The Irish standard. [volume] (Minneapolis, Minn. ;) 1886-1920, 1907-01-05

of the property OF the clergy which
had been taken during .le Revolution,
but not alienated.
III a report made to tho Chamber of
Deputies by the Minister Of Public
Worship on April II, 1906, it was esti
| with an annual revenue Of 100000
francs. 1t was also estimated that since
1886 there had been received by these
ecclesiastical Embellishments in gifts
and legacies for pious and charitable
purposes nearly 1o0,oOo,OG5 francs.
The separation bill has forty four
articles, but 1 can give enly it's essen
tial provisions. It leaves the appoint
ment Of Bishops TO the Pope without
interference from the State; it stops
all stipends to the clergy except a few
provisions to Old priests and it sup
presses all the old ecclesiastical es-
tablishnents, q. g.. the fabriques and
the lnenses.
The chief feature OF the bill is the
establishment Of the new boards, or
trustees. called associations cu1tuel-
les" These associations must have for
their exclusive object the exercise Of
a particular form of worship and must
be composed Of seven persons in COM
munes of 1000 inhabitants, fifteen per-
sons in communes of 10000 to 10000
inhabitants and twenty five persons in
communes over 10000.
These associations are the pivot on
which the whole Jill turns. The bill
declares that all cttfedrals, churches.
chapels, Archbishops' and Bishops
houses are the property of the State,
the departments ahd the conlmunes,
but are left gratuitdusly at the disposal
of these ASSOCIATIONS. All the real and
personal property # the fabrfques and
menses are to be hade over to those
associations, so thEt these new asso-
Citations will get The use Of all the
ecclesiastical propafty. If the new as
sociations are5notE formed under the
law, then the rrs,1!slS'of the fa1ria,aAs
and nnenses shaIiIlte handed over by
decree to the charitable establishments
of the communicated is, State estab-
lishments-anu the churches. cathe-
drals, etc. would he taken by the
State.
But how are these new associations
to be formed? The kaw says "in ac-
lcordance with thc!rults Of general or
gahization ofthc relig Jon OF which they
are to maintain the exercise" In case
Of dispute between two rival associa-
tions for Il church or property the mat
ter is decided by the Council of State,
sitting as arbitar, which "shall take in
to account all. the circumstances Of
fact connected with the case"
The Council of State is an admins
trative court appointe ed by the Presi-
dent and removable at his pleasure.
Now what do these vague words
mean? The internal organization OF tho
Catholic Church is we'll known. No one
is Catholic unless he is in commun-
ion with his Bishop and that Bishop
with the Pope. Now, in case a new as
sociation is formed under the law by
Catholics in communion with their
Bishop and then rival association is
formed by persons calling themselves
Catholics, but w1o are not in COM
munion with their Bishop, and the dis
pute is referred under the law to the
Council of State, would the Council of
State have the bower to give the
church edifice and the property to the
schisnatic body?
It must be remembered that this law
pretends to deal with property which.
under the Conco:dat, practically be-
longs to the Catholic Church, and it
processes to provide that it shall now
belong to or be used Ly the Church
without interference from the State.
But by the internal government OF
the Church the question as to who are
Catholics is decided by tho Bishop, and,
therefore, the rev associations that
are to be formed to take over Catholic
churches and Cataolic property should
be formed by the Bishop and its MEM
bers allowed to belong to the associa-
tions only so long as they are in COM
munion with the Bishop; because, IL
not, you are either taking Catholic
property and giving it to persons who
are not Catholics. or you are asking
the Church to gre up its internal or
xahization and submit the question as
to who is a Catholic to the Council
Of State, and MOTTO the Bishop.
This question yes very clearly put
by M. Ribot in B. debate before the
Chamber Of Deputies on April %, 1905,
when the meaning of the general
words of the Law were being consid-
cred. He pointedy asked the question