V

TKaUn . j-i . J

.

A-Ax oSi/-S

IS\

PERSECUTED

MEXICO

By

H. J. THOLEN
(

Hays, Kansas



DEDICATION

This study of the Mexican situation

was prompted by an editorial appear-

ing in the Emporia (Kansas) Gazette.

It is not strictly confined to an answer

to that editorial, but includes much

other material, bearing on the Mexican

persecution of religion in general and

the Catholic Church in particular.

No claim of completeness is made,

but the information contained herein

is authentic and can easily be cor-

roborated by any one.

To liberty loving Americans who

believe in Freedom of Conscience.

Freedom of Press and Freedom of

Speeiti, we are pleased to dedicate
this pamphlet in memory of the
founders of this nation who secured
for us this priceless heritage.

H. J, THOLEN.



MINDING OUR OWN BUSINESS

“ Young Bill” White, in the Em-

porta Gazette and reprinted in the

Hays Daily News on February 19,

1935, said:

“Josephus Daniels, the New Deal’s

Ambassador to Mexico, is under heavy

fire in Congress and outside of it be-

cause of a speech he made several

months ago in Mexico City. He took

occasion to compliment the American

system of free public schools. Con-

tinuing his rounded oratorical periods,

he sa d they were the outgrowth of

the ideals of Thomas Jefferson, and

commended the principles of that

great Democrat to the Mexican people.

Here it would have ended, had it

not been seized upon and misrepres-

ented by a section of the American

religious press. The Mexican govern-

ment for the past 10 years has been

engaged in two campaigns, one to

educate the people of that semi-

illiterate country, and another cam-

paign of bitter, ruthless, and, as it

seems to us on this side of the Rio

Grande, entirely unjustified persecu-

tion of the Roman Catholic faith.
‘Tn defense of this policy, Mexicans

argue that the Mexican Catholic
church was for centuries the greatest
enemy of popular education. They say
that before the Revolution, when
education was by law a monopoly of
the church, not one Mexican child in

a hundred could read. Now they claim
that, as a result of the newly estab-
lished Mexican free public schools, 25



4

per cent of the population is
already

literate.

“To our American eyes this
would

seem no reason for persecuting the

Catholic faith, or for prohibiting

relig’ous schools. Whether or not, 20

years ago, the Mexican Catholic

church was unwilling or unable to as-

sume the burden of educating the

peons is unimportant today Under

our American system, public anJ

church schools exist side by side, each

bearing a share of the common task,

and people are free to send their

children to either.

“On the other hand, thjngs have

come to a pretty pass if an American

ambassador abroad can not point with

pride to the school system of his

own country and praise the ideals of

Thomas Jefferson without being ac-

cused (as Mr. Daniels recently was

by a volunteer congressional spokes-

man for the Catholic viewpoint) of

“conspiring with the tyrants of

Mexico to enslave the people.

“As an outgrowth of all this ruckus.

Senator Borah, who is old enough tp

know better, has introduced a resolm

tion calling for a senatorial investiga-

tion of the Mexican government’s

persecution of the Catholic fa’th.

“Such an investigation would prove

what everyone knows, namely that

such a persecution has ex'sted for a

decade, and is conducted with relent-

less brutality. But what business is

this of the United States senate? Is

it not, however misguided, purely a

domestic
,
affair of the Mexican peo-

ple?



5

‘•Do we threaten to investigate or

intervene when the Germans per-

secute the Lutherans or butcher the

Jews, when the Turks have at their

ihercy Armenian Christians, when*

the Bolshevik Russians ship their mkl-

dle classes into exile, or when the

British slaughter the Hindus?

“How would you feel about it if the

French or Spanish government had

officially invest'gated the acivities of

the old American Kii Klux Klan

against the Catholics? Or if the

British parliament appointed a com-

mittee to “investigate” southern

lynchings or northern gang murders?

‘ Senator Borah for 15 years has op-

posed the League of Nations on the

h’ghly questionable ground that it

would permit foreign countries to

meddle in American domestic affairs.

If v/e want foreign countries to mind

their own business, why don’t we set

an example by not butting into

theirs?”

Several glaring errors occur in this

b t of “wisdom” from the pen of

“Young Bill.” The exact words of Mr.

Daniels, which caused, according to

White, “a section of the American

relig.ous press to misrepresent Mr.

Daniels will be given in this record

of events in Mexico. The other errors
in Mr. White’s statement will become
evident from a careful perusal of all
of what follows in this brief resume
of the Mexican persecutions, covering
not 2i{) but 100 years of misrule in that



a

unfortunate country. Space will not

permit even a brief record of the 300

years of progress in culture and civil-

ization made between 1524 and 1824,

during which time the Catholic church

had a frfee hand in the education and

civiliz-ation of Mexico, and for which

she offers no apology. Of the history

of these 30i0 years, she may well be

justly proud. This booklet will deal

with the past 100 years In which the

church has bee*a hampered by the gov_

ernment and particularly the past 20

years for which the Revolutionary

party in power is responsible.

Charges and counter charges are

constantly being made regarding the

persecution of the church in Mexico.

Recent official statements by the

president of Mexico and by the

Mexican Ambassador at Washington

deny the exlstance of religious per-

secution in Mexico. These denials

were occasioned by the Borah resolu-

tion which called for a senatorial

invest gation of the Mexican Govern

ment’s persecution of the church. For

the purpose of clarifying the matter

in the minds of the American people^

we will present authoritative infornqn:
tion in regard to the situat’on as it

stands today.

