Recent studies throughout much of Europe have led to what one historian has described as ‘a quiet revolution’ in the history of poor people and poor relief. Earlier generations developed and debated the distinctions between Catholic and Protestant forms of charity, crediting Protestantism with ushering in a new form of rational, discriminating relief, directed by secular authorities, while relief in Catholic countries was seen as disorganized and haphazard, controlled by an over-indulgent church that sought to preserve a class of paupers so the rich would have ample opportunity to exercise their charitable obligations. Having jettisoned the old belief that almsgiving and other good works could assure salvation to those who performed them, it was argued that Protestantism was able to concern itself with the long-term benefit of the recipients of relief and society in general by encouraging the poor, through education and employment, to be self-reliant and industrious, whereas the practice of indiscriminate charity, thought to characterize relief in Catholic societies, had the opposite effect of encouraging idleness and dependence, thus destroying the will or the need to work and demoralizing the recipients.

Many of these familiar and pervasive distinctions have been displaced. In a recent study of Venice, Brian Pullan has demonstrated that this Catholic city pursued welfare policies that were efficient and highly discriminating, especially against public beggars, and were directed toward long-term social improvement by providing the poor with education and opportunities to work.