson, Etienne, ed. The Church Speaks to the Modern World: The Social Teaching of Leo XIII. Garden City, N.Y.: Doubleday, 1958. Gladden, Washington. Christianity and Socialism. New York: Easton & Mains, 1905. Gleason, Philip. The Conservative Reformers: German-American Catholics and the Social Order. Notre Dame, Ind.: Notre Dame, 1968.
182
Stephen A. Werner
———. “An Immigrant Group’s Interest in Progressive Reform: The Case of the German-American Catholics.” The American Historical Review 73 (December 1967): 367-79. Grisar, Hartmann. Martin Luther: His Life and Work. Edited by Arthur Preuss. Westminster, Md.: Newman, 1950. Guerry, Emile. The Social Doctrine of the Catholic Church. Trans. Miriam Hederman. New York: Alba House, 1964. Guilday, Peter, ed. The National Pastorals of the American Hierarchy (1792-1919). Westminster, Md.. Newman, 1954. Hamilton, Raphael N. The Story of Marquette University: An Object Lesson in the Development of Catholic Higher Education. Milwaukee, Wis: Marquette University, 1953. Hennesey, James. American Catholics: A History of the Roman Catholic Community in the United States. New York, Oxford University, 1983. Higgins, George G. “Joseph Caspar Husslein, S.J. Pioneer Social Scholar.” Social Order 3 (February 1953): 51-53. Higham, John. Strangers in the Land: Patterns of American Nativism, 1860-1925. New Brunswick, N.J.: Rutgers University, 1955. Hillquit, Morris. History of Socialism in the United States. 4th ed. New York: Funk & Wagnalls, 1906. Hoehn, Matthew, ed. Catholic Authors: Contemporary Biographical Sketches, 1930-1947. Newark, N.J.: St. Mary’s Abbey, 1957. Hofstadter, Richard. The Age of Reform: From Bryan to F. D. R. New York: Knopf, 1963. Holubowicz, William. “A University in Print.” Sign 21 (December 1941): 281-82. Hopkins, Charles Howard. The Rise of the Social Gospel in American Protestantism: 1865-1915. New Haven, Conn: Yale University, 1967. Huber, Raphael. M. ed. Our Bishops Speak: National Pastorals and Annual Statements of the Hierarchy of the United States. Resolutions of Episcopal Committees and Communications of the Administrative Board of the National Catholic Welfare Conference, 1919-1951. Milwaukee, Wis.: Bruce, 1952. John Paul II. On Human Work. Washington, D.C.: United States Catholic Conference, 1981. John Paul II. “Sollicitudo Rei Socialis”. Origins 17 (3 March 1988): 641, 643-60. Josol, Abdon Ma C. “Property and Natural Law in Rerum Novarum and ST. 2-2, Q. 66, AA. 1, 2, 7: An Expository and Comparative Study.” S.T.D. diss., Pontificia Universitas Lateranensis, 1985. Kaiser, Edwin G. Theology of Work. Westminster Md.: Newman, 1966. Karson, Marc. American Labor Unions and Politics, 1900-1918. Carbondale, Ill.: Southern Illinois University, 1958. ———. “The Catholic Church and the Political Development of American Trade Unionism.” Industrial and Labor Relations Review 4 (July 1951): 527-542. Kautsky, Karl. Foundations of Christianity: A Study in Christian Origins. New York: Monthly Review, 1925. Kerby, William. The Social Mission of Charity: A Study of Points of View in Catholic Charities. New York: Macmillan, 1921. Kress, William S. Questions of Socialists and Their Answers. Cleveland, Ohio: Ohio Apostolate, 1905. Kunz, Mary Madeleine. “American Catholic Opinion on Feminism”. M.A. thesis, Mullen Library, Catholic University of America, 1946. LaFarge, John. The Manner is Ordinary (New York: Harcourt Brace, 1954). Latta, M. C. “The Background for the Social Gospel in American Protestantism.” Church History 5 (1936): 256-70.