Members of Protestant denomina
tions who believe that the attack up-
on the church in Mexico is anti-Cathol
lie instead of anti..God and anti-
KeJgiaus in general, will find fma a
careful perusal of the laws which I

will cite, that these laws are directed

against all religions and not merely

the Catholic religion. Recent acts of



7

the Government under General Calles

also bear out the' fact that the aim of

the Government of Mexico is to de-

stroy every vestige^ of religion and

they are proceeding to do so along the

same lines which have been followed

in Russia for the past 15 years.

However, before offering our

evidence on the present situation,

let us go back to the very beginning

of the trouble between the church

and state in Mexico in order that

we may view the whole matter in its

proper setting. This background is

necessary for a thorough undersand-

ing of the problems.

THE FIRST ATTACKS UPON THE

CHURCH MADE BY THE GOVERN-

MENT OP MEXICO

Let us examine the Constitution of

1857 and the Laws of Reform. From

July 4, 1822, when the law was is-

sued permitting the Government to

take possession of the Philippine mis-

sion property, and of revenues from

pious foundations which were not to

be spent within the limits of the

Mexican Republic, to the law of

November 23rd, 1855, Article 42 of

y hich abolished all ecclesiastical juris-

diction in civil matters, a series of

laws were enacted by congress and the

legislatures of the states clearly show-

ing the anti-religjous spirit of those

who framed them. This spirit was at
its height from 1857 to 1874. During
the presidency of D. Ignacio Comon-

fort the famous Constitution of 1857,
decreeing the separation of Church



I

and stale, was promulgated, and in

the years following Benito Juarez

framed innumerable laws systematiz-

ing the provisions of the Cionstitutioa

and enforcing the separation, and in

1874 President D. Sebastian Lerdo de

Tejada raised many of the Reform

Laws framed by Juarez to constitu-

tional statutes.

THE CHURCH AND HER

PRIVILEGES

Law of December 4, 1860: Art. 8-—

Right of asylum in churches is

abolished and force may and should

be employed in whatever measure it

may be deemed necessary to arrest

and remove according to law a declar-

ed or suspected criminal, without the

ecclesiastical authorities having a

right to intervene.

Art. 17—Official recognition former
ly given to various ecclesiastical per-

sons and corporations is withdrawn.

Art. 18—The use of church bells is
to be regulated by police ordinance.

Art. 24—Public officials are forbid-
den in their official capacity to as-

sist at any religious ceremony, or

entertainment in honor of a clergy-

man, however high in rank he may be.
Troops of soldiers are included in the

foregoing prohibition.

Law of May 13, 1873—No religious
rite or demonstration of any kind

whatsoever may take place outside Oi
the church building in any part of the
republic.

Law of December 14, 1874, Art. 3

—

Nor shall the Government recognize
in any manner whatsoever religious



9

solemnities. All days, therefore,' that

do not commemorate some exclusively

civil event cease to be holidays. Sun-

days are set apart as days of rest

for offices and public institutions.

Art. 5—No religious rite may take
place outside the church building,

neither shall the ministers of religion

or any individual of either sex, of any

denomination whatsoever, wear in

public a special dress or insignia

which would characterize him in any

way, under penalty of fine of ten

to two hundred pesos.

Constitution of 1857, Art. 5—The
State cannot allow any contract, pact

or agreement to go into effect that

has for its object the impairment,

loss, or irrevocable sacrifice of a

man’s liberty, whatever the cause

may be, work, education or religious
vows. Consequently the law does not

recognize monastic orders, nor can it

permit their establishment, whatever

be their designation or object.

Art. 27—Religious institutions or
corporations, whatever their charac-

ter, name, period of existence and

object, and such civil institutions as

are under the patronage, direction, or

administration of these, or of the

ministers of any religious denomina-
tion, shall have no legal right to

acquire title to or administer any

property, but such buildings as are

destined for the immediate and direct
use of sa‘d corporation and institu-
tions. Neither shall they have the
right to acquire or man^age revenues

derived ^rom real estate.

Law of July 12, 1859, Art. 5—All the



10

male religious orders which exist

throughout the republic, whatever

their name or the purpose of their ex-

istence, are hereby suppressed

throughout the whole Republic, as

also all archconfraternities, confra-

ternities, congregations or sisterhoods

annexed to the religious communities,

cathedrals, parishes or any other

churches.

Art. 6—The foundation or erection

of new convents of regulars, archcon-

fraternities, confraternities, congrega-

tions, or sisterhoods, under whatever

form or name is given them, is pro-

hibited, likewise the wearing of the

garb or habit of the suppressed

orders.

Art. 7—By this law the ecclesiastics
of the suppressed orders are reduced

to the conditions of secular clergy, and

shall, like these, be subject as re-

gards the exercise of their ministry

to the ordinaries of their respective

dioceses.

CONFISCATION OF PROPERTY

Art. 12—^All books printed or manu-
script, paintings, antiquities and other

articles belonging to the surpressed

religious communities shall be given

to museums, lyceums, libraries and

other public establishments.

Art. 13—All members of the sup-
pressed orders who fifteen days after

the publication of this law in their

respective localities shall continue to

wear the habit or live in community

shall forfeit the right to collect their

quota as assigned by Article 8, and



11

if after the term of 15 days designated

by this Article they should reunite in

any place and appear to follow their

community life they shall immediately

be expelled from the country.

Art. 21—All novitiates for women

are perpetually closed. Those at

present in novitiates cannot be profes-

sed.

