Showing posts with label Fr. Vincent McNabb. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Fr. Vincent McNabb. Show all posts

Wednesday, February 20, 2008

Is Bishop Gore a Distributist?

by Fr. Vincent McNabb


There is no cause that would not gain by the pen of Bishop Gore. Not that it would always gain in clearness. The Bishop can be so deep or so dark that many of his writings are read by his enemies, who quarry in them for something to denounce, rather than by his friends, who are anxious for something to understand.

On social matters, such as form the subject of these gathered Halley Stewart lectures, Bishop Gore speaks with something of prophetic power. Amongst the “word-sowers” of the Church of England the authentic prophetical note will oftenest be heard, not from the pulpit of St. Paul’s or the chair of Birmingham, but from this cultured voice to which, we believe, not a few pulpits are closed. But as far as we can judge, if all the pulpits in the Church of England were closed to him, he would feel no sense of narrowed outlet, still less of thwarted ambition. The man who has given up two Episcopal chairs for the sake of intellectual life and social truth is set beyond the little passions that shake lesser men. Nowhere in the written or spoken words of the man has anyone detected an effort or intention to “play to the gallery” or to catch votes. For this reason his readers know that, even in those pages where his mind seems bewildered, his bewilderment comes of that “cor sincerum” on which alone the final stages of truth can be built.

In these lectures, this sincere heart, and on the whole this clear thinker “sets out four main propositions: (1) That the present state of society demands a reform so thorough as to amount to a peaceful revolution; (2) That the revolution must consist of a change of spirit rather than a change in legislative administration; (3) That the change in spirit will not come from any conversion of men in masses, but from the influence and inspiration of leaders; (4) Finally, that Jesus Christ is the Saviour and Redeemer of man in social as well as individual life.”

It is in the development and proof of this thesis that Bishop Gore leads us to ask if he is a Distributist. If ever he was a “Socialist” in deed or name, life and thought have brought a gradual focusing of vision. Or it may be that the young man who saw visions has gradually grown into the older man who dreams dreams – those prophetical dreams that are woven of spun memories. No wonder, then, that the dream which ends the book should have so many pages of history – the “memory of mankind.” But this history of Bishop Gore’s is such as a Distributist would write. It is a quiet panegyric, not of what is primitive but what is primary. It can look on the Middle Ages, as many historians look on the Crusades, as the tragedy of thought and purpose outrunning accomplishment. It has no wish to copy the failures of the past, but only its clear, damning vision of transcendent intellectual and moral right.

In many or most of the details of the Bishop’s dream he is frankly distributist. Thus he writes of the Early Church:-

“We find in the Christian fathers vigorous denunciation of all keeping of private wealth such as is not needed for the support of the possessor’s own family. Such selfish keeping of wealth from the common land they call – not lack of generosity only, but injustice or theft. It is not that they deny the right of private property. In a world of sin, private property must exist; and the law must maintain it. But it is only to be justified when it is reduced to the minimum needed to meet the reasonable requirements of life according to a man’s condition.” (p. 84)


A further passage in Bishop Gore’s most convincing manner might well be copied into any handbook for Distributists:-

“From any democratic point of view the aim of the State in legislature must be, as far as possible, to secure the reality of private property to all citizens, though no doubt in varying degree. As against any thorough-going form of Socialism or Communism I desire to insist that the maintenance of the family (which should always be regarded as the root and center of the organization of human society) as well as the encouragement of individuality demands the maintenance of private property…the object of legislation should always be to endow the largest number of individuals with property and the sense of property. It is in both these respects that our laws have signally failed. Their tendency throughout history has been to create a propertied class and make it dominant over an unpropertied nation. It is certain, if anything that can be called democracy or freedom to prevail, that this tendency has to be deliberately and systematically reversed. Nothing seems to me at this moment more alarming than the concentration of capital, and the vast power that capital gives, in a few hands. For instance, in the department of journalism, so important for the life of any nation, it appears already to have almost destroyed the freedom of the Press.” 9pp.143,144).


This is vigorous, limpid, well-head Distributism. Are we to welcome Bishop Gore as a Distributist?

Read more...

Wednesday, August 01, 2007

An Economic Creed

by Fr. Vincent McNabb


1. I believe that human life, being a divine life, is not adequately paid by any human dividend, but only by a divine wage.

2. I believe that "the desire of money is the root of all evil" in our economic world.

3. I believe that a life organised for moneymaking is the error of taking "gain to be godliness."

4. I believe that money values are false values: as money weights are false weights.

5. I believe that mass production on the land is not for the sake of the land, but for the sake of money.

6. I believe that what is called moneymaking is not wealth-making, but money-getting.

7. I believe that the growing of one commodity, such as fruit or flowers, finally impoverishes the country by making it the servant of the town; whereas the town should be the servant of the country.

8. I believe the salvation of our overindustrialised England must come from the land, but it cannot come from industrialising the land.

9. I believe that the business methods which have brought our towns to bankruptcy would bring our country to bankruptcy.

10. Finally, I believe that by organising our land-work for a market, and not for home and homestead consumption, inevitably puts the landworker at the mercy of the market and the transport service which carries the market.

11. I believe in God, the pattern or the Mount, who has challenged us by a life and death given the service of mankind.

12. I believe that to service God by serving man is not to be a slave, but a king.

"Servire Deo Regnare Est." God's Service is Kingship!

Read more...

Friday, January 26, 2007

A Distributism How-To

by Dr. Peter Chojnowski



When considering the practical implications of the economic doctrines of Distributism, it is important to remember that the theorists, Hilaire Belloc, G.K. Chesterton, Arthur Penty, and Fr. Vincent McNabb, had no intention of merely providing a macroeconomic model for a nation. Such a macroeconomic model is useful for the prudential decisions of the statesman. They, more so than we, had hope that such a model would be taken up by the statesmen of their day. It is providential, therefore, that they also mentioned the microeconomic implications of the "Third Way." It is these microeconomic implications, applied specifically to the current situation of the average traditional Catholic family, which will be the topic of this article.

It is particularly fitting that we focus on the microeconomic aspects of the Third Way and ask ourselves, how can we apply these principles and ideas our own lives, our own family situations, and the situations of our ever growing traditional Catholic communities. The reason it is fitting is because "economics" from the Greek oeconomia, means "household management," the way in which we give order, sustenance, and stability to our families and our communities. A true economic theory must, therefore, have as its primary aims the establishment of a system which provides for the basic needs of families and which provides men with work which is intrinsically fulfilling, capable of providing sustenance, and in full accord with the ultimate end of human life, the sharing in the Divine Life Itself.

What will enable our families to achieve these ends of work and household? First, we must commit ourselves to the goal advanced by the economic teachings of Pope Leo XIII (Rerum Novarum), Pope Pius XI (Quadragesimo Anno), and the Distributist theorists, the attainment of real property for families. It is only with the attainment of real property (i.e., not mortgaged to the modern day usurer) that we shall establish fixed "realms," footholds of Christendom capable of sustaining over a indefinite period of time families dedicated to the Social Kingship of Our Lord Jesus Christ.

Second, we must organize labor. Obviously, to organize labor there must be an sufficiently large "labor pool" to organize. If we are to truly construct the essentials of a microeconomic system, we must fulfill the end of an economic system, the satisfaction of the basic needs of families. This can only be done if there is a diverse enough group of men and women whose occupational talent would allow them to participate in this attempt to provide for the basic and primary needs of a community. In this regard, let us emphasize that our "parallel economy" (i.e., an economy which provides for the same needs as the dominant capitalist economy, but provides for these needs in a different manner), must be focused on attempting to provide what Fr. Vincent McNabb refers to as "primary goods," (e.g., housing, food, clothing, and I would add medical services) as opposed to "secondary goods." Secondary goods are those which are meant to satisfy some want or whim of man, but are not essential as are primary goods. By providing for the basic needs, or at least as many as possible, our community would advance towards the self-sufficiency which is the mark of all true societies.

Third, we need to have, on the part of a coherent community organized on the foundation of the true Faith, a commitment to support, in every way possible, the economic organization of the community on the basis of the teachings of the Church. Without this type of intentional commitment, any such project will fail. What is needed is both an occupational commitment on the part of some members of the community or communities and a financial commitment on the part of all of the members of a community. What type of occupational commitment would this entail? It would mean that a workingman or professional would give up his capitalistic consciousness which dictates that he use his skills, talents, and labors to fulfill the wants and whims of himself and his family alone, but rather, use them to both satisfy his families needs and contribute to the satisfaction of the needs of all the families in the community. What type of financial commitment would this entail? Only the resolve, on the part of all the members of the community, to channel their financial resources in such a way that their own family's needs are satisfied through the efforts of the economic organs or corporate bodies which are made up of the men and woman of one's own community. The point is not gratuitous financial contributions, but rather, simply fulfilling one's family's basic needs within the structures organized by the community itself. For this especially to occur, we must develop a stronger sense of "brotherhood" based upon adherence to the fullness of the true Faith and upon the God-given virtue of fraternal charity. Our commitment, as individuals and as communities, must be to ensure that whole groups of families, the larger the better, survive, prosper, raise and educate their children, and persist in their practice of the true Religion in the face of a completely hostile world and anti-Christian "system." This would be our opportunity to disinvest in an economic system committed to the destruction of large, truly Catholic families and reinvest in a microeconomic effort that will not only sustain traditional Catholic families as traditional Catholic families, but, inevitably, help sustain the traditional chapels and schools which are now giving life to the souls and minds of so many.