Bibliography
183
Laux, John Joseph. Christian Social Reform: Program Outlined by its Pioneer, William Emmanuel Baron Von Ketteler, Bishop of Mainz. Preface by William Cardinal O’Connell. Philadelphia: Dolphin, 1912. Lee, William J. “The Work in Industrial Relations of the Social Action Department of the National Catholic Welfare Conference, 1933-1945.” M.A. diss., Catholic University of America, 1946. Leonard, Joan. “Catholic Attitude Toward American Labor, 1884-1919.” M.A. Thesis, Columbia University, 1940. Lescher, Bruce H. “William J. Kerby: A Lost Voice in American Catholic Spirituality,” Records of the American Catholic Historical Society of Philadelphia 102 (Spring 1991): 1-11. McAvoy, Thomas T. “Americanism, Fact and Fiction.” Catholic Historical Review 31 (1945): 133-53. ———. The Americanist Heresy in Roman Catholicism, 1895-1900. Notre Dame, Ind. Notre Dame University, 1963. ———. “The Catholic Minority after the Americanist Controversy, 1899-1917: A Survey.” Review of Politics 21 (January 1959): 53-82. McDonagh, Thomas J. “Some Aspects of the Roman Catholic Attitude Toward the American Labor Movement 1900-1914.” Ph.D. diss., University of Wisconsin, 1951. McDonough, Peter. Men Astutely Trained: A History of the Jesuits in the American Century. New York: Free Press, 1992. ———. “Metamorphoses of the Jesuits: Sexual Identity, Gender Roles, and Hierarchy in Catholicism.” Comparative Studies in Society and History 32 (April 1990): 325-56. McEntee, Georgiana Putnam. The Social Catholic Movement in Great Britain. New York: Macmillan, 1927. McGovern, Arthur F. Marxism: An American Christian Perspective. Maryknoll, N.Y.: Orbis, 1980. McKeown, Elizabeth. “The National Bishops’ Conference: An Analysis of Its Origins.” The Catholic Historical Review 66 (October 1980): 565-83. ———. “War and Welfare: A Study of American Catholic Leadership.” Ph.D. diss., University of Chicago, 1976. McQuade, Vincent A. The American Catholic Attitudes on Child Labor Since 1891: A Study of the Formation and Development of a Catholic Attitude on a Specific Social Question. Washington, D.C.: Catholic University of America, 1938. Mcshane, Joseph M. “Sufficiently Radical”: Catholicism, Progressivism, and the Bishops’ Program of 1919. Washington, D.C.: Catholic University, 1986. Maynard, Theodore. The Story of American Catholicism. New York: Macmillan, 1948. Michel, Virgil. Christian Social Reconstruction: Some Fundamentals of Quadragesimo Anno. Milwaukee, Wis.: Bruce, 1937. Miller, Raymond J. Forty Years After: Pius XI and the Social Order. St. Paul, Minn.: Radio Reply Press, 1947. Ming, John J. The Characteristics and the Religion of Modern Socialism. New York: Benziger, 1908. ———. “Modern Theories of Society.” American Catholic Quarterly Review 21 (January 1896): 26-42. ———. The Morality of Modern Socialism. New York: Benziger, 1909.