Law of Feb. 26, 1863, Art. 1—All
religious communities of women are

suppressed throughout the republic.

Law of December 4, 1873. Art. 19

—

The State does not recognize monas-

tic orders, nor can it permit their

establishment, whatever their name or

the object for which they are founded.

Any orders that may be secretly estab-

lished shall be considered unlawful

assemblies which the authorities may

dissolve should the members attempt

to live in community, and in all such

cases the superiors or heads shall be

judged criminals infringing on in-

dividual rights according to Article

973 of the Penal Code of the District,

which is declared in force in all the

republic.

CHURCH PROP,ERTY

Law of July 12, 1859, Art. 1—All
property which under different titles

has been administered by the secular

and regular clergy, whatever kind of

property it may be, taxes, shares or
stock, or the name or purpose it may

have had, becomes the property of the

State.

Law of September 25, 1873, Art. 3
r—No religious institution may acquire



12

property nor the revenuie derived from

property.

LEGACIES AND WILLS

.

Law of December 14, 1874, Art. 8

—Legacies made in favor of ministers

of religion, of tbeir relatives to the

fourth degree, or of persons

living with said ministers where

they have rendered any spirit-

ual aid to the testators in their

last illness, or when they have been,

their spiritual directors, are null and

void.

HOSPITAL and charitable •

INSTITUTIONS

Law of Feb. 2, 1861, Art. 1^—All
hospitals and charitable institutions

which up to the present time have

been under ecclesiastical authority and

managed by religious corporations

are secularized.

Law^ of February 5, 1861, Art. 67

—

Charitable institutions that were

managed by ecclesiastical corpora-

tions or committees independent of

the Government are secularized an i

placed under the immediate super-

vision of the civil authorities.

Law of August 27, 1904, Art. 25

—

The ministers of any form of religion

cannot act as the directors, adminis

trators or patrons of private charity;

neither can officials, dignitaries, or

religious corporations, nor anyone,

delegated by them, act in the same

capacity.



13

PUBLIC OFFICE

Constitution of 1857, Art. 5(5—No
member of the ecclesiastical body can

be elected ^ cotipressman.

Law of Nov. 1874, Art. 58—Nomina-
tions for senator are subject to the

same conditions as those for congress-

man.

PRESENT PERSECUTION BASED

ON CONSTITUTION OP 1917

President Cardenas of Mexico, on

January 25th, 1935, issued a state-

ment which was reiterated by the

Mexican Embassy at Washington on

January 31st. These statements said

there is no religious persecution in

Mexico. The same statement has been

made by emissaries of the Govern-

ment, scouting through our country

for tourist traffic and for attendance

at the Lions International and Rotary

International Conventions which are to

be held in Mexico City this year.

If the denial of the inalienable right

of liberty of religious worship by its

own citizens is not persecution, then

what is it? By law, the Mexican Gov-

ernment prohibits training of students

for the ministry; has closed and con-

fiscated thousands of churches a\id has

so limited the number of priests as to

make rel'gious worship practically im-
possible. By law, the Mexican Govern-
ment confiscates at OMce and without

the presentation of any further (evid-

ence any house or institution wherein

a Pi iost or minister has held a^y

private religious service. The reiigoifs

educatipn of pither children or adults



14

Is prohibited. In denying the liberty of

education, the Government has made

mandatory the exclusion of the name

of God from all schools, and made a

necessary part of the curriculum the

teaching of the tenets of the National

Revolutionary Party. The Mexican

Federal Government deprived the

citizens within the Federal District

of Mexico, numbering over one mil-

lion Catholics, of the possibility of

religious worship by reducing the num-

ber of priests therein to twenty-five.

The Mexican Government has abetted

and encouraged the different State

governments to pursue this policy of

persecution and by making public

worship impossible, deprived the

citizens of the exercise of the right

to freedom of worship.

In 1926 after fifteen years of per-

secution, after all foreign priests had

been expelled, it was estimated that

there were 3,910 Catholic, priests in

Mexico, all Mexican citizens. The

Catholic citizens of Mexico petitioned

the National Congress stating that

this number of priests was wholly

inadequate in a nation of fifteen mil-

lions, more than ninety-five per cent

of whom are officially recorded as
Catholic. The Congress rejected that

petition and State Legislatures were

instructed to reduce further the num-

ber of priests.

LIBERTY OP WORSHIP DENIED

At present in Mexico by law no

priest is allowed to minister in any

way in fourteen of the thirty states

and territories of Mexico. Thie Catho-



15

lies therein, numbering over six mil-

lions are persecuted and liberty of

worship is denied them. Even when dy-

ing, they may not have the services

of a priest. In the State of Oaxaca

a population of more than a million

Catholics is limited in its opportunity

of religious worship, of receiving the

sacraments, to one priest. In Durango

a Catholic population of one million

two hundred thousand, scattered over

a region of nearly forty thousand

square miles, with only primitive

means of transportation, is limited in

its opportunity of religious worship,

of receiving the sacraments, to the

services of two priests.

In the entire thirty States and Ter-

ritories of Mexico a population of

fifteen millions is limited by the laws

of Mexico to the services of three

hundred and thirty-four priests. Yet

President Cardenas and the Mexican

Embassy in the United States have

the effrontry to state ‘There is no

religious persecution in Mexico.’'

