The Intermountain Catholic. (Salt Lake City [Utah] ;) 1899-1920, 1907-02-16
LECTURE FOR K. OF C. AT OGDEN.
Continued from Page

but right to say that this semblance is now taken
away. In 1905, however, the adversares of Chris,
tianity became strong in the chambers that the
present separation law was proposed and carried.
If this we're fair and honest measure such that
lately enacted in Brazil and accepted by the Pope
or such as American congress would pass if it
had the question to be dealt with, neither Pope
French Catholic, much less an American Catholic,
would object to 1T, except, perhaps act of bad
faith on the part of France in breaking the
cordat. But this is just what it is not and do not
think that there is fair minded man in America
who would CALI so if he were thoroughly posted
on the situation The two vital articles in this law
of separation articles iv. and viii. Article 4.
originally provided that year after the passing of
the law all the church property should be devoted to
associations formed under the new law 1t should
be stated here that this church property cavalier
ly given away consists of the requests and dona-
tions of the faithful since 1901 and is said to be
worth $100,000,000 There question
sideration at all proposed of the $300,000,000 con-
fscated in the great revolution of the miserable
stipends allowed the bishops and priests of the
church by the concordat in lieu of that old spoa-
ton The 300,000,000 and the stipends we're alike
to go forever That is the French notion of sol
emn contract
Everybody wanted to know during the debate
Oh this article how the new associations to
be formed. An amendment proposed and car
ried that the associations shall be legally formed
ton of the religion of which they are to maintain
the exercise. Mr. Ribot a non-Catholic deputy,
asked the meaning of this amendment, and whether
the Catholic church property can be turned ever to
any new associations, except to those approved by
the bishop. To this, Mr.. BRAND (not cur William
j. answered: No. we do not wish that anyone
should be able to accuse US Of laying trap for the
church, Now, bear this declaration of the French
minister in mind, and then hear the sequel. This
statement satisfied the Catholic members of the
chamber and they voted for article so amended
and it became the law. Things went until
tice of the law was reached which provided that
if several new associations claimed the church
property the dispute should be decided by The civil
tribunals of the place where the dispute arose. but
on May 90. 1905. the government introduced
amendment to this article to the effect that III
where the property transferred Is claimed at once
or later by several associations set up for the
else of the same form of worship, the transfer
might be accepted before the council of state Ga
political body and be by them decided. This is the
worst point in the whole law The laws of France
as we'll as the laws of England and America, bear
ing on dispute between two rival claimants TO
church property in the organization, Cnjoin on
legal tribunals that whenever the questions OF dis
cpne or of faith or ecclesiastical rule, custom or
law have been decided by the highest OF those
church Indicators to which the matter has been car
red the legal tribunals must accept such decisions
as final and binding But this amendment,
ceived in inlqulty and bad faith and intended rs
the foul trap the lying minister of public worship
protested they could not think of, abrogates the
general law in its application to these associations
cutuelles, and hands over the church and the bish
OPS and the church property to a VIGOROUSLY cor
rupt and atheistcal council of state. Hear what
Mr.. Ribot. the high-minded Protestant deputy be-
fore referred to- said in the chamber of deputies
anent this Infamous amendment: You explained
article t. We accepted it Loyalty and voted for it.
There was majority of ia based ON your explana-
ton. Is it 4 true? No one will contest it. Were
YOU not serious when you voted article 4? Do you
wish to destroy utterly today what you then did,
You leave to the council of state to decide arbi
trariy of whom the Catholic associations should be
composed Separation! 1t is a pretense The
Catholic associations which you have emancipated
on paper you keep under stricter rule than ever.
You say to them, eff you do not please u.s. if your
attitude is not agreeable to the project the min