184
Stephen A. Werner
Misner, Paul. Social Catholicism in Europe: From the Onset of Industrialization to the First World War. New York: Crossroad, 1991. Monk, Maria. Awful Disclosures of the Hotel Dieu Nunnery of Montreal. New York: Howe & Bates, 1836. Morse, Samuel F. B. Foreign Conspiracy Against the Liberties of the United States. New York: Leavitt, Lord, 1835. Mueller, Franz H. Heinrich Pesch and His Theory of Christian Solidarism. St. Paul, Minn: College of St. Thomas, 1941. (This work dedicated to Husslein.) Mulcahy, Richard E. The Economics of Heinrich Pesch. New York: Holt, 1952. Murray, Raymond W. Introductory Sociology. 2d ed. New York: F. S. Crofts, 1946. Neusse, Celestine. J. The Social Thought of American Catholics, 1634-1829. Washington, D.C.: Catholic University of America, 1945. Nell-Breuning, Oswald Von. Reorganization of Social Economy: The Social Encyclical Developed and Explained. Trans. by Bernard W. Dempsey. New York: Bruce, 1936. New Catholic Encyclopedia. New York: McGraw Hill, 1967. The New York Times. 21 October 1952: 29-2. Nitti, Francesco S. Catholic Socialism. Trans. by Mary Mackintosh. New York: Macmillan, 1895. “Obituaries: Rev Joseph A. [sic] Husslein, S.J.” The Province News Letter 17 (February 1953): 139-41. O’Brien, David J. American Catholics and Social Reform: The New Deal Years. New York: Oxford University, 1968. O’Brien, John A., ed. Catholics and Scholarship: A Symposium on the Development of Scholars. Huntington, Ind.: Our Sunday Visitor, 1939. Organized Social Justice: An Economic Program for the United States Applying Pius XI’s Great Encyclical on Social Life. New York: Paulist, (1936). Plater, Charles. Catholic Social Work in Germany. St. Louis, Mo.: Herder, 1909. Puhl, Louis J. The Spiritual Exercises of St. Ignatius: Based on Studies in the Language of the Autograph. Chicago: Loyola University, 1951. Pumphrey, Ralph E. and Muriel W. Pumphrey. The Heritage of American Social Work: Readings in Its Philosophical and Institutional Development. New York: Columbia University, 1961. Francois Quesnay, Quesnay’s Tableau economigue, ed. Marguerite Kuczynski and Ronald L. Meek (London: Macmillan, 1972). Rauschenbusch, Walter. Christianity and the Social Crisis. Edited by Robert D. Cross. New York: Harper and Row, 1964. Regis, M. The Catholic Bookman’s Guide: A Critical Evaluation of Catholic Literature. New York: Hawthorn Books, 1961. Reher, Margaret Mary. Catholic Intellectual Life in America: A Historical Study of Persons and Movements. New York: Macmillan, 1989. “Rev. Joseph A. [sic] Husslein.” The News-Letter—Missouri Province 17 (February 1953): 139-41. “Rev. Joseph C. Husslein: R.I.P.” America 88 (1 November 1952): 116. “Rev. Joseph Husslein, S.J., Pioneer Sociologist.” Liguorian 39 (May 1951): 318. Ring, Mary Ignatius. Villeneuve-Bargemont, Precursor of Modern Social Catholicism. Milwaukee, Wis.: Bruce, 1935. Romig, Walter, ed. The Book of Catholic Authors: (First Series). Grosse Pointe, Mich.: Walter Romig, 1942.
Bibliography
185
Roohan, James Edmund. American Catholics and the Social Question 1865-1900. New York: Arno, 1976. Ross, Eva Jeany. A Survey of Sociology. Milwaukee, Wis.: Bruce, 1932. Ryan, John A. Social Doctrine in Action: A Personal History. New York: Harper and Brothers, 1941. ———. Alleged Socialism of the Church Fathers. St. Louis, Mo.: Herder, 1915. ———. Distributive Justice. New York: Macmillan, 1916. ———. A Living Wage: Its Ethical and Economic Aspects. Rev. and abridged. New York: Macmillan, 1920. ———. “May a Catholic be a Socialist?,” Catholic Fortnightly Review 16 (1 February 1909): 70-73. ———. Social Reconstruction. New York: Macmillan, 1920. Shannon, David A. The Socialist Party of America: A History. New York: MacMillan, 1955. Smith, Thurber M. The Unemployment Problem: A Catholic Solution from the Viewpoints of Ethics, History, and Social Science. Milwaukee: Bruce, 1932. “Social Study Courses.” The Woodstock Letters 42 (1913): 404. Sparr, Arnold. To Promote, Defend, and Redeem: The Catholic Literary Revival and the Cultural Transformation of American Catholicism, 1920-1960. Westport, Conn.: Greenwood Press, 1990 Talbot, Francis X. Richard Henry Tierney: Priest of the Society of Jesus. New York: America Press, 1930. Tome, William N. “Joseph C. Husslein, S.J.: “Pioneer of American Catholic Social Thought.” M.A. thesis, St. Louis University, 1951. Trehey, Harold. Foundations of a Modern Guild System. Washington, D.C.: Catholic University of America, 1940. “Two Sociologists.” America 43 (19 April 1930): 31. Wallace, Lillian Parker. Leo XIII and the Rise of Socialism. Durham, NC.: Duke University, 1966. Weeks, Estella T. Recontruction Programs: A Comparative Study of Their Content and of the Viewpoints of the Issuing Organizations. Introduction by Herbert N. Shenton. New York: Woman’s Press, 1919. White, James A. The Era of Good Intentions: A Survey of American Catholics’ Writing Between the Years 1880-1915. New York: Arno Press, 1978. Williams, Melvin J. Catholic Social Thought: Its Approach to Contemporary Problems. New York: Ronald Press, 1950. Williams, Michael. American Catholics in the War: National Catholic War Council, 1917-1921. New York, Macmillan, 1921. Worland, Carr Elizabeth. “American Catholic Women and the Church to 1920.” Ph.D. dissertation, Saint Louis University, 1982. Wynne, John J. The Great Encyclical Letters of Pope Leo XIII (New York: Benziger, 1903). Xavier Alumni Sodality. Fifty Years in Conflict and Triumph. New York, 1927.