Among the provisions of the Con-
stitution of 1917 affecting directly the

question of religion, I wish to call at-

tention to the following quoted in

The outlook March 14, 1917, Vol. 115,

No. 11, Page 455. You will note that

the Catholic chu^rch is not singled out

particularly, arnd that these Constitu-

tional provisions apply alike to all re-

ligions :

“No religious corporations, no min-

ister of any cult may establish or
direct schools of primary instructio*Q.

“Education shall be free but it shall

be laical in the official educaticmal in-



16

stitutions as in thie primary, elemen-

tary and superior instruction given

in the private schools.

“Private schools of primary instruc-

tion may be established only subject

to official direction.”

“In other words, both Catholic

schools and instruction by priests and

nuns, in any kind of schools are pro-

hibited. Mexico, of course is a Catho-

lic country.

“All church property passes at once

to the nation. Many churches in

Mexico are held by private citizens.

These properties also pass to the

nation.

Here from Article 130, is a grist

of clerical reform:

“The power of intervention in the

public worship belongs exclusively to

the Federal powers.

“Congress may not dictate laws

establishing or prohibiting any re-

ligion whatsoever.

“Marriage is a civil contract. jThis

and other acts of the civil state of

persons are the exclusive jurisdiction

of the functionaries and authorities

of the civil order, in the manner

prescribed by the laws, and will have

the force and validity that the same

attribute to them.

“The law does not recognize any

personality in the religious .groups

denominated churches.

“The ministers of the cults will be

considered as persons who exercise

a Profession.

“The Legislatures of the States only

will have the power to determine, ac-

cording to the local necessities, the



17

maximum number of ministers of the

cults.

“To exercise in Mexico the ministry

of any cult it is necessary to be

Mexicali by b’rth.” (Thus all the

Spanish, French and Italian clericals

in Mexico are barred; even Amer.can

priests, Protestant ministers, and mis-

s onaries.)

“Ministers are forbidden to inher t

property,to gather for political pur

poses, to take part in political gather-

ings, and to vote.”

As evidence that the prov sions of

the Constitution of 1917 are being

applied and made use of by the Gb\^-

ernment, I refer you to an Associated

Press dispatch of June 23, 1934, which

among other things, says:

“At Villa Hermosa in Tabasco, two

w dows and two girls were arrested
and held in jail for ten hours because

they had visited a cemetery and put

floA^ers on the grave of the husband

of ons of the widows. They were

finally released on the payment of

f nes. A recent decree by the Cover
nor provided that all tombstones must

be removed from cemieteries and all

giaves be without any sacred adorn-

ment or flowers.”

General Calles, at Guadalajara in

July, 1934, emphas zed the view cf

the Revolutionary party toward the

youth of Mexico. “They must” he said,
‘ wrest youth from the claws of the

clergy. The child and the youth be-

long to the community and it is the

Revolution that has the obligat on

of doing away with prejudices and

developing the new national soul. For



18

this reason I urge all the Govern-

ments in the Republic, all the authori-

ties and all the revolutionary ele-

ments, that they go into wh^atever

fields it may be necessary to go> be-

cause the child and the youth must

belong to the Revolution.” “America

Vol. LI No. 19, Aug. 18, 1934” (Note

especially these last four woixis,

Belong To The Revolution; not even

to the State as in Russia but to the

dominant party—the Revolution.
There is no longer any doubt at all

if there ever was any, that it is the

determined design of General Calles

and the military dictatorship of which

he is the boss to crush out every

vestige of religion from the Mexican

people.

The campaign has proceeded with

diabolical ruthlessness and single-

ness of purpose. Following the agree-

ments made with the church, the at-

tack shifted from the Federal Govern-

ment to the States. There the number

of priests allowed to function was re-

duced from time to time to a pitifully

small numhar, utterly inadequate ex-

cept for only a small fraction of the

people, and finally in many states no

priests at all are allowed. Then at the

beginning of June, 1934, under the

pretext that they were not being used

(It was forbidden to use theno^)

church after church was confiscated.

From an official list before us, between

June 2 and July 28 no less than

twenty seven decrees were issued tak-

ing over as many properties. In the

middle of this came the elections, and

nothing but even darker days were



19

promised by the result, for the pre

destined candidate, General Cardenas,

left no doubt of his desire to please

the fanatical aims of his master, Cal

les After the elections, Calles h mself

returned publicily to the seene and

announced a program which was

radically socialistic; the principal

item b'f this progTam as stated above

was that the child belongs to the

Revolution.

FREEDOM OF EDUCATION
ABOLISHED

*‘Calles made a speech at Cuerna

vaca in which he set forth the six

year plan wh ch he designed for his

creature, the new President. In the

course of this speech, made in the

name of his political party, which is

a military camaHllu, he announced his

purpose of amending Article 3 of the

Constitution which guarantees free

dom of education, by abolishing that

freedom and putting all education in

the hands of his anti-religious party.

He continued: “We must enter into

and take possession of the minds of

the children, the mhids of the

youth.” What this meant was clear

to everybody who heard him: the

National Revolutionary party, dedicat-

ed openly to the destruction of all

rel gion in Mexico, must possess even

the souls of youth, as it now con

trols its bodies.’* America Vol. LI

No. 21, September 1, 1934.

In its issue of August 11, 1934, the

Living Church, an organ of the

Protestant Episcopal Church, sounded

an alarm against the new law that is



20

to ba passed abolishing all private

education whatsoever in which any i?e-

iigious training is given. Other repr

resentative journals of religious

opinion according to Archbishop Gur-

ley, Baltimore, quoted by the Literary

Digest on March 2, 1935, which have

unanimously condemned the Mexican

situation as a major scandal in woj-lid

affairs are: “The Chirstian Century’',

“The Christian Science Monitor” “The

American Hebrew” as well as Baptist,

Presbyterian and Methodist publica-

tions.