A) Guilds
The first step in the organization of such a microeconomic system is the organization of guilds. Guilds were the organs of the Distributist economic system which flourished in the Catholic centuries of the past. In recent times, Archbishop Lefebvre and Bishop Fellay have specifically advocated the formation of such vocational organizations among the traditional Catholic faithful. By their very nature, guilds demand a labor force divided according to certain specialties. For our purposes, since we are dealing with a relatively small labor pool, we ought to establish guilds each dedicated to the satisfaction of one of the basic needs mentioned earlier (i.e., food, housing, clothing, and medical care). Since these guild will be corporate bodies, uniting all the members of a certain type of trade, these bodies will need to be animated by spiritual souls. The first need for such an organization of workers is the spiritual and moral care of a chaplain. The chaplain's role would be to properly orient the minds of the "brothers" so that in their dealings with one another and their clients, they will properly implement the teachings of the Church in their own specific field of labor, along with insuring that the men are always understanding their work and their labor as a guild from the perspective of the Faith and of the ultimate goal of human life. Also, in the great spirit of the medieval guilds, a special devotion to a patron saint should bind together the Catholic life of each specific body; St. Raphael for the medical workers and St. Joseph for the construction workers readily come to mind. By giving work a Catholic spirit, and by working with those who have the same faith and struggle to lead the same moral life, there will inevitably be a greater integration of faith and labor which will make for a more integral Catholicism on the part of those who attain membership in the guild.

Along with integrating faith and work, the system of guilds would help gain economic clout for the guild as a body of worker or professionals. Either the guild as a whole, for instance, the construction worker's guild, would be in a better bargaining position as regards specific contracts because they have an assembled team with a certain reputation in the area, or an individual employee, say a radiologist, as a member of the medical services guild would have backing him a group of professionals from the same general profession. The ultimate objective for these guilds, of course, would be to serve as the primary "organs" supply the basic goods needed for the sustenance of the community. Not only should the work of the guilds be specifically directed to the good of their own specific communities. The members of the communities serviced by the guilds must also take it upon themselves to support their brethren by employing them. The traditional Catholic communities must begin to employ their own people to service the primary needs of their own families. When a traditional Catholic man is looking for a wife, he, if he is sane, "looks" in specific places and among certain families. Why is it not the same when looking for an employee?

B) Guild and Family-Owned Businesses
By organizing labor in the form of a guild system, financial resources can also be more easily pooled, making the takeover of operational businesses in the area in which most of the community lives more likely. A grocery store, farmers' cooperative, or a clothing store which has as its aim the service of the community rather than pure profit, should be a goal for the relevant guilds. It is these types of businesses, either guild or family owned, which could make the Church's demand for a just and affordable price a reality. Establishing affordable prices and providing just wages for the employees could be rendered economically feasible by a steady clientele and a high volume of sales. Business ownership also means some degree of political clout on the local level. Money means power; let us not shirk from this thought, but rather, employ the truth for the financial and social well-being of our communities.

Of course, in our time, one of the fields in which you find many morally objectionable practices and attitudes is the medical field. Surely, with all the medical needs of large families, including deliveries and pre- and post-natal services, one of the goals for a medical service guild should be the establishment of a independent medical clinic or the takeover of an already operational clinic. There might even be a concerted search to find staffing for such a clinic from among traditional Catholic medical professionals looking to move to one of the various communities in the United States and elsewhere. In full accord with the "back to basics" approach of this proposal, the servicing of home-births would surely be beneficial to those large or new families seeking to avoid the astronomical price, sterility, and nonfamilial atmosphere of the modern hospital.

C) Homesteading
As increasing numbers of young families realize that their children need the benefits of an education at a traditional Catholic school, they will necessarily consider migrating to a traditional Catholic community which is formed around an operational educational institution., normally one which can provide an education for all the years up to and including high school. One of the concerted efforts which must be made is to provide affordable housing for these new and growing families. Affordable housing is only possible when there is affordable land upon which to put a house. It would be most probable then that the communities which could attract such new or large families would be situated in rural or semi-rural areas. In these areas, tracts of land could be bought outright, without needing to ask for the "services" of the local branch of international usury. If real property is the aim, affordable land is a necessity. The next problem to be solved is the building of affordable housing. Here, I believe that the construction guild could make this there central task and "apostolate." What better way to encourage young and growing families to move to chapels which provide also a school for children, than by making affordable, really affordable housing available to them? What better way to provide for steady and continuous work for the construction guild, than to service the demand which would no doubt exist if a ready supply were known to be available? Our slogan here should be "make work not fake work"! Of course, in these individual communities, there would need to be those who coordinated supply and demand. This could consist in an outreach program attached to the construction guild. The accumulation of capital by the guild itself, could facilitate the initial purchase of the tracts of land upon which the guild would build the houses. Houses not generally meant for singles or for small families, but for large ones. Again, increased volume would make possible affordable prices. The goal, of course, must be to have the maximal number of families possess their own mortgage-free housing.

D
) Apprenticeships
On of the aims of the proposed guild-system must be the initiation of an apprenticeship system. Apprenticeships have always been the future of any guild. They have also been a source of hope for the young. The essence of the apprentice system is the existence of a master or master-craftsman and a disciple or apprentice. The relationship between master and disciple is the fundament of all true educational systems of any sort. Such a relationship, either established within a particular guild or, even, with a youth's own father serving in the roll of master-craftsman, would remedy many of the dilemma's which tax the minds and hearts of our traditional Catholic youth. First, there would be a greater psychological integration. By forming fraternal bonds with the men working in the same profession who, also, share the same faith, the true Faith would become something more than a series of propositions learned in childhood, with little relevance to the world of work, money, and friends. Rather, by feeling himself to be a vital part of a corporate body of men united not only be a common work but by a common faith, he will not be able help understanding the Faith to be something for mature minds. In this case, the Faith will provide him friends, mentors, customers, an occupation, hope for the future, and bread.

Second, the apprenticeship system would provide something desperately needed by our youth: a very quick transition from adolescence to adulthood. The serious work of a serious trade would not only render the youth more responsible for themselves, but it would also allow them to clearly envision the day in which they will be provident enough to form a family of their own. Attached to this idea of reviving the ancient position of the apprentice, is another proposal which has a similar set of goals. It is the master/apprentice relationship applied to professional "white-collar" careers. Most of these would fall outside a guild system which has as its aim the providing of what we have called "primary goods"; if a young person should want to become a professor, lawyer, or accountant for example. For these youth, I would advance the idea of a "big brother" program with an established network of professional contacts. These "big brothers," who are traditional Catholics who already work in the profession that the youth is trying to enter, would act as advisor, confidant, patron, and contact provider for the youth as he maneuvers his way through the educational and professional maze that is part of the initiation into any profession. We would therefore ensure either that the communities we have been speaking of would have an entire ensemble of professionals dedicated to its service or you would have young traditional Catholics being carefully maneuvered into the "right" positions. We must cultivate our best and our brightest. Remember, the Masons took the idea from us!

E) Barter and Credit Unions
One of the most obvious problems encountered by the head of a household in his attempt to gain real property for his family is the fact that wages are not high enough to meet the demands made upon him to provide the primary goods necessary for his family's survival in our contemporary society. Our style of life cannot be maintained without going into debt to one or another of the financial institutions which, through usury and by exploiting an economic system based upon wants and whims, have gained a hold on the money supply and have somehow received "permission" to create "money," backed by nothing but the word of the institution itself. How can we avoid having the brethren go into debt? Such must be one of the primary aims of a parallel economy based upon the Distributist principles of Rerum Novarum. In this regard, along with the construction guild keeping prices down because of steady demand and because the objective is family sustenance and not profit, there are two other ways I would suggest for avoidance of indebtedness by our fellow co-religionists. They are a prudent and restricted use of the barter system, and the establishment of nonusurious credit unions. By the "barter system," I simply mean the exchange of service for service, rather than the exchange of service for dollar. Not only would this exchange of one man's work for another man's work further strengthen ties between man and man, family and family, but it would also allow a family to conserve whatever monetary capital it has, while absolutely avoiding the need to go to the givers of credit to pay for a service. Moreover, as far as I know, a service exchanged for service (e.g., plumbing work for chickens and eggs), would not figure as part of one's yearly income. Another way to legally "disinvest" in the System and reinvest in the homesteads of Christendom.

