The Auckland Star: WITH WHICH ARE INCORPORATED The Evening News, Morning News and The Echo. TUESDAY, AUGUST 3, 1926. CHURCH AND STATE.

Auckland Star, Volume LVII, Issue 182, 3 August 1926, Page 6

The Auckland Star: WITH WHICH ARE INCORPORATED The Evening News, Morning News and The Echo.

TUESDAY, AUGUST 3, 1926. CHURCH AND STATE.

■ i For the cause that lacks assistance, For the wrong that needs resistance, For the future in the distance, And the good that ice can do.

Mexico lias never been a fortunate country and the conflict that has now arisen there, between Church and State comes as a fitting sequel to the long series of revolutionary outbreaks that have diversified its history since the downfall of the Diaz regime. With a population of mixed origin, including Aztec, Indian, Negroid and Spanish elements, and a tradition of misgovernment and tyranny that dates back to the Spanish conquests of the sixteentli century, Mexico has never bad a fair chance of enjoying peace, security, and the advantages of modern civilisation, although the action of the Calles Administration which is causing jo much trouble just now is probably weil_ intentioned, it is more likely to check than to promote the progress of the country for some time to come. To give a reasonably clear idea of the conflict that is now convulsing Mexico, we may refer briefly to tlie clauses of the Constitution of 1917, which General Calles is now endeavouring to enforce. According to this famous instrument, no church, "irrespective of creed," may acquire, hold or administer real property in Mexico. This provision dates as far back as 1857, but it originally excluded the property "intended directly and exclusively for the purposes of the institution." But by the amendments of 1917 not only the churches themselves, but all colleges, schools, convents, asylums or seminaries "built or designed for the administration, propaganda or teaching of any religious creed" are to become the property of the nation. But General Calles is not satisfied with the confiscation of church property. His final pronouncement in the controversy between Church and State is that "only a Mexican by birth may be a minister of a religious creed in Mexico," and that "no ministers of any religious creeds , shall criticise tlie fundamental laws of the country, the authorities in particular, or the Government in general." These last two provisions probably indicate the real meaning and purpose of the Government even more clearly than the announcement that all religious instruction in schools, convents and monasteries is forbidden under the new regime. This embargo laid upon clerical education may be regarded in a sense as striking the keynote of the Calles policy. Long before General Calles was a revolutionary leader he was a school teacher, and throughout his career lie has always professed most anxious solicitude about the illiteracy of the people and the lack of intellectual progress among them; and he has announced his intention of securing education for the masses throughout the country on progressive modern lines. No doubt tbe schools and colleges organised by the Church in Mexico left a great deal to be desired in the way of efficiency. But the determination to exclude all foreign clergy and to prohibit absolutely any criticism of the Government and its policy by ministers of religion helps us to put a different interpretation, upon the whole episode. Though Calles is relatively an enlightened ruler, he seems to be infected with that prejudice against all churches and all established forms of religion which has been one of the most characteristic features of revolutionary movements in modern times. The conviction that "Clericalism is the enemy"—the great obstacle in the way of democratic freedom and progress—was not confined to France even in Gambetta's day; and since then the world has seen the anticlerical movement spread far and wide. Calles evidently takes the ground that a republic can recognise no divided allegiance and that foreigners who recognise an alien church as their director should have no place in a democratic country, and that the only safe way of dealing with political propaganda from clerical sources is to deprive the religious bodies of freedom of speech. The Mexicans have centuries of devotion to the Roman Catholic faith behind them; and the rights and interests of Roman Catholics of all nations are clearly endangered by the new policy. Already strong protests on behalf of the 20,000,000 Catholic laymen in tlie United States have been submitted to the American Senate, and it has even been suggested that the Government of the United States should withdraw its recognition of the Mexican Republic as a protest against this reactionary and tyrannical policy.