The Washington herald., 1911-08-06
Catholic Clergy Issues Stirring Protest
Against Decree of Separation Pro-
mulgated by Young Republic.

OF non-Catholic and free thinkers! II Is
this audacious but small minority that
has carried the dav; IT was at the sug-
gestion of this small band Of hot-heads,
Of these anti-religious families, that the
law of April 20 was promulgated. Law!
There is no law deserving of the name
which is not in clear conformity with
the dictates of the social will, of the
majority of the collective body. In
both these requirements the decree OF
April 20 is wanting, and so cannot claim
| to be acknowledged as having the force
Of law" which 1t arrogates for itself.
| Neither does It express the eternal and
| inviolable principle of justice, nor does
1t in any way reflect the sentiment and
the will of the majority of Portuguese
citizens, that is, of the Catholics.
We do not propose to make any COM
| plete judicial analysis of the decree by
studying its provisions one by one. We
confine ourselves to considering t as a
whole and in a general manner. In its en-
tirety what does this document contain? ?
1t may be summed up in four words: In
justice, oppression, spoliation, mockery.
We proceed to say a few words on each.
InJustie.
The decree of April 20 is opposed to
positive divine law. for 1t Is antagonistic
to the divine constitution of the Catho-
lie Church and to its independence as a
spiritual power.
1t is opposed to public law, for, as al
ready explained 1t is an arbitrary abro-
CATION of the concordat system of treat
les. which for many centuries from the
very dawn of our national existence, had
obtained. with the exception OF short in
tervals of time. which never implied any
absolute final rupture between the Por-
tuguese state and the holy see.
II is opposed to canon law because II
invades the domain and restricts the pre-
negatives of ecclesiastical Jurisdiction,
and sets at naught the autonomy and
hierarchy of the church by empower
ing the state to intervene in the provision
and administration OF dioceses and par
ishes Independently of any agreement and
without the Intervention of the ecclesi-
astical authority: giving the state the
right to alter the boundaries of dioceses,
annulling patrimonies. and permitting and
even encouraging the violation of the
laws of ceIlabacy.
1t is opposed to the civil law because
II infringes. in respect of many persons
the fundamental principle of laws not
being retroactive; for IL disregards the
legitimate rights of beneficiaries with
or without cure of souls, to the fruits
of their benefces-rights which have
only of the canon but also of the civil
law. after preliminary costly courses of
required studies tests, and competi-
tions. and the payments of heavy legal
and registration state fees, and pos
session duty. Thus the decree in
jures a large number of citizens And
it further annuls the rights of all those
whom by reason of their naturalization
the civil code tart. IS sec. 81 regards as
yrh 4
spoiled of that character without any
fault on their part and without a trial
1t is opposed again, to the law of ma
ture because, by ignoring the wills and
trampling on the last wishes of tesla
tors who left pious bequests, 1t attacks
the right of association and the right
of private property; 1t restrains the right
of making offerings to religion. offends
the liberty of conscience Of a great many
individuais-as collegiates and sick,
prisoners and sailors on voyage, and SOL
diers in the field-to all Of whom 1t rem
ders the help of religion most difficult.
Oppression.
1t is no separation; It is not a divorce;
it is a violent abuse of force. 1t is no
neutrality. but it is an evident and
avowed determination, We will not say
to exercise surveillance (for surveillance
reason
able limits Of common law), but to en-
slave
1t is oppression in the exercise Of wor-
ship. which is now made subject to the
arbitrary power of lay corporations, to
whom Is intrusted the regulation of the
fees payable to the parish priests (who
are authorized to receive them in the
name of the said corporation), and with
whom lies the choice and appointment
of sacristans (keepers Of public churches),
while the parish priests are placed in the
position of employees and commissioners
of these associations, from the manage
ment of whc they are absolutely ex-
cluded and are even rendered Ineligible
to the parochiaL boards. The necessary
consequence of such a state of things
would be to make 1t morally impossible
for any bishop to enter a cathedral or a
cure his parish church.
1t suppresses religious teaching, which
is hindered on all sides by endless OBJ
stacles and restraints. 1t is oppression
in respect to the formation of candidates
to the priesthood. and the regulation of
seminaries, from which the teaching of
preparatory discipline has been banished,
and the life of which is to remain alb
solutely dependent the will of the
state. 1t is an arbitrary interference
with the relations or the bishops with
the faithful, or of the faithful and the
bishops with the supreme pontiff; for
it reqires an authorization (what a sep
aration! What liberty of conscience!
What a conference of logicD for all pom
tifical constitutions and even for all pas
toral and episcopal pronouncements.
The very cassock is banned! 1t is for
hidden outside the place of worship! Is
il because it offends the freethinker? But
that garment is distinctive of a class of
men whose doctrines possess nothing
that is anti-social, and are publicly pro-
fessed. And has there not been allowed
the public exhibition of emblems of So
cieties which. being secret no state can
acknowledge? All, the fact Is that the
black cassock of the priest speaks OF
mourning and reminds people OF death,
while modern society wants joys with
out shadows and life without cares.
Away then, with whatever may awake
one thought of eternity. Let US crown
ourselves with roses before they fade,
according to the old well-known lam
guage of all materialists.
Spoliation.
The decree denies in fact to the Catho-
lie Church all right of possession and
ownership of any personal or real prop
erty-a right. which belongs to the
church as an external. visible. perfect
and independent society.
The state proclaims itself the sole pro-
PRETORIA doctrine of collective social
ism); IL SseiZes upon and absorbs hence
forth and for all future time all eccle-
siastical property whatever. though 1t
allows precarious usufruct of certain