| OCR Text |
Show SEPARATION OF THE CHURCH AND STATE IN FRANCE The Programme Marked Out Its Far-Reaching j Consequences It Means Anti-Clerical Lib- j erty. Loss of Church Property Purch- - ased by the People, Spolia-tion. Spolia-tion. and Desecration. (Louis Bard in New World.) The question of the Separation of Church and State hi France has been discussed several times in this journal, but it is of such' importance to the French people that all other questions take second sec-ond place. So Ave think that it will be perhaps interesting in-teresting to Catholics of other nations to speak to them of this great event which will soon effect the situation of French Catholics. Until recently, the Socialists did not dare hope to see the separation realized. But the government ! of Waldock-Rousscau, and that of Combes put j them on the anticlerical road. They knew no limit to tiieir wild desires. They threw themselves blindly into u religious war and having obtained the expulsion of all religious orders; then the rupture rup-ture of diplomatic relations with" the Vatican, and now they are on the point of accomplishing the separation. One amongst them, Mr. Millerand. who was minister of commerce 'uuder Waldeck Rousseau, wanted to stop them in this fruitless course. He is not a Catholic far from it but he perceived very quickly that this agitation was fruitless and that the Socialists would lose all influence in-fluence with the working men if they continued to advocate nothing but anticlcricalism. He warned them then that they were on the wrong road. He counseled them, to abstain from the antireligious conflict and to think a little of social reform. His brother Socialists, however, would not listen. They felt they were masters of the gov- ' crnment under Waldeck Rousseau and Combes, and so they thought of nothing else but their hatred of religion. Now, M. Douvier has succeeded suc-ceeded Combes. He is less brutal and more clever. I He has condemned the shameful practices of the j delation of his predecessor; and declared quite re-! re-! cently, in the chamber of deputies, that he -would j govern lightly. But. M. Rouvier is the victim of j the old majority "of Combes party. "He does not j want, to render himself disagreeable to them, ami, . at the same time he does not want to be too agreeable. agree-able. But the Socialists have clamored that the separation question be discussed before any other and Rouvier could not dare to jef use them this request. re-quest. As soon as the budgpf is voted, the parliament will take up the separation. EouTir will declare, as he has already declared, that he wants a liberal separation, that is to say, one which will not hurt the Catholics. But his words do not agree with his actions. And the proof is that his government has framed a project of law which is not liberal. I have already stated that after the great, revolution revo-lution of 1770-170.'?. the nation took possession of ihe property of the Church, and that Napoleon T on signing the concordat, stipulated that the clergy should receive a salary in compensation for this property which had been taken and sold. This salary was always afterward paid and is at the present day. Tn the. government project, the priests now living will receive a salary only for a certain number of years; then this will be withdrawn. with-drawn. One would think that the separation would be an easy matter in France if the state would say to Catholics: "You will be absolutely free to live as you wish; the churche will belong: to you; you will celebrate your olices,;is you like" The state does not r,ay that. It. savs; '"You will le free; but ou are forbidden to make ti.-o o; such freedom. Voii cannot form large association- to assure the c.verci-e of your worship; vou cannot can-not make uv of your churches according to your pleasure, for the churches will all belong to me. You cannot hold st-rires when vou like; you rnn.v first give notice; you niUst not ring the hells of jour churches when you want, to; yon must a:k permission. The churches may remain in your hands, but you must pay a rent to the state, and the town, and when ihe town wants to it can refuse you the churches. You shall not be free, to say what vou like in your sermons, nor to publish what you 'like.' This is what the state says. It, is not, there-fore, there-fore, liberty which i- offered to (.'at holies. For centuries French Catholic have contributed con-tributed considerable Minis of money to the construction con-struction 6f churches.. After the priests had built, their churches, "penny by penny." they appealed to the rich and to the poor alike, saying to them, "Give; it is for the house, of (rod; it i.-, to give Him a temple in which to adoie him: to baptize your children in: to bury them from." Thus millions have been given. Today the state is seizing all the churchc. It promises to rent them for VI years; hut, later on the towns will be free not to rent thetn. So, in certain cer-tain towns, where the municipality is Socialist, they will transform the church into a theatre or a dance hall. This will be shameful but it will certainly cer-tainly happen. The Catholics under this bill cannot form powerful associations to assure the maintenance of their priests, for the state will have power to take - their treasury. Small associations will be formed in each department. Several Bishops have an- i nounced that they will organize these little asocia- tions. Thus they can irroup the practical Catln- ! lies. . t . j Kvery year during f.ent the Bishops write a i pastoral letter to the faithful iu which they ex- hort them to penitence and mortification in re- membrance of that Divine Drama, enacted two thousand years ago. This year, a certain num.- 'I ber of Bishops wrote upon the question of the , I hour - the Separation. Not one of them desires it because no separation made by the government will ' be liberal to Catholics. Several fear it, because it J will be an obstacle to the exercise of worship and because it will touch upon important interests which have existed for centuries and which cannot be touched upon without danger to the French character. Others (in fact these are the greatest number) regret the di.-appcrtMce- of the con- J cordat, which could always assure both to state - ; I and Church an era of lasting peace, if they would only have good will towards each other and have j the wish to live on good terms. All the Bishops ask the faithful to pray and I prepare themselves for future events, for painful f but necessary s. r ritice. We shall want, in brief, a . new organization, and we must appeal to the ' f generosity of the faithful. ' What we French Catholics would like, i. 3 , separation, if they insist, on giving: us one, which would give us a free life, in the rule of common j. right, as is in the United States. We would want. 10 be permitted to practice ur religion openly. I without every sort of restriction beinr inipod upon us, leavina others free to do as thy wi?h. I But our government, unfortunately, i not j animated with this liberal spirit which would allow the Church to live in sunshjn without annoying j the stale. j And the best proof that they will nnf art lib- I erally is that they will not enter into relations with the Pope. Th" French government formerly signed a treaty with the Popp; it fear? it up to- I day. It. is about, to install a new regime; it j doesn't even deign to speak of it. to the FopOj chief of the Catholic world. 1 |