The other way I would propose for helping the traditional Catholic brethren to avoid the slavery of usury and, yet, to provide a source of finance for some of the projects suggested here, is to establish nonusurious credit unions. How can this be possible since the typical credit union loans out money at a lower, but still at some, rate of interest to its members? Here we must keep in mind the Catholic Church's traditional condemnation of the taking of interest on all nonprofit yielding loans. Loans for housing construction are, except in cases of speculation, not profit-bearing loans. A loan with interest which serves as the initial investment money for a project which yields a profit, a census as the Medievals would have it, was always perfectly acceptable to the Church . The loaner, in this case the proposed credit union, would simply serve as a partner in what would be a joint venture. By receiving back part of the profit from these joint ventures, the credit union, which would have to be established by the pooling of capital, would be able to loan money to those in the community who are building houses or providing for other basic and primary needs. These loans would be paid back, on schedule, without any usurious charged being attached to the loan.

F) Not Treating Brothers Like Strangers
The above proposals are based on a cold and hard fact. It is that, in the near future, on the geo-political scene and on the macroeconomic level, there is little hope that the ideas put forward by the Distributists in the early part of the twentieth century will be implemented. Since, however, they are part and parcel of a full Catholic vision of the rightly ordered human society and since, according to Rerum Novarum and Quadragesimo Anno, they are part of the full realization of the Social Kingship of Our Lord Jesus Christ, we must attempt to implement these ideas on the local level and community level. We need communities for this. We have such communities established and we know of a number of other such communities, in the United States and elsewhere, Tynong, Australia for example, who are in their nascent stage.

If we are to survive and to even prosper as communities of families animated by and adhering to Tradition, if our young are to be encouraged from going over to the other side, in their minds or in their hearts, and if we are to live the principles and doctrines that we adhere to with our minds within a hostile society, we must consider, seriously, the question, how to do it? The basic answer to this question is not to treat brothers like strangers.

©Dr. Peter Chojnowski
http://www.pelicanproject.org/

Read more...

Thursday, January 25, 2007

15 Things A Distributist May Do

by Fr.Vincent McNabb



(An Open Letter to J.—B.—, A Young Gentleman with Desires)

You say you are at sea with a pen; and that anyhow, Fleet Street, not to say Little Essex Street, is in no need of recruits. You feel that Distributist modelling and designing has been well and truly done; but that the modellers and designers will have wasted their brains if some simple folk like you don’t attempt to carry out the designs. You ask dramatically, ‘Don’t tell me what to think for I subscribe to G.K.’s. But tell me what to do.’

I will therefore set down fifteen things, any one of which would be good to do. They shall be fifteen for two reasons. Because if I set down the hundred and one things you might do, it would fill a whole issue and not just one article in G. K.’s. Fifteen gives a choice such as a man has, say, in choosing a cravat, a livelihood, or a wife.

I will not begin at the beginning. I will begin anywhere and go on anyhow. But, indeed, when things have come to such a state of social untidiness as they are at present, a beginning can be made anywhere and anyhow. The one things necessary is to begin.

1. If you have a mantelpiece, remove everything from it except perhaps the clock. If you are fortunate enough to have no mantelpiece, remove from the walls of your home all pictures and such like, except a crucific. This will teach you the Poverty of Thrift. It may be called an empiric approach to Economics.

2. Clean out your own room daily. Clean it if possible on your knees. This will teach you the Poverty of Work. It will also prevent paralysis of the knees. But a paralysis which has reached the knees will soon reach the hands and the brain, if not the tongue.

3. For forty days or more—say, during Lent—do not smoke (and neither grouse about it nor boast about it). This will also improve your eyesight. It will also improve your insight into the tangled economics question: (tobacco) combines and how to smash them.

4. Buy some hand-woven cloth. Wear it. Buy some more. Wear that too. Remember the noble advice on how to eat cucumber, cut it into two parts (equal or unequal). Eat one part. Then eat the other. Your home-spun will instruct you better than the Declaration of Independence will instruct you on the dignity and rights of man.

5. Buy boots you can walk in. Walk in them. Even if you lessen the income of the General Omnibus Company, or your family doctor; you will discover the human foot. On discovering it, your joy will be as great as if you had invented it. But this joy is the greatest, because no human invention even of Mr. Ford or Mr. Marconi is within a mile of a foot.

6. Find another young Distributist, with our without University education, but with brains and feet1. Invite him to use his feet by tramping with you across any English county, say, water-logged Staffordshire during the summer holidays. Invite him to use his brains by standing on his feet, but not on his dignity, in market-places, telling the village-folk what is the matter with Staffordshire. This will lead him to tell them what is the matter with himself.

If you will keep at it for three weeks or a month, your advice on How to Save England will be more valuable, though, I admit, less valued than that of the entire Board of Directors of the Old Woman of Threadneedle Street.

7. If you fail to find a fellow-tramp, or if you covet the heroism of the dug-outs in a time of peace, spend your summer holiday as a farm-hand. You will not be worth your keep; but it will be worth your while. If Babylondon has not befogged your ‘intellectus agens’—your active intellect, in the noble phrase of Scholasticism, you will gradually see the Poverty of Work. This is the other empiric approach to Economics.

8. If through the machinations of Beelzebub or his fellow-devil Mammon, your house is in suburbia, plant your garden not with things lovely to see like roses, or sweet to smell like lavender; but good to eat like potatoes or French beans. At the end of two years you will have done three things: (1) You will have a higher appreciation of yokel-intelligence; (2), you will have a wider knowledge of Natural History (especially of slugs and the like); and (3), You will have a sardonic scorn for the economics of our present Sewage System. In other words you will have had the beginnings of a liberal education.

9. I wil not approach a matter or your reputation. If you take the advice offered, you may be accounted a fanatic. But fanatic or no fanatic, here is the advice. For twelve months, if possible, or at least for twelve days, do not use anything ‘canned’, neither canned meat nor canned music.

This will throw you back on what is called Home Produce. This in its turn will show you the right expression to put into your singing of Rule Britannia.

10. I will now appeal to the artist that is within every one of us. Art, as you know, is the right way of making a good thing. There is no right way of making a bad things. Not only something, but make something—a cup of tea, a boiled egg, a hatpeg (from a fallen branch), a chair!

This heroic attempt to make something will enable your friends to practise their wit by saying you have only made an ass of your yourself. In order to hear this gibe stolidly, read up about ‘the ass’s colt at the crossways.’

11. Talk your young architect friend into spending two weeks of his holiday making an abode (formerly called a house1). He is thinking in terms of Brick-combine bricks, Timber-combine timber, Steel-combine steel, Cement-combine cement, Building materials-combine building materials. Drag him out into England that still grows oak, elm, ash, beech, fir, larch, etc. Give him a wood axe, a hatchet, and adze, and a few tools. Tell him from me that if in two weeks and for less that 100 pounds you and he cannot make an abode more spacious and sanitary than ninety per cent of the dwellings in the Borough of Westminster or St. Pancras, your should be certified. This may be called the Strain Test, enabling you to know whether he has brains enough to be your friend, even if he has brains enough to be an architect.

12. Set down for the information and inspiration of young Distributists one hundred answers to the usually despairing question: ‘How can I get out of London?‘ Begin with the simplest answer: ‘Walk out.’ You may find that some of your most promising Distributists will walk no more with you. Do not be despondent at this; because it may make your own Distributism more sea-worthy.

13. As you are not yet married, and as marriage is the fundamental state of life as well as the unit of the Commonwealth, make up your mind whether your are called to this state. If you make up your mind to marry, do not marry merely a good wife: marry a good mother to your children. A wife that is a good mother to your children ist the Angel of the House; the other sort is the very devil.

14. Before asking her hand and her heart, tell her how to test you. Advise her to ask herself not whether you would make her a good husband, but whether you would make a good father to her and your children. A wife that is not a house-wife, and husband that is not a good house-band are heading for Admiralty Probate and Divorce!

15. If you do not feel called to the state of marriage vows, there is another state of vows—where mysticism and asceticism prove themselves the redemption of Economics.

But—well—God-speed you, as they say in lands of the old culture.


note 1. Do not believe X.—, who says they are not to be found. The truth is that X.— has lived so long in stunt circles for the last six months that he has become prematurely infantile.)

note 1. The word house is now becoming obsolete. Collections of flats are not a house. For the moment the genius of the English language seems unequal to the task of giving these collections a name.

Read more...

Tuesday, January 23, 2007

On Rights and Property

by Fr.Vincent McNabb

Let me set down some principles and definitions, chiefly from St. Thomas Aquinas. They may help towards clearer thinking.

A Duty is an act necessitated, not by a physical, but by a moral obligation, i.e. not by nature but by Will. It is a moral, as distinct from a physical, necessity to act, e.g. the duty of living, of seeking the truth, of working, etc.

A Right is a moral, as distinct from a merely physical power to have the means necessary to fulfil a Duty. Hence Duty is primary and absolute; Right is secondary and relative to Duty.
As moral obligation and moral power presuppose a free will, Duties and Rights are predicable only of a Free Will.