186
Index
America 12-14 American Bishops 30-31 American Catholic Literary Revival 8, 128f American Socialist Party 26 Americanism 28-29 Amos 45 Anti-union practices 79-80 Bellarmine, Robert 95 Bible 15, 39-48, 147 Bible and Labor 39-48 Blakely, Paul L., S.J. 36 Bruce Publishing 16-18, 131 Capitalism 23, 24, 74-83, 98 Catholic Association for International Peace 15 Catholic Conference on Industrial Problems 15 Catholic Press 121, 129 Catholic Social Guild, The 94 Catholic Social Work 141-42 “Catholic Social Platform, A” 1415, 94-122 Central Verein 32, 38 Christ the King 15, 146 Christian Democracy 98-100, 121 Christian History 48-61 Christian Socialism 71-72 Church and Slavery 50 Cooperatives 86-87 Copartnership 87-88 Co-Production 88-90
Stephen A. Werner
Family 120 Farm Labor 117-18 Fordham University 13, 15 George, Henry 27-28, 104 Gladden, Washington 71 Herron, George D. 71 Hillstrom, Joseph 80 Holy Grail 149 Husslein, Joseph C., S.J. Early Life 10-12 Career 12-18 Final Years 18-19 Ignatius of Loyola 82 Industrial Workers of the World 26 Jesus 47-48 Kenkel, Frederick 32, 55 Ketteler, Bishop 89 Kerby, William J. 33-34, 144 Knights of Labor 28 Labor Measures 105-13 Labor Unions 110-12 LaFarge, John, S.J. 36 Leo XIII 21-24 Lord, Daniel, S.J. 127-28
Democratic Industry 81-83, 100101 Democracy 95-98, 123 Devotional Writing 145-49 Dietz, Peter 34-35, 89-90
Martin, Luther 55-61 Mathews, Shailer 71 McGlynn, Edward 27-28 Marquette College (University) 10 Marx 48, 67, 70, 106 Marxism 23, 49 Medieval Guilds 14, 24, 51-55 Ming, John J. S.J. 11, 20, 129
Engelen, William J. S.J. 34, 55 Eucharist 16 Evolution 14
National Catholic Welfare Conference 15, 17, 19, 30-31 Nativism 29-30
Index Nell-Breuning, Oswald von, S.J. 24 Occupational Groups 112 Organized Social Justice 17-18 Piux XI 24-25, 31 Pesch, Heinrich 96, 102 Plater, Charles S.J. 94 Populist Movement 102 Prices 102-103 Prison Labor 110 Progressivism 102 Property 104, 119 Protestant Reformation 55-61 Quadragesimo anno 24-25, 31 Quesnay, Francois 75 Rauschenbusch, Walter 40, 60, 71-74, 92 Religion and Culture Series 13041, 156-63 Rerum novarum 21-24 Revisionist Socialism 69-70 Ryan, John A. 14, 32-33, 40, 52 Role of the State 107 Saint Louis University 10-11, 16, 18, 141-45 School of Social Service 141-45 Science and Culture Series 128-41, 156-63 Single Tax Theory 28, 104 Slavery 49-50 Smith, Adam 75 Strikes 108 Social Gospel Movement 71-74, 96 Social Insurance 110 “Social Reconstruction” 15, 31, 109 Socialism 23-27, 64-74, 98 Socialist Party of America 65-66 Suarez, Francisco de 95
187 Taxation 104 Thérèse of Lisieux 15, 148 Tierney, Richard Henry, S.J. 36 Unemployment 108 “University in Print, A” 16-18, 128-41, 156-63 Wages 105-106 Women’s Issues 113-17, 125-26 Woman Labor 113-17 World War I 14, 30 Wynne, John J., S.J. 12, 35
