184 ' ARTHUR GALTON, M.A.^ ON 



and no application of a new principle by the separation 

 law. In all cases, the use of the churches was made over to 

 the existing occupants, subject to their proper usage and repair. 

 Cathedrals and all important buildings were considered, as they 

 have long been, historical monuments, for which the State liolds 

 itself responsible. In this matter, the separated church of 

 France is treated more wisely and generously than are the 

 cathedral chapters of our own established church. Legal 

 associations were to be formed to deal with all questions of 

 repairs and finance. Official inventories were to be made of all 

 moveable property, at the desire of the catholic deputies, and 

 solel}' in the interests of the catholics themselves, so that 

 valuable and artistic objects might not be alienated or stolen. 

 These associations were absolutely under the control of the 

 bishops ; and more than this, only those ecclesiastics were to be 

 recognised as lawful occupiers of churches who were approved 

 by the bishops and the Vatican. In all this, the State conceded 

 everything the papacy can have desired or expected, and 

 certainly more than it should have given. The majority of 

 local catholics, and not the Pope, should have decided all such 

 questions, and the State should have accepted their decision. 

 At any rate, there was no attack by the State on ecclesiastical 

 discipline, or on the hierarchical order, or on the papal 

 authority. They were all safeguarded, and even guaranteed 

 by the State, which not only did nothing to encourage schism, 

 but exceeded its functions by devising an organisation that 

 discouraged it. 



The French bishops, by large majorities, were willing to 

 accept all this legislation ; but they were over-ruled by the 

 Vatican, which played the desperate game of disapproving 

 every law, and rejecting every financial scheme. Its reasons 

 are obvious. It hoped the government would retaliate, and 

 that the disturbing cry of persecution might be raised. It 

 wanted to see churches closed, services forbidden, and ecclesi- 

 astical life suspended. The government was too alert and 

 wise to fall into this trap, and also too faithful to its liberal 

 principles. Not a church nor a service was interfered with, 

 and the ritual business of France has gone on uninterruptedly, 

 as usual. Salaries and pensions have been paid as the law 

 intended, though the papal repudiation of the law should, 

 strictly, have vitiated the whole scheme and relieved the State 

 from any further responsibility. There have been a few disputes 

 over the use and rents of presbyteries, but in all cases the courts 

 have decided impartially between ecclesiastics and the local 