The fundamental right of the free will is to be free, and not enslaved.

SERVITUS EST IMPEDIMENTUM BONI USUS POTESTATIS.
(1)(1) Summa Theologica, Ia-IIae, Q. ii, art. 4, 3rd reply.

Slavery is a hindrance of the good USE of power.

'To use is to apply a principle of action to its action.'(2) Hence 'To Use is properly an act of the will.' (3) Slavery is the evil of a being that has the internal quality of free will, but has not the external condition of freedom. Hence the fundamental property or the foundation of property and ownership is our free will. A being that cannot call its will its own can call nothing its own.

(2) ibid. q. xvi, art. 2
(3) ibid. Art. 1


By liberty our acts are our own; by property our goods are our own. Free will is the psychological condition of property; and property ist he material condition of freedom. 'A man by his will possesses (owns) things.'(1) To have (or own) is nothing else than to use or to be able to use; and this is only by an operation.(2) As a right is a moral power to use, Right is the fundamental form of property.

1. ibid. IIa-IIae, Q. lix, art. 3, 1st reply.
2. ibid. 1a-IIae, Q. xxxii, art. 1, 1st reply.

'OWNERSHIP' ... denotes the relation between a person and any right that is vested in him. That which a man owns is a right.

(3)3. Jurisprudence. By Sir John Salmond. 7th Edit. London, p. 277.

Whoever, then, admits the existence of human rights has denied any arguments against human property.

The right to property does not mean that a man shall have a right to as much as he wishes, but that he shall have a right to as much as he needs.

If ownership or property is a right, and especially if ownership is moral power, as distinct from physical power, to use, it is as misleading to speak of the ownership of a thing as to speak of the right to a thing. There are as many limitations of ownership as there are limitations of right and of power.

Where there is no physical power there is no moral power; a blind man has not the right to have electric-light shades.

Yet there may be no moral power where there is physical power. Physical power to use is not moral power to us; and moral power to use in one way may not be moral power to use in another way.

In one and the same material thing there may be centred many physical and many moral powers to use and thus to own.

Of God alone, who alone has full physical and moral power over everything, can we say 'God has the ownership of A. or B.'

All other bings have only an ownership in whatever they are said to own: Thus, in land the nation has not the ownership but only an ownership of the land. All England belongs to all England. The nation has the 'altum dominium', the highest ownership of the land of the nation. But this kind of ownership is quite compatible with another kind of ownership by the individual.

Some examples may stimulate thought. (a) Lord B.---- has a valuable picture-gallery; but is blind. His valet is an artist who has found no money in painting. The valet has the physical and psychological power to use the pictures. Lord B.----, who is said to own them, has not the power to use them, but has only the power to prevent other people from using them.!

(b) Mr. E.-----, the millionaire shipowner, owns half a Scotch county; but his asthma confines him to the South of France. His tenants have the physical and psychological power to use his land both for tillage and for enjoyment. He can neither till nor enjoy. Almost his only ownership of the land is the power of selling; or is a selling-ownership.

(c) A certain Government holds the Communistic doctrine that no one can individually own land. But the individual land-workers have alone the physical power to till the land and largely the physical power to control the fruits of the land. Whether or not their very real control of the 'earth and the fruits thereof' is called ownership by the central authority, it is a more effective ownership than the shadowy overlordship of a doctrinaire bureaucracy. The land-workers, who have no official ownership, can bring the land under cultivation; whereas the central Government's official is a power of putting the land out of cultivation.

All this may lead us to generalize about the words Right and Property. Right is an old word with something like a simple definite meaning. Property (like Capital, Industrial, Employee, Income, etc.)is a new word with a complex or indefinite meaning.

Again, the things which are the objects or RIghts and Property are of many kinds. At the one extreme there are things like food and clothing, whose use is their consumption. At the other extreme there is the earth or land which can be used in a thousand ways and even abused, but cannot be consumed. Between these two extremes there are different classes of things with different ways of being used. To state man's relation to these things, with their complex and multifold ways of use, in terms of one word 'Property,' is to court ambiguity. The older word Right is at once more illuminative and scientific. Thus we can say, Right of Production, Right of Use, Right of Usufruct, Right of Occupation, Right of Selling, etc. etc.

Read more...

Toward Social Thinking

by Fr.Vincent McNabb


For the purpose of clear thinking on social matters, I venture to set down some thoughts on Socialism.

Very gravely I add they are not meant to be a defense of Socialism. They are merely social facts, the knowledge of which has been arrived at by a process of observation. I set them down as the astronomer tabulates and records his observed astronomical facts, not knowing what use may be made of them but feeling that it is his duty to record them whether they are used or not.

A late writer in an influential Catholic review maintained that absolution could not be given to a Catholic Socialist who came to confession because the policy of the Socialist party was secularisation. The argument, couched in the accustomed forms of the schools, was very persuasive. But on second thoughts it could be seen that the premises, which served to insure the conclusion desired of the writer, would also serve to justify not a few conclusions which the writer would disown.

Socialism is accused of wishing to a number of undesirable things. Indeed, the common method of disproving Socialism is to show by striking and detailed word painting that if Socialism became dominant in the Commonwealth, the state of things thereby introduced would be intolerable and even unjust.

(1) One of the first charges made against Socialism is that it would socialise everything and everybody and that it would therefore make slaves of us all, or at least of all except the State officials under whom we should all be regimented, case-papered, paid, fed, tendered and buried. This argument if carefully drawn by a man of feeling can be particularly effective. It is perhaps the locus communis which for years has left me not unmoved whenever I hear it.

But, on second thoughts, it appears that this inhuman programme which Socialism is expected to bring forth is already in great part realised and not by the Socialists.

Mr Belloc and others who are confessedly not Socialists agree that Socialism is committed to this dismal homogeneity and slavery. But they add that it is a thing in great part and essentially realised by existing political parties. One has only to read The Servile State to be haunted by the idea that not only existing Socialism but the existing Conservative and Liberal, and Democratic and Republican parties, are committed to a programme of socialised services which rest essentially on a basis of compulsory work, i.e. slavery.

Moreover, in such a thorough-going Monarchy as Germany, the number of social functions that have now become socialised are alsmost as many as most Socialists would claim for their Socialist State. Indeed, the formula of the most absolute monarchy "L'Etat, c'est moi" needs a change not of form but of content, to be the programme of every advanced party in modern political education.

All this is dramatically confirmed by the diagnosis made by Leo XIII of the actual state of social affairs. 'A small number of very rich men have been able to lay upon the teeming masses of the labouring poor a yoke little better than that of slavery itself.'(Rerum Novarum.)

It is quite evident that this existing state of thigns is substantially what Socialism is condemned for proposing to bring in! Moreover, it is equally evident that the state of things condemned by the Pope is not due to Socialism; but if attributable to any party, then to Conservatives, Liberals, Republicans or Democrats.

(2) A second plea for decrying Socialism is that it would secularise education.

Here as elsewhere in this paper no attempt is made to accept or deny these pleas although it is well known that a large portion of the Education Act of 19021 was inspired by a leading Socialist.

But anyone dread Socialism because it will secularise education? Has not education, even in these countries, been largely and dominantly secularised? In the United States public education is completely secularised. There it was a bourgeois revolution and not Socialism that brought in secularisation. In England the secular programme is officially Liberal.

If, then, a Socialist is to be refused absolution because his party would bring in secularism, how can absolution be granted in England to a Liberal whose part have an equally secular programme; and in the United States, to both Democrats and Republicans, who agree in accepting and defending the present secularism? At any rate, secularism is not something future to be dreaded but something present to be uprooted.

(3) A further argument against Socialism is that it would degrade women by taking women out into the spheres of public work

But statistics are at hand to prove that women workers are to be found in almost every sphere of labour; moreover, they have often been employed because being non-unionised they could be forced or persuaded to accept a lower rate of wages than men. This is most strongly confirmed by all kinds of investigators. Recently the Municipal Vice Commission of Chicago found that a great deal of the prostitution in their rich city was due to the abnormally low wages paid to girls in a number of employments. The present state of women is such a matter of shame that many of the arguments against the suffrage movement are pointless.

But what has Socialism had to do with the degradation of women? And if Socialists are not to be absolved for a crime they have not committed, why may absolution be granted to those by whom the crime has been either committed or approved?

(4) A further and most forcible argument against Socialism is that it would destroy the home. This argument is of great service in strengthening minds that see in the home the only hope of a nation's future. Any political party that threatens the home, no matter what its calim to social service, must be looked on as anti-social.

But, it may well be asked, has the home not already been threatened? Indeed, have the threats not been but too well realised and are not great masses of the workfolk wholly homeless. A room or two overcrowded with inmates can not be called a home. A house in such conditions and in such surroundings that the infant mortality is twice and thrice as much as in well-to-do neighbourhoods cannot be called a home. Yet the recent blue-book on the housing of Great Britain and Ireland has an eloquence of statistics proving that the homes of our country are not merely threatened but vigorously attacked and undermined.