Marquette Studies in Philosophy Andrew Tallon, Editor Standing orders accepted All books available as eBook Harry Klocker, S.J. William of Ockham and the Divine Freedom. ISBN 0-87462001-5. 141 pages, pp., index. $15. Second edition, reviewed, corrected and with a new Introduction. Margaret Monahan Hogan. Finality and Marriage. ISBN 0-87462-600-5. 122 pp. Paper. $15. Gerald A. McCool, S.J. The Neo-Thomists. ISBN 0-87462-601-1. 175 pp. Paper. $20. Max Scheler. Ressentiment. ISBN 0-87462-602-1. 172 pp. Paper. $20. New Introduction by Manfred S. Frings. Knud Løgstrup. Metaphysics. Translated by Dr. Russell Dees ISBN 0-87462-603X. Volume I, 342 pp. Paper. $35. ISBN 0-67462-607-2. Volume II, 402 pp. Paper. $40. Two volume set priced at $70. Howard P. Kainz. Democracy and the “Kingdom of God” . ISBN 0-87462-610-2. 250 pp. Paper. $25. Manfred Frings. Max Scheler. A Concise Introduction into the World of a Great Thinker ISBN 0-87462-605-6. 200 pp. Paper. $20. Second ed., rev. New Foreword by the author. G. Heath King. Existence Thought Style: Perspectives of a Primary Relation, portrayed through the work of Søren Kierkegaard. English edition by Timothy Kircher. ISBN 0-87462-606-4. 187 pp., index. Paper. $20. Augustine Shutte. Philosophy for Africa. ISBN 0-87462-608-0. 184 pp. Paper. $20. Paul Ricoeur. Key to Husserl’s Ideas I. Translated by Bond Harris and Jacqueline Bouchard Spurlock.With a Foreword by Pol Vandevelde. ISBN 0-87462-6099. 176 pp., index. Paper. $20. Karl Jaspers. Reason and Existenz. Afterword by Pol Vandevelde. ISBN 0-87462611-0. 180 pp. Paper. $20. Gregory R. Beabout. Freedom and Its Misuses: Kierkegaard on Anxiety and Despair ISBN 0-87462-612-9. 192 pp., index. Paper. $20. Manfred S. Frings. The Mind of Max Scheler. The First Comprehensive Guide Based on the Complete Works ISBN 0-87462-613-7. 328 pp. Paper. $35. Claude Pavur. Nietzsche Humanist. ISBN 0-87462-614-5. 214 pp., index. Paper. $25. Pierre Rousselot. Intelligence: Sense of Being, Faculty of God. Translation of L’Intellectualismse de saint Thomas with a Foreword and Notes by Andrew Tallon. ISBN 0-87462-615-3. 236 pp., index. Paper. $25. Immanuel Kant. Critique of Practical Reason. Translation by H.W. Cassirer. Edited by G. Heath King and Ronald Weitzman and with an Introduction by D.M. MacKinnon. ISBN 0-87462-616-1. Paper. 218 pp. $20. Gabriel Marcel’s Perspectives on The Broken World. Translated by Katharine Rose Hanley. The Broken World, A Four-Act Play followed by “Concrete Approaches to Investigating the Ontological Mystery.” Six orignal illustrations by Stephen Healy. Commentaries by Henri Gouhier and Marcel Belay. Eight Appendices. Introduction by Ralph McInerny. Bibliographies. ISBN 0-87462-617-X. paperbound. 242 pp. $25. Karl-Otto Apel. Towards a Transformation of Philosophy. New Fore-word by Pol Vandevelde.ISBN 0-87462-619-6. Paper. 308 pp. $35. Gene Fendt. Is Hamlet a Religious Drama? As Essay on a Question in Kierkegaard. ISBN 0-87462-620-X. Paper. 264 pp. $30.
