Protestant Pleads for Justice to the Catholic Church

New Zealand Tablet, 7 December 1911, Page 2489

Protestant Pleads for Justice to the Catholic Church

Although Mexico is overwhelmingly Catholic (remarks the Sacred Heart Review), there are on its statute books laws known as the £ Reform Laws ’ which are very unjust to the Catholic Church, laws which hinder and hamper the work of the Church in a manner that Catholics in the United States would consider bitterly tyrannical. The injustice of these laws is recognised by the editor of the Mexican Herald —a new England Protestant. In the September 13 issue of his paper this American editor, Mr. Guernsey, devotes nearly a column and a half of editorial space to a consideration of the Reform Laws. He writes: It must not be forgotten that the reform laws were the outcome of a .long and bitter struggle, which excited the passions of the contending groups to a high degree, and it is, therefore, not surprising that some of the provisions of those laws bore the stamp of vindictiveness, and, calmly judged at the present time, must

be pronounced as harsh and tyrannical, not to say, in some cases, impracticable. Such, for example, is the constitutional provision, which prohibits the establishment of religious Orders in Mexico. Says Article 5, in part, of the Federal Constitution : ‘ The State cannot permit the consummation of any contract, compact, or agreement entailing the impairment, the loss or irrevocable sacrifice of the liberty of the individual, whether for purposes of labor, education, or religious vow. The law, in consequence, does not recognise monastic Orders, nor can it permit their establishment, whatever be the name or object which it is sought to give them.’ It is perfectly right for the State to refuse to recognise religious vows in the sense of not permitting the law to enforce them. A statute to this effect was enacted in Mexico as early as 1833 under the auspices of no less a personage than the reactionary Santa Anna. But when the State goes beyond that point, and seeks to place a ban on The taking of religious vows, and consequently on the existence of the regular Orders of the Catholic Church, it is trespassing on the liberty of the individual and interfering in matters which in no wise concern it. For the rest, the prohibition has proved wholly nugatory and is being violated every day in the year, as everyone can see, for communities of the regular clergy, bound by the three well-known vows of their institutes, exist in considerable number throughout the Republic, and there is no way of preventing it. In addition not a few of the female Orders have also houses in the chief cities. Now a law, which is not and cannot be enforced, ought not to remain on the statute book, for its nonobservance undermines the respect of the people for legislative enactments in general. The too stringent prohibition of open-air religious exercises is another blemish of the reform laws. Art, 5 of the Law of December 14, 1874, says on this subject: ‘ No religious ceremony can be held publicly save in the interior of the churches, under penalty of its being stopped and its promoters being punished with a fine of from ten to two hundred pesos or with detention

for from two to fifteen days. When the ceremony is of a solemn character owing to the number of persons taking part or any other circumstance, the promoters, as well as all other participants who disobey the warning of the authorities to disperse, will be sent to gaol at the disposal of the judicial power, becoming liable to imprisonment for not less than two nor more than six months.’ As is known, a ruling based on this provision, issued during the period when Senor Corral was Minister of the Interior, went to the intolerable length of forbidding the reading of the burial service at the graveside within the ] recincts of the cemeteries. It seems that open-air religious demonstrations are a question of police and ought not to be forbidden in so sweeping and absolute a manner. There is no reason in logic or fairness why political, Masonic, and fraternal societies should be '-permitted to hold open-air demonstrations, with all their insignia and emblems displayed, and why the same privilege should be denied to religious bodies. The question ought to be purely one for police regulation, and no doubt the clergy themselves, at any rate in the large cities, would find it prudent to use the privilege, if it were again to become available, somewhat sparingly and with all due precautions to prevent regrettable collisions. But the absolute legislative prohibition seems irrational and despotic, and all the more irritating in that it involves an unfair discrimination. The same, more or less, may be said about that clause of the Law of December 14, 1874, which prohibits the clergy to appear in public in their clerical garb, nay, which prohibits them to wear in the streets, if the

\ ■ - provision be literally interpreted, the slightest badge of their office. Here again the law takes too much upon itself. If, as we have pointed out, the members of secret or fraternal societies are permitted to parade the streets, wearing their uniforms and regalia, there is no just ground for prohibiting the clergy of the various denominations from appearing in a distinctive garb, if they see fit. The matter is one which should be left to the clergy’s own discretion and common sense. In all these respects, it seems that the Catholic community of Mexico, , the community chiefly affected, may legitimately aspire to the same liberty as is enjoyed by their co-religionists in the United States. In the United States, the religious Orders of men and women enjoy unrestricted freedom to establish themselves and to live according to their rule ; religious parades and processions in the streets are not under the ban ; nuns are seen on the thoroughfares of the great American cities wearing the garb of their Orders, and occasionally, as in processions, both secular and regular clergy appear also in public in their sacred vestments or habits. There is no reason why the same conditions should not prevail in Mexico.

pleasant point (From an occasional correspondent.) December 1. On Sunday, November 26, his Lordship Bishop Grimes made his triennial visitation of this parish, and administered the Sarcrament of Confirmation in St. Mary’s Church. Masses at 8 a.m. and 10.30 were celebrated respectively by his Lordship the Bishop and the Rev. Father Fay, S.M. Collections for the Cathedral fund were taken up at both Masses, and totalled about £BO, a very creditable amount for this the ‘ small

end' of the parish. The collection at Temuka the previous week reached about £IOO, including the Rev. Father Fay's generous donation of £2O. At 3.30 p.m. his Lordship administered the Sacrament of Confirmation to 34 children, about another 30, belonging to this district having presented themselves in Temuka the previous Sunday. The weather broke from a cold spell, and was warm and sunny during his Lordship's visit to Pleasant Point. It may be mentioned. in passing that this town has made wonderful progress since the last visitation. Twenty-four new buildings, including shops and private residences, have been or are in the course of erection, and four trains now arrive here daily.