Moreover, to repeat the argument of the previous section, woman's work has largely taken wives from their own homes and made them wives, not mothers. This is to destroy the home.

Now this again is not a future eveil to be dreaded, it is such a rooted present evil that any whole-hearted efforts to uproot it are likely to offer the features of a revolution.

Yet again, not Socialism but some other political or industrial policy has set up almost unnoticed this enemy of the home.

(5) Lastly, and this is perhaps the most urgent of all the pleas against Socialism, it is said that Socialism would destroy the inborn and inalienable right of property.

But if the right of property means, not that some men shall own all property but that all men shall own some property, one asks 'Where is the right of property existing in the world today?' Is the inalienable right of property kept in a state of things where vast numbers of work-folk have not a square yard of land and are never even more than a month from destitution? Is this inalienable right a fact in a state of things where by the testimony of a Pope 'a small number of very rich men have been able to lay upon the teeming masses of the labouring poor a yoke little better than that of slavery itself,' and where there are 'two widely differing castes ... one which holds power because it holds wealth and which has in its grasp the whole of labour and trade, on the other side there is the needy and powerless multitude, broken down and suffering' so that 'some remedy must be found, and found quickly, for the misery (i.e. want) and wretchedness pressing so heavily and so unjustly on the vast majority of the working classes'. (Rerum Novarum).

It is evident that this state of injustice whereby the vast majority of the working classes are in a position of misery is not exactly a state bsed on the right of property

For injustice is the forcible taking or holding of property. And it is evident that this state, based on the violent interference with the right of property, is not in any measure due to the political party called Socialism. It must therefore be due, either in its rise or maintenance, to the other political parties which Catholics freely enter without dread of being refused absolution.

As was said at the outset, this line of thought is not meant nor perhaps even fitted to be a defense of Socialism. It is merely an observed and recorded fact for the guidance of Social thinkers. If a Social thinker refuses absolution to a member of the Socialist party because the Socialist party would bring in a state of things, why does he not refuse absolution to the other political parties; for the state of things is already in existence and has been brought about or, at least, is being upheld by them?

It is evident therefore that there is some flaw in the course of reasoning which would withhold absolution on a probability and give it on a fact. Either the premises are not observed facts or the reasoning is amiss.

For the moment our task is to point out that somewhere there is a flaw in the chain of reasoning, with the hope that social thinkers will revise either their facts or their deductions.

Published in "The Tablet", Jan. 3, 1914

Read more...

Saturday, January 20, 2007

A Review of The Church and the Land

by Cicero Bruce



Few in our time have heard of Father Vincent McNabb—Irishman, Dominican theologian, leading light among the Distributists, and man of paradigmatic character. Nor would many today relish what he had to say if, by some chance encounter, they were introduced to one or more of his thirty books and numerous articles. For he was no apologist for the way we live now. In truth he repudiated it. He argued prophetically that, since the Industrial, French, and Scientific Revolutions, life in the West, having centered itself doggedly around the city and its mechanistic values, has lapsed into a stupor of economic and moral confusion.

Nowhere did he make this argument stronger than in The Church and the Land, originally published in London in 1925, and lately recovered and made available under the auspices of IHS Press. In penning and proffering this “unity of thought and purpose,” as he described it, McNabb was not hoping “merely to make men read a book of his.” He was seriously seeking to incite the Catholics of his day “to accept a challenge and even to organize a crusade.” The end of that crusade, the object of McNabb’s challenge to the faithful, was a return to contemplative rural life.

Back of McNabb’s challenge was the history of the British landlords, who, by the eighteenth century, had become mere money-minded squires bent on competing with urban manufacturers by embarking upon schemes of “agricultural improvement.” Foremost among these schemes were the enclosures, the primary intention of which was to maximize the rents of the lords’ lands. From the point of view of mere agricultural efficiency, perfected methods of cultivation were a boon, insofar as they increased production of essential foodstuffs. But in the words of one of McNabb’s fellow contributors to The Founding Papers of the Catholic Land Movement (another volume now available through the reissuing efforts of IHS Press), the agricultural policy of the landlords resulted finally in ousting “the old small yeomen in favour of the later big tenant farmers.”

Though the circumstances were altogether different, independent farming in the United States suffered a comparable decline in the first half of the last century. The cause was the American dream of prosperity under the influence of which the small farmer decided to grow fewer consumable crops to feed his family and more cash crops to exchange at market for legal tender. This decision marked the beginning of the end of the American subsistence farmer, who, ultimately, became a servant to the market as well as a victim of its fluctuations. As the competitive farming of cash crops evolved into a risky enterprise necessarily reliant upon scientific methods and machines that had to be purchased with either token wealth or bank credit, many whose ancestors had enjoyed relative independence in the countryside flocked to urban areas where they joined the servile ranks of proletarian wage earners.

McNabb believed there were urgent reasons why the Church could not ignore the problem of urbanization in the Anglo-American world. For one, the sheer number of Catholics involved was significant. Between the World Wars, up to ninety-five percent of Great Britain’s Catholic population, which had grown in the nineteenth-century as a result of the Oxford Movement and as an outcome of immigration in the wake of the Irish famine, was urban. During the same period in the United States, approximately eighty percent of Catholics was concentrated in industrial towns, although urban and rural populations were roughly equal. But the most compelling reason of all was the fact that what McNabb called the smothering “incubus of industrialism” threatened to quash the family, Catholic culture, and human liberty.

By the time McNabb began penning The Church and the Land, urban confluence, competition for wages, unemployment, and rationalizing appeals to theories of “overpopulation” had already predisposed urbanites to accept as “enlightened truth” the propaganda of neo-Malthusianism. For this reason, the book’s forty-one essays, which McNabb depicted as “the blood-spurtings forced from the mind and heart of a priest in life’s fighting line,” resound with a clear indictment of the principal neo-Malthusians of the early twentieth century, most notably American Socialist Margaret Sanger and her English friend Marie Stopes, the controversial author of Wise Parenthood (1918) and founder (in 1921) of the Society for Constructive Birth Control and of England’s first “family planning” clinic in Holloway, London.

In the neo-Malthusian city that McNabb delineates, “there is no possibility [wages and rents being what they are] for the average working man to have an average family” and still be called “responsible” by his peers. (What McNabb considered to be an average family is unclear, but he himself was the tenth of eleven children “born to a sea captain and a peasant mother who,” as William Fahey informs us in the book’s new introduction, “exemplified the loving and capable parenthood that so often marks McNabb’s social criticism.”) To avoid the average family, the average working man is coerced by the circumstances of his urban situation, to which there seems to be no alternative, to limit his offspring either by contraception or by abstinence—either by mortal sin, that is, or (in McNabb’s words) by “what is for the average individual heroic virtue.”

For McNabb the city was nothing less than a proximate occasion for sin and consequently a hindrance to a thriving and devout Catholic population in the industrialized West. The Church, he therefore concluded, must of necessity encourage and support a back-to-the-land movement in the developed nations. It could not expect “heroic virtue” of its urban members, but it could present them with an optional way of life, a rural way of life that had sustained Catholicism for nearly two-thousand years and was continuing to sustain it where a healthy peasantry survived and where villages were not yet deserted. McNabb was convinced that on their own and far from the madding crowd the faithful stood the best chance of fully realizing and truly actualizing their destiny as creatures of God. On the land, in other words, they could best harmonize with the immemorial descant of their Catholic faith.

And what was Catholicism for Father McNabb but the song through which believers know what is objectively good and true? He knew that without the Church’s guidance in distinguishing relative or supposed goods from objective or real ones, men and women are subject to what Saint Augustine of Hippo called the libido dominandi. It was precisely this, “the lust for power,” that begot the incubus of industrialism, which exploits the metaphysically rootless who wander aimlessly in the metropolitan quagmires of apparent self-sovereignty. It was the lust for power that caused industrial England to organize its economy chiefly for exports—to become the world’s workshop. The tragic result of that experiment, as McNabb rehearses it in dirgeful commentation, was that “[a] people capable of freedom and of a noble life in their own homesteads...crowded into the factory and the mine; where deceived by loud praises of their freedom and their dignity, they [forgot] that they [were] the bondsmen not only of their paymasters at home, but of their freer, happier paymasters abroad.”

McNabb wanted his readers to see that the “great industrial town which had naturally fascinated his eyes of youth and dimmed his vision to the land” was not “the flower and scent of social life but the scurf and putrescence of decay.” He would have posterity remember that, after only two hundred years of industrialization, the urban centers of England, Scotland, Wales, and the United States had been “reduced to such a state of economic bankruptcy . . . that race suicide could be made the only practical agenda for the people.” Until the end of his earthly sojourn he made it his apostolic mission to embolden as many Catholics as possible to flee to the fields. “Let your Exodus be after the coming out of Egypt,” he told them. “Leave the garden cities and the flesh pots, not in order to scorn suburbia or to lead a simple life, but to worship God.” Forsake your cosmopolitan neighbors “not because you hate them or despise them, but because you love them so much as to hate the conditions which degrade and enslave them.”

