Medieval Socialism

Last updated on: September 19, 2019 at 3:41 pm by Chase Padusniak

Medieval Socialism 2019-09-19T15:41:26-04:00 Chase Padusniak

LOGO Patheos Explore the world's faith through different perspectives on religion and spirituality! Patheos has the views of the prevalent religions and spiritualities of the world.

Rarely does a student of Aristotle so simply and directly sound like a student of Marx—and yet, there it is.

Thus, with this in mind, we can find certain features that obtain both then and now that, broadly, can be called “socialistic.” As he writes:

In that age [the medieval period], therefore, we must not expect to find any full-fledged Socialism. We must be content to notice theories which are socialistic rather than socialist. (Medieval Socialism 26).

He acknowledges that the term has expanded and contracted in its meaning at different moments. And so, “socialism” needs a very particular definition to be useful in this context:

[I]t is undeniable that socialism in itself need mean no more than the central principle of State-ownership of capital and land […] By socialistic theories of the Middle Ages, therefore, we mean no more than those theories which from time to time came to the surface of political and social speculation in the form of communism, or of some other way of bringing about the transference which we have just indicated. (Medieval Socialism 12-13).

From there, he points to a central problem in early Christianity. There exist two seemingly opposite trends in the tradition that the Church Fathers had to contend with. On the one hand, there is a clear defense of the equality of all human beings, as all created in the image and likeness of God, equivalent in dignity. On the other, there is a defense of existing civil authorities and institutions, including slavery. The Fathers, as a result, developed a theory centered on the Fall. Before this event, there was actual and meaningful equality between people. But, as sin entered the world, so did the need for coercive institutions and differences in power. Putting it succinctly, Jarrett writes that “[t]he sin of Cain is the social result of this personal upheaval” (Medieval Socialism 16). Lawlessness and rebellion, in other words, follow sin; on these follow a need for legal authorities that contain violence and make peaceful human interaction possible. The Church Fathers, in a way, show themselves to think like Hobbes about the origins of human governance.

At the same time, the early Church was influenced by the Roman lawyers who handled cases involving non-citizens. Among citizens, Roman law worked well enough. These other lawyers, however, had to learn about the laws of a variety of civilizations in an attempt to develop a basic framework around which such cases could be adjudicated. Thus, the ius gentium or law of nations came into existence. This, however, was not an absolute, but a heuristic based on history and experience:

It was carefully explained that this Lex Naturae was not absolutely inviolable, for its more accurate description was Lex or Jus Gentium. That is to say, it was not to be considered as a primitive law which lay embedded like first principles in human nature; but that it was what the nations had derived from primitive principles, not by any force of logic, but by the simple evolution of life. The human race had found by experience that the observance of the natural law entailed as a direct consequence of the establishment of certain institutions. The authority, therefore, which these could boast was nothing more than the simple struggle for existence. (Medieval Socialism 19-20)

The way things are set up, according to Jarrett, is merely normative; it is about practicality, not absolute principles. The organization of a particular society is geared toward its flourishing and can change over time based on material circumstances.

One can see this, in part, he argues, because of monasticism. These orders encouraged communal ownership, fearing that individual possessions of any meaningful sort could get in the way of the perfect contemplation of God. They did not begrudge others such ownership but thought that it might get in the way of their stated purpose. This implies that, within the Christian paradigm, there is a tacit acceptance of the provisional nature of social organization and property rights.

Go back Continue Reading

Previous Post

March 29, 2019

Donald Trump, Literature Lover

Next Post

April 15, 2019 Notre Dame de Paris is Burning

Browse Our Archives

Select a Category Academia Culture Politics Reviews Theology Uncategorized

Select a Month October 2026 September 2026 August 2026 July 2026 June 2026 May 2026 April 2026 March 2026 February 2026 January 2026 December 2025 November 2025 October 2025 September 2025 August 2025 July 2025 June 2025 May 2025 April 2025 March 2025 February 2025 January 2025 December 2024 November 2024 October 2024 September 2024 August 2024 July 2024 June 2024 May 2024 April 2024 March 2024 February 2024 January 2024 December 2023 November 2023 October 2023 September 2023 August 2023 July 2023 June 2023 May 2023 April 2023 March 2023 February 2023 January 2023 November 2022 October 2022 September 2022 August 2022 July 2022 June 2022 May 2022 April 2022 March 2022 February 2022 July 2021 December 2020 November 2020 July 2020 May 2020 April 2020 February 2020 January 2020 December 2019 November 2019 October 2019 August 2019 July 2019 April 2019 March 2019 December 2018 August 2018 July 2018 June 2018 May 2018 April 2018 March 2018 January 2018 December 2017 November 2017 September 2017 August 2017 July 2017 June 2017 May 2017 April 2017 March 2017 February 2017 January 2017 December 2016 November 2016 October 2016 September 2016 August 2016 July 2016 June 2016 May 2016 April 2016 March 2016 February 2016

TAKE THE

Religious Wisdom Quiz

Which book of the Bible contains the story of Balaam’s talking donkey?

Select your answer to see how you score.

Judges 1 Samuel Exodus Numbers