Regarding the question of education

in Mexico there is a very enlightening

article on this subject in Volume 35,

Number 4, April 1935, St, Francis

Home Journal, by Hon, Dr. John Jos.
Correll. Among other things he says:

“At the very beginning of the

seventeenth century, Samuel Champ

lain, for whom Lake Champlain was

named, declared that he was suprised

beyond words at the beautiful build-

ings of a public character, official

residences, cathedrals, churches, hos

pitals and universities he saw in

Mexico.

Dr. Correll continues: “There were

schools for Indians, that is trade

schools and industrial schools that we

would call technical schools, of many

kinds. Every church, and even the

poorer mission stations, had a school

for Indians and besides* being taught

to read and write they were schooled

in the art of using their eyas and

hands. We have come to such schools
here in America only in very recent

times.



*‘Tke TJiliversity of Mfexicd was

iished in 1551. Thie Spanish ^r^own

was so much interested in this enter-

prise th*at is allowed from the rev-

enues of the Viceroy a sum of rnoney,

approximately two hundred thousand

dollars, for the salaries of the profes-

sors. It is sometimes said that eur

own bluestocking Harvard was. the

first school established in America.

The fact of the matter is Harvard

was not founded Until 1638. At this

time, it was little better than a high

school, and before the year 1700, had

scarcely one hundred students and did

not become a university until the

nineteenth century. The University

of Mexico became a full-fledged

university within twenty-five years

after its founding.

“In short, just lelghty-three years

before our proud and stately Harvard,

was founded, Mexico had a university

licensed to give baccalaureate degrees

by the Spanish government. Two hun-

dred years befone Harvard had a

school of Medicine, the University of

Mexico had its misdical college.

Eighty-six years before Hunter opened

the first school of disstection in Eng-

land, Mexico had initiated the study

pf surgery and dissection. Humboldt,

by no possible streteh of the imagina-

tion a friend of the Catholic church,

was not one whit stingy with his

praise of what he saw in Mexico when

he visited it in 1808 for he wrote:

“No city of the new continent, not

even excepting those o»f the United

States, can display such great

3Cieiitifio establishment^ as the oapi-



n
tal of MexiCa Does this look like?

the Catholic church was “for centur-

ies the greatest e'rieihy of popular

education?”

“One of the most interesting books*

on education in Mexico has been writ-

ten by Professor Bourne; 6t Yale'

University, under the title, ‘‘Spain in’

America” In this book, Dr. Bourne'

has this to say relative to the educa-

tional development of Mexico dtft*ing

the ^sixteenth century: “Not all tk^

instHutions of learning founded in^

Mexico in the sixteenth century can

be enumerated here, but it is not too

mbeh to say that in number, range of

studies and standard o»i attainments

by the faculties they surpassed any

th'ng exisiting in English-America

until the nineteenth century.” In ef-

fect Dr. Bourne tells us that educa

tion in Mexico was three hundred

years ahead of education in Ehglish

America.

“SOmie idea of the growth of educa-

tion and the throughness of the teach-

ings of the Franciscan monks may be
gathered from a letter of Geronim®

Lopez to the King of Spain in which

he bitterly complains that the clergy^

taught the Indians “all to faithfully^

and thoroughly even to the point of

making them excellent writers and

latinists.” This was in 1540.

The claim has frequently been made,

that the first book printed in Amer,

ca was the Massachusetts Bay Psalm

Book printed in Boston in 1638. Fully

a century earlier the La Escala

Spiritual (The Spiritual Ladder) was

printed in Mexico along with scores



2^

of otlier books before tbe end bf tbe

sixteenth century. In 1570 the first

medical book '‘Secretos de Cbi!hlrgia’’

(Secrets Of Surgery), printed ih the

New World appeared and by 1575

there were no less than 6 printing

presses running in Mexico. From this

wa must Conclude that the Mexican

Indian could read, else Why the plt'int-
ing presses?^’

the danieils incident

To the stupefaction of all Mexicans,

Mr. Daniels on July 26, 1'934, in the

course of a speech on education, said

this: “The spirit of the Mexico of

today was clearly and succinctly stat-

ed last week in Guadalajara by Gen-

eral Calles in as brief a sentence as

that employed by Jefferson decades

ago. General Calles, speaking for the

ear of all patriotic Mexicans, and

particularly those entrusted with

leadership, said: “We must enter in

to and take possession of the mind of

childhood, the mind of youth.’ To the

carrying out of that aim, which alone

can give Mexico the high place envi-

sioned by its statesmen, the Govern-

ment is making the rural school a so-

cial institution.”

»“Now of two things, one is true:

either Mr. Daniels knew what Calles

meant, or he did not. If he did know,

he was guilty of an unwarrantable

interference in Mexican politics, on

the side, too, of the anti-Christians.

If he did not know, then he should

not be in Mexico as our Ambassador.