In his retrospective introduction to The Church and the Land, Professor Fahey observes that, “between 1926 and 1930, 14,000 men formally applied for small-holding grants with the British Ministry of Agriculture.” How many of these men were directly induced to do so by the Catholic Land Movement spearheaded by McNabb’s book remains a matter of conjecture. But the number was likely considerable, given the movement’s determination, methodical organization, and documented early successes. To be sure, McNabb and the English agrarians had little if anything to do with a comparable exodus which occurred in the United States from 1930 to 1932, when, according to Fahey, some 764,000 Americans took up life in the hinterlands. Yet, this historical recollection reminds us that, up to the Second World War, agrarianism and decentralist thought on both sides of the Atlantic had not yet been entirely muted by “the world of machines,” as Wendell Berry puts it in his own call to contemplatives, “running beyond the world of trees / Where only a leaf is turning / In a small high breeze.”

It is tempting to expound the relevance of McNabb’s book to the present economic and moral situation. Here is not the place, though, to reconsider America’s sweatshops, now out of sight, and out of mind; the nomadic lives of careerists in the global economy; the allure of the workplace, which has replaced the home as the economic center of gravity; the enthralling costs of fashionably inefficient automobiles, capacious homes, and cellular gadgetry; the consumptive battening upon the last vestiges of communal and personal autonomy; the commodification of every aspect of man’s pursuit of happiness; the decay of tradition; the loss of reflective leisure upon which authentic civilization depends.

Suffice it to say that the current importance of McNabb’s commentary lies in the vexing questions it causes the thoughtful to ask—yet again. And the imperative question is this: “where are we allowing ourselves to be led by our passion for industrial progress and for an ever-higher standard of living”? This, said Daniel Boorstin, “remains among the deepest, the most embarrassing, and the most unasked questions of our day.” This, however, is the question pertinent to any latter-day appreciation of The Church and the Land, which, if it does nothing else, helps one “to contemplate in the mind,” to appropriate the words of seventeenth-century Yorkshire divine Thomas Burnet, “as on a tablet, the image of a greater and better world, lest the intellect, habituated to the petty things of daily life, narrow itself and sink wholly into trivial thoughts.”


Cicero Bruce teaches in the Department of English at McMurry University, Abilene, Texas.


The University Bookman, Vol. 44, No. 1
Copyright © 2002–2006 The Russell Kirk Center for Cultural Renewal.
http://www.ihspress.com/

Read more...

Wednesday, January 10, 2007

Fr. Vincent McNabb: A Voice of Contradiction

by Michael Hennessy



"Every minister of holy religion must bring to the struggle the full energy of his 'mind' and all his powers of endurance."


If there is one thing, one single line of text, that could be said to have motivated the tireless apostolic work of Father Vincent McNabb, it is this line from the encyclical Rerum Novarum of Pope Leo XIII. This great papal "call to arms" illuminated all of his work and action: after Holy Scripture and the works of St Thomas it held pride of place in his heart. Indeed, no priest, no religious in England was as indefatigable as Father McNabb in his desire — in his work — to see the blue-print of Rerum Novarum and the Church's social teaching put into action.

It is evident that Father McNabb is hardly known amongst Catholics today. Even amongst those who concern themselves with Tradition many may know his name but little more. Perhaps most of those who have heard of him stumbled across his name while reading about Hilaire Belloc or G K Chesterton. All these mental associations are indeed aspects of the man, of the priest; yet he would, I think, like best to have been known for championing Rerum Novarum.

Father McNabb was — with some notable exceptions, principally within his own Order — held in very high esteem by his contemporaries, even by those such as George Bernard Shaw or the Webbs, founders of the socialist Fabian Society, who could have most been expected to dislike him. During Father McNabb's life, G K Chesterton wrote of him:

"... he is one of the few great men I have met in my life; that he is great in many ways, mentally and morally and mystically and practically... nobody who ever met or saw or heard Father McNabb has ever forgotten him."


Hilaire Belloc wrote this about him after his death, in the Dominican journal Blackfriars in 1943:

"The greatness of his [Father McNabb's] character, of his learning, his experience, and, above all, his judgement, was altogether separate from the world about him... the most remarkable aspect of all was the character of holiness... I can write here from intimate personal experience [here, Belloc refers to Father McNabb visiting Belloc — at the latter's request — immediately after the premature death of Elodie Belloc, his wife, in 1914] ... I have known, seen and felt holiness in person... I have seen holiness at its full in the very domestic paths of my life, and the memory of that experience, which is also a vision, fills me now as I write — so fills me that there is nothing now to say."


Monsignor Ronald Knox, who was, in many ways, Father McNabb's temperamental opposite, wrote:

"Father Vincent is the only person I have ever known about whom I have felt, and said more than once, 'He gives you some idea of what a saint must be like.' There was a kind of light about his presence which didn't seem to be quite of this world."


So who was Father McNabb? He was born Joseph McNabb, at Portaferry near Belfast on 8th July 1868. His father was a sea captain whom he seldom saw: his mother was just that, a mother, and — in his eyes — all the more blessed for being "just" that. Not that she didn't have other things than bringing up the children and managing the home to occupy herself with: one of Father McNabb's first memories is of his mother taking him on a sick visit to a lady with a cancerous growth in her chest whom Mrs McNabb would wash and comfort. She was the mother of eleven children in total, Joseph McNabb being the tenth. In his later years he wrote a book, almost an autobiographical study of his early years, called Eleven, thank God! which he dedicated to his mother and which stands as a great apologia pro familia magna. Family always held a central place in Father McNabb's world, as it indeed holds a central place in Rerum Novarum.

Although born in Ireland, by the age of 14 he had moved with his family to Newcastle-upon-Tyne, on account of his father's work. The influence of his time in Newcastle was important to him, for his family moved into the parish of St Dominic's which was — unsurprisingly — run by the Dominican Order. He was profoundly impressed by all he saw of Dominican life and spirituality, of their asceticism, their love for Holy Scripture and their profound learning; and so he decided to become a Dominican. Curiously, what appears to have been the principal human motive behind Father McNabb's vocation was the same thing that drove Chesterton into the Catholic Church — fear of Hell. As he put it: "I don't want to go to Hell; I think I'll go to the Novitiate!" Undoubtedly, while many reasons can be identified for the motivation behind his vocation, the simple fact was that he felt God was calling him to become a friar in order to save his soul.

At the age of 17 Joseph McNabb entered the Dominican novitiate at Woodchester. The Dominicans at this time were but a small band: but Joseph McNabb's entrance to the Order coincided with the beginnings of a comparative deluge of able and devout novices who entered in his year and the three or four years following, novices who once professed formed the basis of the Order's rise to prominence during the first half of the twentieth century, principally under the aegis of Father Bede Jarrett.

Father NcNabb was ordained in September 1891, the year of Rerum Novarum, shortly after his 23rd birthday. He was the most brilliant scholar of his year in the novitiate, although the following years were to see some greater academic minds entering the Order. Interestingly, when he took his Ad Gradus examination in Rome prior to his Mastership, Père Garrigou-Lagrange was one of his examiners. By 1894, three years after his ordination, Father McNabb was sent back to Woodchester with his Doctorate in Sacred Theology.

For the next 26 years, Father McNabb was sent hither and thither as holy Obedience demanded. He taught novices at Woodchester, was then sent to Hawkesyard to teach theology: in 1906 he went to St Dominic's Priory in north-west London for the first time as parish-priest for two years from whence he was plucked back in 1908 to become Prior of Holy Cross, Leicester, for 6 years until 1914. In 1914 he was elected Prior of Hawkesyard, where he faced his severest personal and spiritual tests, and in 1920 he returned to St Dominic's Priory in London, where he served again as parish-priest until his death on 17th June 1943, some 23 years later.

So let us now look in more detail at the work and thought of Father McNabb. He took some time to find his own apostolic feet but as he came into contact, through his apostolate, with more prominent Catholic and non-Catholic figures, he came into greater national prominence as he was asked to write articles and essays, to preach, and to address public meetings of almost every conceivable variety. When he finally settled down at St Dominic's Priory in London at the age of 52 he found a context for his work and contacts with those able best to assist him in his work and so — per accidentem — became a national Catholic figure. His preaching at Parliament Hill and Speakers' Corner with the Catholic Evidence Guild were instrumental to this growing renown.

Some idea of the style and content of Father McNabb's teaching, preaching and writings can be gleaned from the introduction to the book, Old Principles and the New Order, published in 1942, which was a collection of his essays printed in Catholic journals over the previous twenty years:

"This book rests upon certain dogmatic and moral principles, certain undeniable facts, and it makes certain practical proposals.

The first principle is that there is a God, our Creator, Whom we must love and serve; and Whom we cannot love and serve without loving and serving our fellow creatures.

The second principle is that the Family is the unit of all social life; and that therefore the value of all social proposals must be tested by their effect on the Family.