Marquette Studies in Theology Andrew Tallon, Editor Standing orders accepted All books available as eBook Frederick M. Bliss. Understanding Reception. ISBN 0-87462-625-0. 180 pp., index, bibliography. Paper. $20. Martin Albl, Paul Eddy, Renée Mirkes, OSF, Editors. Directions in NewTestament Methods ISBN 0-87462-626-9. 129 pp. Annotated bibliography. Paper. $15. Foreword by William S. Kurz. Robert M. Doran. Subject and Psyche. ISBN 0-87462-627-7. 285 pp. Paper. $25. Second ed., rev. With a new Foreword by the author. Kenneth Hagen, editor. The Bible in the Churches. How Various Christians Interpret the Scriptures ISBN 0-87462-628-5. 218 pp. Paper. $25. Third, revised editon. New chapter on Reformed tradition. Index. Jamie T. Phelps, O.P., Editor. Black and Catholic: The Challenge and Gift of Black Folk. Contributions of African American Experience and Thought to Catholic Theology. ISBN 0-87462-629-3. 182 pp. Index. Paper. $20. Foreword by Patrick Carey. Karl Rahner. Spirit in the World. New, Corrected Translation by William Dych. Foreword by Francis Fiorenza. ISBN 0-87462-630-7. COMPUTER DISK VERSION. $10. Available on 3.5 inch disk; specify Macintosh or Windows. By a special arrangement with Continuum Publishing Co. Karl Rahner. Hearer of the Word. New Translation of the First Edition by Joseph Donceel. Edited and with anIntroduction by Andrew Tallon. By a special arrangement with Continuum Publishing Co. ISBN 0-87462-631-5. COMPUTER DISK VERSION. $10. Available on 3.5 inch disk; specify Macintosh or Windows. Robert M. Doran. Theological Foundations. Vol. 1 Intentionality and Psyche. ISBN 0-87462-632-3. 484 pp. Paper. $50. Robert M. Doran. Theological Foundations. Vol. 2 Theology and Culture. ISBN 087462-633-1. 533 pp. Paper. $55. Patrick W. Carey. Orestes A. Brownson: A Bibliography, 1826-1876. ISBN 0-87462634-X. 212 pp. Index. Paper. $25. John Martinetti, S.J. Reason to Believe Today. ISBN 0-87462-635-8. 216 pp. Paper. $25. George H. Tavard. Trina Deitas: The Controversy between Hincmar and Gottschalk ISBN 0-87462-636-6. 160 pp. Paper. $20. Jeanne Cover, IBVM. Love–The Driving Force. Mary Ward’s Spirituality. Its Significance for Moral Theology ISBN 0-87462-637-4. 217 pp. Paper. $25. David A. Boileau, Editor. Principles of Catholic Social Teaching. ISBN 0-87462-6382. 204 pp. Paper. $25. Michael Purcell. Mystery and Method: The Other in Rahner and Levinas. With a Foreword by Andrew Tallon. ISBN 0-87462-639-0. Paper. 394 pp. $40. W.W. Meissner, S.J., M.D. To the Greater Glory: A Psychological Study of Ignatian Spirituality. ISBN 0-87462-640-4. Paper. 657 pp. $50. Catholic Theology in the University: Source of Wholeness. Virginia M. Shaddy, editor. ISBN 0-87462-641-2. Paper. 120 pp. $15. Subscibe to eNews from Marquette University Press Email
[email protected] with the word “subscribe” as the subject. Visit Marquette University Press online: www.marquette.edu/mupress/
