Gibson on Article XXXVIII: Of Christian men's Goods, which are not common

There has been no alteration whatever in this Article (except in the form of the title i) since it was first drawn up in 1553. The error of the Anabaptists condemned in it is described more fully in the Eeformatio Legum EcclesiastimrMm, from which we learn that the opinion of the community of goods was in some cases pushed to such an extent that it was made to include and justify a community of wives.^

^ Christianorum bona non sunt communia. Christian men’s goods are not common. 1553 and 1563.

The two subjects of which the Article speaks are these —

1. The community of goods.

2. The duty of almsgiving.

I. The Community of Goods.

The riches and goods of Christians are not common, as touching the right, title, and possession of the same, as certain Anabaptists do falsely boast.

The notion of the Anabaptists here condemned probably originated in a misunderstanding of S. Luke’s words in the Acts of the Apostles. Two passages have often been cited in proof of the assertion that Communism proper was the system that originally prevailed in the Apostolic Church, and from them it has been concluded that the same system ought to be practised now, and that consequently the possession of private property by individuals is contrary to the spirit of Christianity.

The passages in question are the following : —

Acts ii. 44, 45 : ” All that believed were together, and had all things common ; and they sold their possessions and goods, and parted them to all, according as any man had need.”

C. iv. 32 : “And the multitude of them that believed were of one heart and soul ; and not one of them said that aught of the things which he possessed was his own ; but they had all things common ” {^v avroh airavra Koivd).

Qu» fceda illonim et conscelerata libido primuiu pietati contraria est et sacris Uteris, deinde cum universa civili honestate, et natural] ilia incorruptaque in mentibus nostris accensa luce vehementur piignat.” Cf. also the quotations given above on p. 761 ; and see Hermann’s Consultation (Eng. tr.), fol. cxl.

These passages, however, do not stand alone ; and a careful consideration of the whole account given by S. Luke of the early Church in Jerusalem, shows conclusively that what he is here describing is not so much an institution as a temper and spirit. Most certainly the rights of private property were not superseded. Mary the mother of John Mark still retained her own house (Acts xii. 12); while the words of S. Peter to Ananias prove that no necessity was laid upon him to sell his property, ” Whilst it remained, did it not remain thine own ? and after it was sold, was it not in thy power?” Moreover, as will be shown below, there are various injunctions to liberality in almsgiving in the Apostolic Epistles which are incompatible with Communism, for where a strict system of this kind is practised, and the rights of property are superseded, personal almsgiving becomes an impossibility. There are no ** rich ” to be charged to be ” ready to give and glad to distribute.”

It may be added, that while there there is no trace elsewhere of any system of Communism adopted by the Church, yet expressions are used by later writers^ which afford striking parallels to those employed by S. Luke, and show us that no violence is done to his words if they are understood of the eager, enthusiastic spirit of love which so prevailed among the early Christians as to lead them to regard whatever they possessed as at the disposal

^ Thus in the Aidaxv tQv ddiSeKa diroardXojv we read : ” If thou have in thine hands, thou shalt give for ransom of thy sins. Thou shalt not hesitate to give, neither shalt thou grudge when thou givest : for thou shalt know who is the recompenser of the reward. Thou shalt not turn aside from him that needeth, but sfuilt share all things with thy brother ^ and shut not say thai they are thine own ; for if ye are fellow-sharers in that which is imperishable, how much more in the things that are perishable,” c. iv. TertuUian also writes as follows : “One in mind and soul, we do not hesitate to share our earthly goods with one another. All things are coinnwn among tcs, btU our wives” Kyiol. xxxix.

of their brethren ; and not of any formal or systematic plan of Communism.^

II. The Duty of Ahisgiving.

Every man ought of such things as he possesseth, liberally to give alms to the poor, according to his ability.

That almsgiving is a Christian duty scarcely needs formal proof. It is sufficient to refer to —

(1) Our Lord*s words in the Sermon on the Mount, where He does not command it, but rather takes for granted that His followers will practise it, and gives directions concerning the manner of doing it, as He does also with regard to the two other duties of prayer and fasting (S. Matthew vi 1 seq. ; cf. also S. Luke xiL 33).

(2) The directions concerning it in the Apostolic Epistles,^ e.g. ” Charge them that are rich in this present world … that they do good, that they be rich in good works, that they be ready to distribute, willing to communicate; laying up in store for themselves a good foundation against the time to come, that they may lay hold on the life which is life indeed,” 1 Tim. vi. 17-19.

• The Second Book of the Homilies contains a plain Homily on the subject of “almsdeeds and mercifulness towards the poor and needy,” in which the Scriptural directions on the subject from the Old Testament (including the Apocrypha), as well as from the New, are collected together, p. 406 (S.P.C.K.).

“To do good and to communicate forget not: for with such sacrifices God is well pleased,” Heb. xiii. 16.

Cf. also Rom. xiL 13; 1 Cor. xvi. 2 ; 2 Cor. ix. 7; 1 John iiL 17, eta

Notes

• De Hctres. c. 14 : ** i>e communitatc bonorum et uxorum. Excludatur etiam ab eisdem Anabaptistis inducta bonorum et possessionum communitas, quam tantopere urgent, ut nemini quicquam relinquant proprium et suum. In quo mirabiliter loquuntur, cum furta prohiberi divina Scriptura oernant, et eleemosynas in utroque Testamento laudari videant, quas ex propriis facultatibus nostris elargimur ; quorum sane neutrum consistere posset, nisi Christianis proprietas bonorum et possessionum suarum relinqueretur. Emergunt etiam ex Anabaptistarum lacunis quidam Nicolait«, inquinatissimi sane homines, qui fceminarum, imo et uxorum disputant usum per omnes promiscue pervagari debere.
• On the position of some modern Communists, who affirm that Communism was the natural outcome of the Law of Equality implied in Christ’s teaching, and maintain that “Jesus Christ Himself not only proclaimed, preached, and prescribed Communism as a consequence of fraternity, but practised it with His Apostles ” (Cabet, F&yage en Icarie, p. 567) ; see Kaufmann’s Socialism ajid Communism, c. i. ; and on the relation between Religion and Socialism, see Flint’s Socialism, c. xi.