The third (psychological) principle is that from the average man we cannot expect more than average virtue. A set of circumstances demanding from the average man more than average (i.e. heroic) virtue is called an Occasion of Sin.

The fourth (moral) principle is that the occasions of sin should be changed, if they can possibly be changed, i.e. they must be overcome by flight not fight.

The great observed fact, of world-wide incidence, is that in large industrialized urban areas (and in town-infested rural areas) normal family life is psychologically and economically impossible; because from the average parent is habitually demanded more than average virtue...

...From this observed fact that the industrialized town is an occasion of sin we conclude that, as occasions of sin must be fled,... Flight from the Land must be now be countered by Flight to the Land."


The occasion of sin which Father McNabb was particularly — but not exclusively — referring to was the temptation placed before poor families living in poor conditions to resort to methods of birth control ("no birth and no control" as G K Chesterton so famously put it — "race suicide" as McNabb put it rather more grimly).

The state in which so many of his contemporaries lived and worked filled him with such grief and anguish because it was largely amongst these people that he worked, and to these people that he ministered and preached. Despite his popularity, and its usefulness to his mission, he was consistent in urging his congregation, his audience, to leave him and to leave London. He encouraged all those who could to desert the Babylon of London — "Babylondon", as he often referred to it — and vowed to remain behind to serve those who could not, or would not, leave: at least until the way had been prepared by those who had gone before them into the countryside. And it must be remembered that this flight to the Land was no foolish idea: towards the end of Father McNabb's life the Government itself was in the face of war to encourage a return to the land, so as to increase agricultural produce from its degraded and untended fields.

While objective material poverty may not now — save in exceptional cases — be so great as it was then, before the Second World War, who would dare say that the various scourges of metropolitan life today are no worse?

Of course, the primary reason for Father McNabb's detestation of squalid and degrading urban conditions was the effect they had upon family life. The family is the prime unit of Christian society — indeed of any society — and precedes the State in every respect. Father McNabb knew that all economic, social, and political acts had some effect upon the family: it was by their effect upon the family that he would measure their worth or morality. The family was what he called "the Nazareth measure". As he wrote in his book, The Church and the Land:

"All our personal and social building, to be lasting, must be trued by the measures of that little school of seers whose names are the very music of life — Jesus, Mary, Joseph!... the Nazareth measure of length and weight and worth is the Family... let no guile of social usefulness betray you into hurting the authority of the Father, the chastity of the Mother, the rights and therefore property of the Child."


Father McNabb knew the importance of the strength that he had derived from his natural family, and the strength that he daily drew from his new spiritual family, his Dominican community. He always stressed that what changed when he "moved" from his natural family to his supernatural family were not the virtues he pursued but the vows he had taken. He was keenly aware of the need for lay people to be inspired amidst the many snares of the modern world to pursue heroic virtue, to imitate the evangelical counsels so far as their duties of state permitted. In his book, Old Principles and the New Order — a title that sounds quite prophetic to our own ears — he writes about charity, poverty, and obedience:

"[E]ven Catholics have sometimes come to think that the three virtues behind these religious vows were only for religious, whereas the three virtues are binding upon all individuals, and in some measure, upon that grouping of individuals... which we moderns...confusedly call the State'."


On one level what Father McNabb says here is a truism — we must all strive to be chaste, poor — in spirit, let us say — and obedient: but upon closer examination Father McNabb is pointing out that these three virtues should be for us as much a daily call to arms as they are for the religious who have professed vows. For after all, as Father McNabb said:

"...the religious men or women who have publicly promised God to keep poverty, chastity, obedience are not thereby bound to more poverty, more chastity, more obedience than if they had remained as lay-folk in the world."


Moreoever, Father McNabb added:

"[I]t need hardly be pointed out that the poverty of work and thrift, the self-control of virginal and conjugal chastity, the obedience to rulers and to law, are of the greatest social value and need."


In many articles Father McNabb traced the decadent and withering effect of the State upon society to its neglect of poverty — through reckless expenditure, financial mismanagement, usurious practices — to its neglect of obedience — by going against the natural moral law and the laws of revealed religion — and to its neglect of chastity — by permitting, even encouraging, activities that undermined sexual or conjugal morality. Just as every individual should strive to be poor, chaste, and obedient, so too the State should aim to adhere to these three cardinal virtues.

One of Father McNabb's hardest lessons to his own and to our generation concerns poverty. To Father McNabb poverty meant having enough for your duties of state but no more: having no excess, no extravagance, no luxury — always giving, as Christian charity dictates, to those less fortunate what you yourself or those for whom you are responsible do not need. He was certainly not referring to indigence: but, certainly, what constituted "enough" in Father McNabb's eyes would be considered as much too little by most of our contemporaries and even by most of us. He wanted us to attempt to be self-sufficient, restrict our desires, limit our needs, control our consumption and give from any over-abundance we possess. Many Catholics throughout the ages have fallen into complacency on this point by retreating behind the wall of "spiritual poverty", by allowing themselves anything and everything on the basis that they are poor in spirit. Father McNabb of course realised the importance of spiritual poverty; realised that it was possible for a poor man to be more avaricious and more greedy than a rich man. But he also realised the dangers of riches, in particular the difficulty of achieving spiritual poverty when surrounded by excess — and he also realised that the demands of justice and especially of charity required people to have less than they would probably like or would naturally have. Furthermore, he saw the embrace of poverty as a means of defeating the increasing materialism and destitution of the world about him.

We must, however, not forget that Father McNabb would never claim originality or even ingenuity for any of the things about which he taught or preached. He taught only what the Church taught: in particular he taught almost exclusively from Holy Scripture and from the works of the Angelic Doctor. All that may strike us as unique about Father McNabb's teachings — he himself would never claim anything unique for them, of course — was in their emphasis and application.

And there were many sides to Father McNabb: as well as being the devoted preacher of Rerum Novarum and being the 'celebrity friar' who appeared at public meetings and spoke at Speakers' Corner and at Parliament Hill, Father McNabb was a busy teacher and a retreat master, in both cases for lay people as well as clerics. His classes on St Thomas — open to all-comers — were very popular; and from his retreats a devotee of his — Dorothy Findlayson — culled sufficient verbatim shorthand notes to have printed, with his permission, a number of slim but rewarding volumes of spiritual advice, such as Stars of Comfort and In Our Valley. Most of the chapters in these volumes are meditations on a few lines of Holy Scripture, or a line-by-line analysis of one of the great prayers of the Church.

Father McNabb was also an enthusiast for Chaucer and Francis Thompson and wrote essays on these, and other, poets and writers. He was also an admittedly casual biographer: he wrote a slim work on St John Fisher and another on St Elizabeth of Portugal. He also wrote a number of small books on aspects of Holy Scripture and a Life of Our Lord, which was written under strict obedience (it is a strange book, full of curious omissions and odd emphases, which unhappily reflects the author's reluctance to take on such a demanding subject).

Interestingly, the very first book for which Father McNabb was responsible was an edition of the decrees of the First Vatican Council: his first printed pamphlet, entitled Infallibility, was a version of a lecture he had been asked to give to the Anglo-Catholic Society of St. Thomas of Canterbury. Father McNabb showed great interest in the possibility of the Anglican Church re-uniting with the Catholic Church: he often spoke to Anglican and Anglo-Catholic meetings and expressed great concern about the continuing de-Christianisation of their sect, from which concern sprang his book The Church and Reunion. He also took an interest in the poor Jews of Whitechapel and East London in general, and was held in great affection by the Jewish community there.

In a more theological context, Father McNabb initially made his name as a preacher and teacher — beyond the walls of the Dominican institutions which he served — with his conferences on faith and prayer at the Catholic Chaplaincy of Oxford University. These conferences were eventually published in one volume, Faith and Prayer, and constitute the most substantial contribution Father McNabb made to more academic theological writing. He also wrote a slim book on the Blessed Sacrament, God's Good Cheer, a collection of theological essays, Where Believers May Doubt, and another collection of similar essays, Frontiers of Faith and Reason, which covers a variety of topics from the origin of the epiclesis to a plea for the re-introduction of the Sarum Rites of Betrothal and Marriage.

Aside from these works Father McNabb was also a great contributor to periodicals of many sorts, from G.K.'s Weekly to the more obvious Catholic periodicals, Blackfriars and the then-orthodox Tablet. While Father McNabb was clearly more than a 'one-issue man' it is striking how many of these books and articles touch upon, even dwell upon, matters relating to the social teaching of the Church and to the family.

