Α'

LL men have the same origin; all are created by God, all descend from one common father. Their position, however, is not the same. Some are rich, others are poor. The former enjoy the comforts of the domestic hearth, while the latter, halfclothed and trembling with cold, are forced to implore charity in the public streets. One class eat at tables abundantly served, the other linger near our doors to beg a morsel of bread for the subsistence of themselves and their families. Whence comes

this inequality of fortune? Why are some permitted to live in the midst of plenty, while others are surrounded by misery? Has not God the same tenderness for all his children? Oh! senseless would he be who thought differently. Man, having lost by sin the happiness in which he was created, can no longer find it upon earth, where he is subject to every kind of affliction. The rich partake with the poor of the succession of evils which their first parents transmitted to them. If the poor suffer from the want of fortune, the rich find in its possession a constant source of chagrin and disquietude. How many anxieties do the rich experience which are unknown to the poor. Under how many moral and physical evils do the rich labor, of whose existence even, the poor are unconscious. Undoubtedly poverty enters into the mass of chastisements inflicted upon degenerate man; and although it afflicts so great a portion of society we should not hence accuse God of injustice; we should recognise it only as an effect of his justice. The law of labor, which is, among others, imposed on man, as an expiation, as a means of ameliorating his condition, preserves from unhappiness most of those who observe it. As to the rest, God owing nothing to any man, distributes his gifts as he pleases, and to whom he pleases. If a wealthy man gave five thousand dollars to one of my fellow citizens, I should not have reason to complain, because I had no part

in his favors. We may remark also, that the poor, those at least who are resigned to the will of God, often receive graces and spiritual consolations which are not granted to the rich, and that if their sufferings are great in this life, their happiness and their glory will be greater in heaven. Moreover what appears to you a disorder, is precisely what constitutes social order. The variety of conditions forms the harmony which reigns among the different classes of society. All cannot possess wealth, for then where should we find workmen or artists? Diversity of genius and of character must necessarily bring with it diversity of social position. But is it not possible to imagine a better state of things? No, since God has not established it. That which he has instituted is doubtless that most conformable to our wants, to our sentiments, to our destinies. If each man had sufficient for himself, you would never witness the wonderful progress of science and the arts; man would remain in a stupid immobility, without ever arriving at perfection. This system would render him selfish and indifferent to his fellow creatures. But God wishes that men should interest themselves for each other, that they should be bound by respective rights and duties. The rich depend on the poor who supply their wants, and the poor rely on the rich who give them the means of subsistence. There is in their different lots but one spirit, but one interest. Let us not cease to admire the divine order of society. Many persons, in consequence of unforeseen misfortunes, cannot work; others drawn away by the strength of their passions, violate the divine precept of labor. They all suffer the rigors of indigence as a trial or as a chastisement. But by the side of these evils, God has placed the remedy, in enjoining upon the rich the duty of almsdeeds; he wishes them to be the administrators only of their goods. Certainly God, in giving to some men advantages, which are purely

gratuitous gifts on his part and which they do not merit of themselves, may impose upon them such conditions as he judges useful either for themselves or their fellow creatures. Consequently the rich are obliged to make that use of their fortune which God commands them. Now, if he wishes them to give part to the poor, no motives, no pretexts can dispense them from obedience. Although there were neither poor persons nor beggars among the Jews, yet Moses said to them:-"Love your neighbor as yourself." Jesus Christ has commanded us to love each other as he has loved us, and to be merciful as our heavenly Father is merciful. When we do good to the poor, it is to Jesus Christ himself that we do it. At the day of judgment, he will say to those on his right hand: "Come, ye blessed of my Father, possess the kingdom prepared for you; because I was hungry and you gave me to eat, I was thirsty and you gave me to drink, I was a stranger and you took me in, naked and you clothed me, sick and you visited me, I was in prison and you came to me." He will say to those on his left: "Go, ye cursed, into everlasting fire which was prepared for the devil and his angels. You have shown no mercy for me." "Oh! with how much confidence may we appear before God," said Tobias to his son, "when we give alms; yes, my son, by almsdeeds you will preserve your soul from hell. Remember that prayer accompanied by fasting and almsdeeds is better than treasures. Without almsdeeds all good works are sterile; that effaces sin, delivers us from death, and brings us to eternal life.” “Without the suffrages of the poor," says St. John Chrysostom, "you will never be saved. If they plead our cause at the judgment, our safety is certain. If they are against us, our damnation is inevitable." "A fast without alms," says the same father, longer a fast." "To fast without giving alms," says St. Cæsarius of Arles, "is to fast fruitlessly and without merit, at least unless you have nothing to give. Then the good will suffices before God." We should make a volume were we to unite all the passages in the Old and New Testaments and in the works of the fathers, which point out to us

