The Intermountain Catholic. (Salt Lake City [Utah] ;) 1899-1920, 1899-11-25
ECCLESIASTICAL PROPERTY IN
THE AMERICAN COLONIES.


preaching confscation of church prop
erty in the Philippine islands, may
study with profit a recent article by
H. K. Carroll, LII D., lately United
States special commissioner to Porto
Rico, regarding the tenure of church
property in that island. The conditions
in the Philippines are identical with
those in Cupba and Porto Rico and
/ hence reasons which obtain in the lat
ter places must likewise obtain in the
former. 1t will be recalled that Mr..
Hartman, who spent about a week in
Manila, desired the American govern
ment to confiscate all the church prop
erty in the island. Mr.. Carroll, the
special commissioner, has made care
full examination of the condition of
church property and draws conclusions
which will commend themselves to fair
minded people.
THE question of church property"
says Mr. Carroll, lis by far the most
important religious issue in our new
possession. l want at the outset to say
the common impression in the United
States that the Catholic Church is
rolling in wealth and has accumulated
vast property in Porto Rico is at fault.
The Church is therefore really
poor and if the churches were taken
away from it, its assets would be practi-
cally nothing" After thus disposing
of sthe allegations that the Church
abounds in wealth in Porto Rico, allie
cations which by the way are made
with the same basis Of truth regard
ing the Church in the Philippines, Mr..
Carroll proceeds to speak of the equity
of the title in Church property claimed
by the Church. Mr.. Carroll shows that
the churches were built in almost eyerv /
instance for religious worship and for
no other purpose. He continues: But |
the equity Of the case seems to me I
perfectly clear. These churches were |
built for Catholic worship and for no !
other. They were built by Catholic
communities; they were dedicated to
Catholic worship; the state made an
nual appropriations for ministers TO
serve them; the municipalities kept
them in repair; the Priests were en-
ployees of the state, under the control
Of their Bishop and conducted the
according to the rules of the
Church. To deprive the Church of this
now that the relations of
Church and state are dissolved
seems to me a virtual act of con-
iscation. This property was unoues-
consecrated by the Church
or Church purposes; it was so designed
by the state; formal transfer was not
made because it was thought unneces-
AIRY; those who paid the money were
either by profession or
preference, with very few exceptions
nd they expected that Catholic worship
would always be celebrated in these
hurches."
Mr.. Carroll concludes his article !
Which all through manifests a spirit
1 fairness and justice, by pointing out t
hat if the ownership of Church prop f
rty was taken from the Church and ]
iven to the municipal authorities. the {
esult would be to divert the churches '
secular use with the consequent c
rave ScdhdaI 10 the Catholic consci- q
nee. Everywhere he says that the +
oirit prevails that justice would not o
e done unless the churches are re- 5
rived for Catholics. 1T is desirable" I
Mr.. Carroll, that the dual T
ontrol should be ended as soon as S
ossible in way to relieve the s
ocular authorities OF the care and n
aintenance of the churches Thevt t
i'll have difficulties enough to meet
ithout a possible civil and ecclesiasti- q
Il conflict $
If those whom the government send il
the Philippine islands show the same W
'irit which seems to have animated o
r. Carroll regarding the Church in g
orto Rico. there need be no Fear but a
hat a settlement satisfactory to all t.
i'll be reached. II