But of course Father McNabb's life as a friar was also of great note. Even amongst his fellow Dominicans, as yet untainted by modernism and its laxities, Father McNabb was considered to be an ascetic. As Prior of Woodchester, Hawkesyard and Holy Cross he had developed a reputation for being hard on others, but certainly no harder than he was on himself: and he could always lend someone a sympathetic ear, something he never seems to have had for himself! He ate sparingly — he blamed his "Protestant stomach" — and his face and body demonstrated the hard self-denial of his religious life. He slept on the floor of his cell — which floor he scrubbed daily — and his bed lay unused even through illness and his final death-pangs. He had no chair in his room until the last days of his life when — still refusing to lie on his bed — he finally consented to be seated in a chair. When writing, he knelt at a table surmounted by a crucifix and small statue of the Blessed Virgin: on the table lay his only books, a copy of the Vulgate, his Breviary, and the Summa Theologica. He kept a compendious box of notes, all written on scraps of paper — the backs of cards, used envelopes and the like — on a huge variety of subjects some penned in English, some in Latin, some in Greek and some even in Hebrew. Everything he wrote was hand-written: he abominated most machinery and had a particular vehemence for type-writers!

This reflected Father McNabb's perennial concern with the primary things. He saw any work or activity that moved even one stage away from the primary thing as less worthy and possibly less virtuous. It was on account of this fundamental view that he developed his famous loathing for international finance which was as far removed from reality and the primary things as it was possible to go. As he put it, cuttingly:

"Some men wrest a living from nature. This is called work. Some men wrest a living from those who wrest a living from nature. This is called trade. Some men wrest a living from those who wrest a living from those who wrest a living from nature. This is called finance."


Of course, as a religious, indeed, as a Catholic, prayer was central to his life. His profound attachment to Holy Mass and the Office aside, Father McNabb devoted much of his energy to praying, and to encouraging others to pray, the Holy Rosary. As a man of formidable intellect and deep learning he had nothing but impatience for those who claimed that the Rosary was a prayer, a devotion, for simple beginners, for the unlettered, for those who have not yet ascended to the sublime heights of spirituality. Such people rendered Father McNabb almost speechless with indignation. "The Rosary", he would say, "is the safest and surest way to union with God through mental prayer." What impressed him the most about the Holy Rosary was the prayerfulness of many of the faithful who had been taught or had grown up to pray to God through Our Blessed Lady. Again and again he would say: "Most of the contemplatives I have met are in the world, and these have found union with God through the Rosary." Devotion to the Rosary, he insisted, should be fundamental to a Catholic's prayer life. As he said during a sermon on Rosary Sunday on 1936:

"The Incarnation is the centre of all our spiritual life.. One of the means by which it is made so is the Holy Rosary. There is hardly any way of arriving at some realisation of this great mystery equal to that of saying the Rosary. Nothing will impress it so much on your mind as going apart to dwell in thought, a little space each day, on Bethlehem, on Golgotha, on the Mount of the Ascension."


Father McNabb wore a homespun habit and marched around London in the same heavy hob-nailed boots from year to year. Over his shoulders as he trudged about the streets he had slung his "McNabb-sack", a capacious if battered means of carriage for his Vulgate, Breviary, and whatever other books he needed. Although he was not averse to rail travel, or public transport in general, he usually refused to travel by car or by cab: the long distances he had to cover in London from St Dominic's Priory to the various convents to which he was chaplain, to Speakers' Corner and to Parliament Hill, he managed on foot and at a startling pace.

There is a moving account of an occasion when Father McNabb actually took a cab back to his Priory. For months he had made sick calls to a young girl, an only child, who was dying. The mother — who had asked him to come — was a Catholic; the largely absent father was not, and moreover was one of his chief hecklers at Parliament Hill. They were a poor family, lodged with another family in a single, small room in a crumbling tenement block near St. Pancras Station. Sadly, the daughter died: McNabb said the Requiem Mass. Just a few weeks later the mother died — she had been ill throughout her daughter's illness but had said nothing about it to anyone. McNabb again said the Requiem Mass. As he left the graveyard the husband approached him, gave him a flower from a funeral bouquet that Father McNabb had arranged from a pious benefactor, and asked him how he was planning to return to his Priory. The sky was thunderous and rain was beginning to fall. Father McNabb replied that he planned to return as he had come — on foot. The husband — trebly poor now — pulled from his pocket enough money to pay for a cab: at first Father McNabb demurred and then he realised that this was the widower's mite. With tears in his eyes he accepted the money. He never forgot this instance of simple charity. As he wrote:

"Blessed are the poor! Few things have ever touched me more than that. Out of his poverty he offered me my fare. Imagine that coming from one who has not the faith. What am I to do when I see him next? To kiss his feet would be unworthy of him. I shall pray... that God may give him the consolation of the faith."


The full extent of Father McNabb's own charity will of course never be known. What he did privately remained private even after the public death that we will shortly be considering. But before I move on to describe Father McNabb's death, I feel I must offer up a few examples of his wit in order to derail any growing impression that Father McNabb must have been a miserable fanatic. Father McNabb certainly had a way with words. He was particularly adept at dealing with hecklers. On one occasion during a long disquisition on sin at Speakers' Corner an Irish woman shouted out: "If I was your wife I would put poison in your tea!" Grinning, Father McNabb replied: "Madam, if I were your husband I would drink it!" On another occasion he famously compared hearing nuns' confessions to being pecked slowly to death by ducks. On a more serious note, he once attended a public meeting on the subject of the Mental Degeneracy Bill then passing through the House of Commons. After listening to various medical experts explaining how they would certify as mental degenerates, and as a result sterilise, many types with whom Father McNabb was familiar in his pastoral work, the good friar stood up and, having been called to speak by the chairman of the meeting, bellowed: "I am a moral expert and I certify you as moral degenerates!" He stormed out of the meeting to rapturous applause and the meeting broke up in disarray.

If it is true that it is possible to tell much about a person's life from the manner of their death then it seems only appropriate that we should now turn to the last long weeks of Father McNabb's life and to his eventual death.

On 14th April 1943, as he was drawing to the end of his seventy-fifth year, Father McNabb was told by his doctor that he had only a short time to live. That same day he wrote to his niece, Sister Mary Magdalen, a Dominican sister, "Deo Gratias!... I have been told that I have a malignant incurable growth in the throat. I can, at most, have weeks to live." It was to be approximately nine weeks before Father McNabb finally died. He carried on his teaching courses on Aquinas and the Psalms, even offering to start a course on the Angels for as long as he lasted: "I do not know what sort of Angels they will put me amongst, dear children! I am not good enough for the good Angels." He warned his students that at any time he may have to send them a telegram to say that he was dead.

When the press found out that such a popular figure was about to die they hounded the Dominican Community at St Dominic's Priory. Father McNabb was determined that his death should be as much a sermon as his life as a Dominican had been. He knew that the last weeks would be difficult. He had been told that he would effectively die slowly of starvation, and may well experience some severe breathing troubles, as the passage of his throat narrowed and finally disappeared. While his strength was still with him he continued to preach and speak across London. He went to all his choir duties until a few days before his death: although he was able to speak to the end, and his breathing problems were slight, he was not able to eat for about a week, and could not swallow any liquids for three days, before he died. He received the Last Rites after a collapse and slowly deteriorated until the morning of Thursday 17th June when he summoned Father Prior to his cell (under obedience he had allowed his fellow friars to move him from the floor to a straight-backed chair — they didn't dare suggest to him that he should take to his bed!). There, amidst the bare surroundings of a familiar austerity, Father McNabb sang the Nunc Dimittis for the last time, confessed his sins to Father Prior, and renewed his vows. He then became unconscious for half-an-hour, sneezed, and died.

Crowds of people, especially the old and the poor, came to see him, pray for him, and touch his habit as he was laid out in the Lady Chapel at the Priory for three days. The Requiem Mass took place on Monday 21st June: the Church was packed, principally with Catholic luminaries — the streets outside were thronged with the poor from the tenements he had so often visited. As requested, he was buried in a plain deal box, marked with a simple black cross. The newspapers were full of stories and details about his last few days, his death and his funeral. Truly, his last sermon, his death, was what reached his greatest audience. As his Prior, Father Bernard Delaney, said at his funeral:

"All that he [Father McNabb] said, all that he did, all that he was, were the expression of his burning love for his Master, Jesus Christ Our Lord. The cause of God was his consuming passion — the glory, the justice, the truth of God. He was a great Friar Preacher, but he was something more — he was a living sermon."


I will conclude this piece with some more of Father McNabb's words:

"Some people say, 'I do not like sermons . I never go to hear a sermon.' They do not know that these very words are themselves a sermon. They do not realise that every deed done in the sight or hearing of another is a preached sermon. The best or the worst of all sermons is a life led. God made every man and woman an apostle when he made them capable of dwelling with their fellow men and women. The best argument for the Catholic Church is not the words spoken from this pulpit but the lives lived in this Priory and in this parish. We should measure the words by the life, not the life by the words."



***
This is an edited version of a talk given to the UK League of the Kingship of Christ by Michael Hennessy, at St George's House, Wimbledon, on Saturday 15th June 2002.

Read more...

Interview with Thomas Storck

On Cooperative Ownership

John Médaille Interview in Romania

Download Web Counter

  © Blogger templates Newspaper III by Ourblogtemplates.com 2008

Back to TOP