“America” Vol. LI; No 21, Sept 1,
1934.



u
What Calles meant by his words he

made abundantly clfear, and it is in-

conceivable that Mr. Daniels did not

know what he meant. It was, and

was^ known to be, the opening gun

in a campaign to strike out of the

Constitution the last vestiges of ed-

ucational liberty, and to place all

education whatsoever in the hands

of the propagandists of his own rad-

ical revolutionary party. The doctrine

consecrated by our own tJ. S. Su-

preme Court in the Oregon decision

June 1, 1925, that the child belongs

to the home and the family he calls

a “selfish doctrine, because children

and youth belong to the community,

they belong to the collectivity, and it

is the Revolution that has the inescap-

ably duty to take possession of con-

sciences, to drive out prejudices, and

to form the new soul of the nation,

children and the young must belong

to the Revolution.” This is indeed

“the spirit o»f the Mexico of today,

which Mr. Daniels lauded, that is, the.

s^pirit of those who tyrannize and|

make no secret of tyrannizing ovei[.

the souls of the people and its young.

The plan to revise Article 3 of the,

Constitution so that education would

be completely under the control of the

ruling party, and exclude all possibility,

of any religious education, soon met

with opposition. In the University of

Mexico, which won its autonomy in

1933, after a series of violent re-

volts, the Mexican Federation of

Uniyersity Students adopted a resolu-

tion by a vote of 8 to 1, denouncing

the proposed changes, op the i^rouncj



25

that they would again destroy academ-

ic freedom, and would substitute

an obligatory doctrinaire Socialist

education for the secular education

now prevailing there. The resolution

protests against ‘'any attempt that

may be made to subject the institu-

tion and its members to rules of

thought and action not adopted freely

by the University itself/’ The pro

test was concurred in by the Rector

of the University himseM.

PERSECUTION DEFINED

Quoting from "America” Vol. LI No.

23, September 15, 1934^
—"What are

the people doing labout it? The people^

not the politicans. They are doing

what devout Christians have done

under similar conditions, in every

age of the world. They are defying

persecution, and prison, and banish

ment, and setting up secret altars

where they gather to make their

devotions. Sometimes, at untold hard-

ships, they make long pilgrimages to

places where they may worship opfen-

ly in the churches without fear. It

has been estimated that several

thousand of those dusty, foot-sore

pilgrims marched in the Corpus

Christi procession at El Paso, Texas.

"For the most part worshipers at

those hidden altars are unmolested,

but once in a while a Judas collects

his pay. The story is told of a young

man, a frequenter 0l the cock pit and

the gambling room, who having a
run of hard luck, cast about for some

money^ ^nd remembering the



26

fifteen pesos paid to any informer

who revealed the place of one of those

secret altars, he led the law enforce-

ment officers to the place and waited

outsidel He had to wait in order to

collect his money. When he saw his

mother slip out of the door into the

clutches of an armed soldier he

realized the enormity of what he haa

done, and went half mad with re-

morse. He fought with the soldiers

until they had to knock him sense-

less and take him to jail also
”

PRIESTS MUST MARRY

“In Yucatan a decree, not yet pro

mulgated, has provided that for the

entire State only three priests will be

allowed; further, that these three

must marry before they will be per-

mitted to exercise their office. Catho-

lics massed before govrnment head-

quarters on September 26 to protest

this decree ^and were shot at by police-

men in plain clothes, and many were

injured.’’ America, Vol. LI, No 26,
October 6, 1934.

CONFISCATION OP CHURCH
PROPERTY

“On September 10, 1934, the Sec-

retary of Hacienda reported to the

Federal Congress on “the nationaliza-

tion of the property of the clergy,”

giving the following figures: “238

preliminary investigations, 68 con-

signments to the Attorney General of

the Republic, l,ll02 judgment pro-

cedures, 58 occupations of rural and

urban properties “He also reported



- 27

that three churches ‘‘gave way to the

widening of streets, and six were

“disaffected to be used for Federal

public service.” At the same time

there were increasing evidences of

rifts within the Calles pariy, since the

President-elect General Cardenas, ap-

parently began to show himself too

independent of party dictation, under

the impression that he had been

chosen by the whole people and not

merely by his own dominant politico-

military organization.” America Vol.

LI, No. 26, October 6, 1934.

In the diocese of Guadalajara alone

twenty priests have laid down their

lives for their Faith. Many other

priests and Sisters have suffered im-

prisonment or death, or both, and the

world will probably never even hear

of their names. But others are taking

their places constantly, and the Catho-

lic Church has no intention aband-

oning its rights before God of carry-

ing religion to an oppressed people,

any more than in the past it did it in

Poland Or Ireland.” America Vol. LII,

No. 1, October 13, 1934.

SOCIALIST EDUCATION IN
MEXICO

“The proposed amendment to Article

3 of the Mexican Constitution was re-

ported to the Chamber of Deputies on

September 26. It stated that the

education in all its types and grades

belonged to the Federation, the State

and the Municipalities, and that it

“shaU exclude all religious education/’

Education “shall be scientific and

socialistic.” Members of Religious



28

Orders or any one “directly or in-

directly connected with the propaga-

tion of a religious creed shall not

intervene in any form in the education

here treated/^ The amendment, as

well a-> eliminating religious education

in public and private schools, also

would give the State arbitrary con-

trol over private institutions without

allowing the latter recourse to legal

action. (If this is not persecution what

is it?,) On October 4, three persons

were killed and eight wounded in

Puebla in a demonstration against the

closing of St. Teresa’s Catholic school.

The local government had decreed it

State property. “America” Vol. LII,

Nd. 2, October 20, 1934,

PERSECUTION CONTINUES

“It is not as if persecution in

Mexico had just broken out anew; it

has never ceased all these years. It is

merely that in recent months it has

put on greater intensity and ferocity,

as the Mexican people itself has be-

come aroused at ever_increasing exac-

tions and tyrannies, Riots, followed

by callous shooting by the police, have

occurred all over the country fanned

by student outbreaks over the deter-

mination to impose on all schools a

system of education which the Gov-

ernment itself calls “Socialistic.”

