The Irish standard., 1904-10-08
Suppression of the Orders Merely an Incident
in the Campaign Against the
Catholic Church.
Combes Had Long Been Looking for Pre-
text on Which to Set Aside Agree
ment With the Vatican

eatlons were suppressed and also that
they We're not specifically mentioned
in the restoration of religion under the
concordat. But 1t has been shown con.
clusively by the Comte de Nun that
they were really included in the first
articles of that treaty between the
Pope and the emperor, which guaran-
tees the "full and free exercise of the
Roman Catholic Apostolic religion"
How can there be "full and free ex.
ercise of the Catholic religion" when
the regular or religious life is prohib-
tied and excluded? Moreover, the
work of the Comte Boulay de Ia
Meurthe on "La Negotiation du Con-
cordat" makes it certain that the Pope
especially desired and strongly urged
that the case Of the religious orders
should be expressly mentioned in the
document, and that the first consul was
unwilling to include them, not because
they were thought to be prohibited, but
precisely because he desired that they
should be recognized as purely re.
l1gfous societies, not needing state
recognition, and depending for their
creation and regulation upon "a brief'
of the sovereign pontiff.
If other proof were wanting that the
concordnt in no way contemplated the
suppression Of the regular orders or
their prohibition. we should still have
the fact that the religious congreca-
tlons had already appeared in France
three or four years before the date Of
the concordat
1t has been suggested as incontro.
vertible, or what is the same, assumed
as self-evident, that the existence Of
the nonauthorized religious bodies
(Which were in 1900 even more numer-
GUS than the authorized congregations)
was undoubtedly illegal and prohibited
by the law Of the land. This is a COM
pletely wrong view of their position.
The laws Of 1917 and 1925 required
authorization only in the case of bodies
which desired to obtain state recogni-
ton, in order to secure advantages
which come from the possession of the
civil personality secured by legal ex-
istence. Until the recent law of
1901 the nonauthorized congregations.
though not recognized by the state,
were not In any way illicit or illegal.
1t Is necessary to bear this in mind
because it has been the policy Of M.
Combes to suggest the opposite, and
to endeavor to rob the congregations
OF the sympathy Of law-abiding people
by representing them as rebels and
lawbreakers who did not dare to place
themselves in relation with the state.
authorization" then gave to the re-
ligious houses that possessed it merely
legal status, and it was M. Waldeck-
Rousseau's professed wish by his bill
Of 1901 to extend to all religious. the
opportunity to ''regularize" their posi-
ton. He was anxious-if we may &C.
cept his reiterated expressions
making unauthorized congregations
henceforth illegal in France, to extend
the approval of the state to all re-
ligious bodies applying for it, and COM
plying with certain formal conditions.
The whole process of the suppress
sion Of the religious orders in France
has been arbitrary and unjust. M.
Combes arranges things as he pleases
by a sic volo sic jubeo Just as it
pleased him by stroke Of the pen to
close 1000 free schools, so it pleased
him, in assigning to the senate and
the chamber the demands for authori-
zation (Which were to be divided be-
tween theml to hand six to the former,
which would have regarded the ap-
plications from more just standpoint,
and fifty-four to the latter. The ac-
companying suggestion sent to the
chamber of deputies for the rejection
of all of them zen bloc" was agreed to
without difficulty or delay, and the
fright of control of the senate" which
exists theoretically according to the
constitutions of the republic, was in
this case and by this parliamentary
J coup d'etat, ignored. ;sssp sss