" is no

the accomplishment of the duty of almsdeeds, as necessary for our salvation. Alms giving offers also immense advantages in a temporal point of view, by inclining the hearts of the rich towards the poor, and habituating them to sympathise in their misfortunes. Arresting murmur on the lips of the poor, or preventing its birth in their hearts it maintains the order of society. But what should be the extent of our alms? That is the only difficulty we cannot resolve; each one should consult the wants of his family, examine the state of his fortunes, and take counsel from the director of his conscience. We must observe that the duty of almsdeeds is binding on all men, and as wealth is a relative term, inasmuch as we are all rich compared with those who have less than ourselves, we are all obliged to give alms. The mendicant even who has satisfied his hunger, instead of putting the bread he has left into his wallet, ought to give it to the beggar who still suffers hunger. "He who has the goods of this world," says St. John, "and who sees his brother in necessity without relieving him cannot say that he loves God." If he says it, he is a liar, he is a hypocrite, he refuses to obey God, he does not wish to help his brother. He loves better to satisfy himself than to obey God, than to mitigate the evils, the sufferings of his neighbor. But in giving alms, we may be deceived, we may give to some one who does not need assistance, we may aid idleness, we may support profligacy. That man is besides without infirmities; as he is able to procure work, we ought not to give him alms. We may say that alms may be abused; but we shall never do any good work if we will first prevent all the ill effects that may arise, all the inconveniences which may result, in the uncertainty that those whom we benefit are worthy.

Doubtless alms should be given with discernment, we must not give to a man who we know is not in want, or who asks it only that he may satisfy his passions. But it is easy to exaggerate prudence in this matter. Cupidity and avarice cause us always to think that those who beg either have no wants or that they can work. Be

sides it is not he that gives the alms who commits the abuse of which we speak, it is he who receives it; but this abuse, is it very certain? You refuse alms to this one because he is healthy; but do you know whether he has found work, whether he is able to procure it, or whether some one more adroit, more vigorous, more active, or more intelligent is not preferred to him? Laborers are wanted in the country, say you? but there are seasons when there are too many; besides, he must be accustomed to agricultural labors. Are there not also in all states unhappy men fitted for work, who never do any thing because they know not where to seek employment or how to make themselves known? Do we not see such instances every day in the liberal arts? How many men of intelligence do nothing because they are wanting in capability, in tact; because they are not in so advantageous a position as to attract the attention of the public? Refuse not alms to a man because he is healthy, you may be mistaken; in believing that you refuse a vagabond, you may depress still more one who is only unhappy. You will not give any thing to this man because he is vicious, because it would be contrary to justice; but is it your place to punish him? Do you lead him back to virtue, do you inspire him with more social ideas by refusing to quench his thirst, to satisfy his hunger, to cover his nakedness? But the healthy are not the only petitioners for alms. See those old men, those orphans, those women with child, those mothers surrounded by their numerous offspring. All these unfortunate beings stretch out their hands to you, address to you their supplications. You cannot say in giving to them that you misplace your alms. But suppose you are deceived by persons who have taken the appearance of misery; is it not better to fall into this error than to refuse alms to one who is really in want, and whom your refusal will expose to more suffering? Besides, if you so much fear giving to unworthy persons, you have only to confide your alms to the ministers of religion, to the curates of your parishes, to the sisters of charity: knowing all the indigent, all those who are too diffident to solicit

charity for themselves, they will distribute your alms with prudence, and you will not have the promotion of idleness to fear. We spoke some time since of different projects for the extinction of mendicity: certainly, we Catholics, should loudly applaud all that can alleviate the distresses of our fellow creatures; but it is necessary that we should explain what we mean by the extinction of mendicity does it mean that it should be ordered by law that there should be no more poor? but that is absurd; there will always be poor, because there will always be infirmities, old age and misfortunes; because there will always be some whose evil passions will draw them into the abyss of vice and misery. Shall we form depots for mendicity? But that would be an odious, iniquitous measure; you would deprive that man of liberty because he is poor, and that to spare hard hearted men, ruthless philanthropists the sight of the misery of their fellow creatures and the supplications with which they are importuned. But if you wish to punish this man because he asks alms, you must also punish him who assists him; he would be his accomplice in the crime of rebellion to the laws. Besides, depots for mendicity would not prevent misery from extending itself, and would not diminish its intensity. Is it from industry that we should demand the extinction of mendicity? but we already know its inefficiency on this point. The hearts of the working classes are not the most tender; their interests, their money, above all, is paramount in their regard; they can, to be sure, throw some looks of pity on the unfortunate, and give them, with disdain, an insulting and contemptuous alms. As to the rest, we know that there are more poor in the operative classes than in the others, immorality being there greater. The mingling of the workers of both sexes in the same departments, who besides, do not receive any religious instruction, favors the corruption of manners, and multiplies illegitimate children. The philosophers of the last century also declaimed loudly against mendicity, they pretended that the precept of almsdeeds favored it; but when they reigned in 1793, they aggravated the evil by despoiling