These student demonstrations have

no specifically Catholic character;

they are a normal and natural revolt

in favor of academic liberty. It was

into the midst of this delicate situa-

tion that the nice old man wbQ



29

repnasented us in Mexico put his

inept oar. The dominant military

party which has the country by the

throat proposed to amend Article 3 of

the Constitution by making Socialistic

Education by name compulsory in all

schools. This is the famous Article 3

which begins: “Education is freie,

“pero” (which means “however’’)

(These peros in the Constitution

have long been the joke of

the lawyer fraternity in MexicOi)

This particular pero, like the others,

of course, nuliified the right guaran-

teed by the first clause, but it was

proposed to go still further and put

Socialism into the Constitution as a

compulsory form of education.

An inconspicuous Associated Press

dispatch of October 10. 1934,

said: “Disregarding public opposition^

the Chamber of Deputies voted unani-

mously in favor of amending Article

3 of the Constitution so as to make

Socialistic education compulsory in

all schools except the universities.

The Senate is expected to act favor-

ably shortly on the proposal.”

This is the most deadly blow yet

aimed at religion in Mexico. The

physical property of the Church has

been wrenched from it, Often with

violence and bloodshed. Now the
souls of Mexicans will be possessed,

as Calles boasted and Daniels echoed.

Calles in his speech made it perfectly

clear that by Socialism he meant

atheism. He still possesses the army

and so he still can make the country

swallow his medicine. But it is in-



30

tolerable that he should have the

support of our own country.

“In spite of continued opposition by

the people, the Government expressed

its determination to institute socialis-

tic education in all secondary schools.

The bill for this was pas^sed by the

Chamber of Deputies and sent to the

Senate, where it was assured of ap

proval. More than 10,000 persons

paraded in Mexico City on October 12

in protest against the bill. Police

using teargas bombs attacked the

marchers, and more than 100 were

injured.

Because of the many protests

against Ambassador Daniels’ speech

endorsing the Mexican plan of

education, Acting Secretary of State

Phillips on October 17 telephoned him

for a statement. Mr. Daniels said he

had no idea his remarks could be

interpreted as having any relation to

controversial Mexican matters.

—

“America” Vol. LII, No. 3, October

27, 1934.

This is a weak excuse for all the

unfavorable comment caused by Mr.

Daniels’ ill timed and ill informed

laudation of Calles’s educational

policies last July which led to a wide

spread demand for his recall as

Ambassador to Mexico.

Did this protest cause him to abate

his unfortunate attitude?

It did not, Mr. White’s smoke screen

to the contrary notwithstanding.

He first offered a lame excuse for

his action. Then he took Senator

Reynolds to make a laudatory speech

to the Deputies in the very midst of



31

their vote to call on the President to

expel all the Catholic Bishops. H»e

Calles and after his visit gave out a

statement acknowledging him as boss

of Mexico then told the official paper

he was glad to give this statement to

it, “because it knew so well how to

interpret the Revolution in Mexico/'

He then dined the Governor Of Puebla

on the very day that resolutions were

being passed exalting that worthy as

one who had most ruthlessly carried

out the Anti-religious program.

Is this folly or is it malice?

HOW THE BRITISH REGARD DAN-
IELS

From the London Tablet as quoted

in the Josephium Weekly Vol. XXI,

No 9, March 2, 1935:

“On this point, our opinion is that

although tminod diplomats ought not

even once to offend against impart-

iality, we might overlook a single in-

discretion just as we allow a dog one
bite. But the Daniels intervention has

been continuous The sans...Dieu Mexi-

can paper, El National, might fairly

be called a personal organ of Mr.

Daniels, in which he encourages anti-

Catholic decrees and activities. When
the Chamber of Deputies approved

the action of the Governor of Puebla

in closing all the churches in that

State, Mr Daniels immediately and
ostentatiously invited the Governor to

luncheon. This old ambassador has

also fawned upon Sr Garrido Canabal,

the Red-Shirt Minister whose men

shot down the Government’s critics.

An American, now in London, to whom



32

we have posed a question based on

these facts, lamely replied that

Washington recalled Mr. Daniels just

now, it would look like a surrender to

the Catholics. We retorted that, in the
eyes of good men, it would look still

more like an assertion of necessary

discipline, and a repudiation of anti-

Catholic activities with which the

United States ought to have no

sympathy at all.”

From an “A B C of Mexican

Politics” by P. S. M. Ridland, I quote

the following:

“To the uninitiated observer the

political organization of Mexico

shows a solid democratic facade

which, in the orderly arrangement of

the divers architectural elements,

closely resembles that df the United

States of America. Mexico is of course

a Federal Republic, and the Presi-

dent, his Cabinet, the Senate, the

House of Representatives, the Su

preme Court, the Stata Governors

and Legislatures are all there. The

proportions are smaller, but in other

respects the frontages are so much

alike that whole parts might be inter-

changed without affecting the struc-

tures.