the clergy of their property. From that moment, the poor having no longer these resources open to them, their position became harder and their number augmented. All the measures that they have taken to fill the abyss created by the alienation of the goods of the clergy have been fruitless; each day misery becomes more general and more poignant. What shall we do in this state of things? Extend the empire of religion, preach almsdeeds to the rich, that it may teach them to retrench their expenses in all that tends to luxury, delicacy, ambition, or dissipation; at the same time that it renders the rich merciful and compassionate, it will teach resignation to the poor; leave it to guide our hearts to virtue, that it may form us to good habits and remove far from us all that is evil. In the heart of man is found the cause of his misery, his misfortunes are often but a punishment of his vices. Religion can prevent this unhappiness, this chastisement, by rendering him virtuous. What shall we do then? Leave Catholicism free to exercise all its influence on society, that it may revive those ancient institutions in whose shades the former civilization of Europe received its birth and increase. Pauperism, that hideous wound of society, was not at that time known. All the families who resided on the territories of the great abbeys, were in easy circumstances; in the cities also, the convents supported a great number of infirm poor, and supplied with work those who were well. Even at this day, the several religious congregations, how limited soever may be their resources, maintain a certain number of poor. Let us say also, that the monks in mingling with the working classes preserved in them the love of their duties, respect for the ancient traditions, the spirit of order and economy. The associations of piety, of charity, formed and supported by the clergy, and which showed themselves so happily provident against the weakness of reason, against the seductions of the passions, contributed also in a wonderful manner, to sustain the working classes in comfort. But what shall we do then? if we are not tired of vain experiments, and if we are not frightened by this pauperism which becomes from day to

day more menacing, we may still demand other systems of human wisdom; but they will not be less sterile. But if we acknowledge that if we have walked only too long in the ways of destruction, that it is to the decrease of faith and to the abolition of the great religious institutions that the critical situation of society is owing, we must acknowledge that there is no other remedy than in the free action of Catholicism: that what it has done for the good of humanity and that of society it may do again. Its divine power is not diminished nor weakened, and the nature of man is not changed; it is always subject to the same weaknesses, and divine aids are always equally neces

sary.

We do not wish to terminate this article without saying a word on the collective alms made in churches. There are some men who are called Christians and who contest their utility. But these almsdeeds, like all others, have for their object the succor of persons or establishments which are in want and which cannot supply that want by their own resources. Who knows, for example, but that a church may require repairs or completion, and on account of its very limited income, not being able often to support the ordinary demands of divine worship, is obliged to incur extraordinary expenses and to have recourse to collective alms? Do you regret a few pieces of money for the embellishment of the temple wherein resides the true God, the Creator of heaven and earth, he from whom you hold all that you possess? Do you wish that the cere monies of worship should be without dignity, without influence? Oh! do not say, Christians, that you know neither how to honor or to love your God. But why make collections for seminaries and foreign missions? You desire then the extinction of the Catholic priesthood, since you do not wish to contribute to sustain the pious and learned asylums where it is formed. You are then heartless and unpitying, since you do not wish to aid by light sacrifices apostolic men. You blame also the collections for the timid poor: you wish then that these men, that these women, fallen often from an elevated rank, and who fear to meet disdainful looks

and to hear railing words, should stretch out their hands in the streets. Oh! if you are not without compassion, you would esteem yourself happy at having made confidants of their sufferings, those consoling angels, the priests and the sisters of charity, who have influenced you by their mediation. You do not wish collective alms? but men acknowledge how weak they are in their isolation, and how association on the contrary gives them strength. They form every day literary, agricultural, manufacturing, and commercial societies; it is very natural that Catholics, struck by the advantages of association for the material goods of life, should unite to ameliorate the condition of the moral and future life. Besides, is not this association of offerings among men whom a common faith calls to the foot of the same altars, very touching? All co-operate for the consolation of the unfortunate, and each there contributes according to his fortune; the day laborer in taking from his wants, the rich in giving from his superfluity. Is not the power of example also something? Because you make your offering, others also make theirs and the poor there find their profit. A greater number of the unfortunate are relieved by these united offerings than could be assisted by individual alms. Christian readers, without troubling yourselves with the utopias of philosophers or the pretexts of the men of the world, give alms every time that an occasion presents itself and you are able to do so, do it individually and in conjunction

with others. Remember that God from whom you hold all that you possess, prescribes to you a duty; in disobeying which, you may draw upon yourself the same evils from which you do not wish to relieve your brethren. Reflect also, that in doing thus, you procure many graces for yourself and your family. Because you have been charitable to your brethren, God will be merciful to you and yours. The alms that you give will draw down upon you the blessing of your heavenly Father, and the preservation of those that are most dear to you. Ye rich, the beggar has with you a common origin; it is your flesh and blood that you succor; in rescuing your brethren from the sorrows of poverty you work also their conversion. The alms which you give them makes them renounce the bad actions they meditated. You yourselves in thus laying aside from your fortune a part for the poor, escape the dangers of avarice or of vain and often ruinous habits. What further shall I say to you, O ye rich? It is perhaps Jesus Christ in person who demands your alms. In giving it, you render yourselves like the God whose love extends itself to all men, who are all poor compared to you. See how Jesus Christ commends him who gives a cup of water in his name, how he glorifies the charity of the Samaritan. In following the example of the God Saviour who passed his life in doing good, you will make to yourselves friends, who, when .the earth shall crumble under your feet, will receive you into eternal tabernacles.