“The successive revolutionary ad

ministrations which have governed, or

misgoverned, Mexico since 1917 pAru

to the Constitution promulgated in

the course of that year as their legal

fountainhead. In other words, the

Constitution of 1917 is, at the present

moment, the fons et origo df author-

ity in Mexico which professes to be

a democratic country. Yet there is lan



33

extremely curious thing about the

Mexican Constitution. It is the wort

of a single party, the Revolutionary

party. The revolutionaries had pre

viously conquered the land by force

of arms and Senor Carranza, who was

at that time head of the Revolutionary

party, solemnly decreed (Sept-ember

14, 1916) that all its opponents should

be rigorously excluded from the Con-

stituent Congress which was to frame

the Constitution. This was duly car-

ried into execution, so that all the

non-revolutionary elements simply had

no say in the matter. Yet the Con-

stitution purports to be a truly demo-

cratic document,

“As I have already pointed out

the Mexican Congress is divided, like

the American, into two houses, the

Senado and the Camara de los

Diputadoes, and the members are

elected in similar fashion, nominally.

Now, in accordance with Article 60 Of

the Constitution it is they who decide

about new elections and the validity

of the claims of their would be suc-

cessors: moreover the same article

lays down that this decision must be

considered final. Of course it would

all be quite acceptable if, in each

particular case^ the members limited

themselves to elucidating the number

of votes securd by rival candidates at

the polling booths, and then admitted

the man who had secured the high
est number,

“But they do not. Votes in fact, are

now about the last thing a Mexican

needs if he wishes to be elected to

Congress. It has been an accepted



34

principle in Mexican politics that, in

every single case, the so called

criterio politico should be applied to

the claims of candidates. The criterio

politico is a very mockery of the

basic principle underlaying any demo-

cratic regime since it simply means

that, regardless of the number of

votes secured, the candidate whose

political views prove most acceptable

to the party in power be immediately

admitted, even if his rival really

proved successful at the election.

“Let us take a concrete example.

At the present moment it has to be

entirely hypothetical, as for many a

long year the non-revolutionary op

position has more wisely abstain'ed

from taking part in such farcial pro

ceedings. Two candidates, A and B,
stand for a given constituency. The

constituency is almost entirely CJatho-

lic. A is also a Catholic: He secunes
20,000 votes. B is a revolutionary and

only secures 2,000. The case comes

up for revision before the Camara

which, by applying the criterio

politico invalidates under any pre-

text, the 20,000 votes cast for a
declares B “legally’’ elected. B takes

his seat and will, needless to say,

vote in favor of all the anti-Catholic

bills together with the rest of th*3

members, many of whom have been
previously “elected’ in precis’ely the

same fashion.

“One would think that the above

ought to be more than sufficient to

satiate the revolutionary appetite for

unlimited power. But it is not. Al-

though the revolutionaries have held



35

undisputed sway over Mexico

since 1914 there have been serious

rifts and divisions among them at dif-

ferent times. Unanimity, as regards

the non-revolutionary opposition, had

already been obtained by processes

like that already described. But not

many yeiars ago the Obregon-Calles

clique decided that it was .necessary

to secure uniformity as well. Hence

the Partido Nacional Revolucionario,

the National Revolutionary party

which at present, under what one

might call the ‘^super-presidency” of

Senor Calles (the president of the

party is nominally a somewhat obscure

politician by the name of Ramos)

controls Congress and, in consequence,

controls the whole nation.

“This control is so thorough that at

the time of this writing every single

Senator, every single diputado (with

one solitary exception) every single

State-Governor belongs to the P. N. R
as it is generally called. Its leader

j

discuss all bills at headquarters and

then send them down perfunctorily to

the Senate and the Camara for “legal”

sanction : a minor matter, as the

Senate and the Camara are little

better than branch offices of the all-

powerful P N. R.

“The P. N. R. derives additional,

strength from the financial support

given it, whether they will it or not,

by all Government employes, regard-

less of category Every person enter-

ing the service of the Administration,

is ipso facto enrolled as a member
the P. N. R. and he must surrender

to it one day’s pay if the month has



86

thirty-one days. The fee is deducted

from his pay ciieck by the Treasury

Department without even consulting

him; and the Treasury Department

hands the mone^ys to the proper of-

ficer of the P. N. R. where it is ap-

plied to purposes specified by the

leaders of the party who do not even

go to the trouble of consulting the

other members about it This means

millions a yerar spent in propaganda.

“These are the broad principles

upon which the Mexican “democra<jy’

rests at the present moment. Wheh

well-meaning journalists admonish us

to be very careful about not wound-

ing the sensibiRty of the Mexican

people they must in fairness tell us

precisely whom they meian by “the

people.'’ If they rejfer to the R- N. R.

and consider it the people, I do not

think one Mexican in ten thousand

would agree with the definition.

“Any inquiry into the Mexican

situation would be incomplete if it

does not take into account everything

that has been outlined above and

fails to go very carefully into the

question of whether, in upholding

Senor Dalles and his P. N R. (which,
whatever international theorists may

say, is the practical outcome of re-

cognition of the present Mexican

Government), Americans are not prov-

ing false to th*e principles which lie at

the base o<l their own Constitution.”

Under the caption “Mexico Outlaws

Religion,” Robert H. Murray writing in

the magazine “Today” Vol. 3, No. 25,

A.pril 13, 1985, says:



37

‘‘Catholics say that
^

their church,

their religion, and their coreligionists

in Mexico are being persecuted. The

Mexican government insists with

vehemence that they are not. I say

they are. I say this as a Protestauc.

although admitting my hesitation to

set myself up as an authority on

Mexican affairs. I have speht twenty-

five years there. If I could stnetch

out that period to half a century,

possibly I might aspire to a title as

an authority on what is going on

there, speaking or writing, as assured-

ly as th-el starry^-teyed folk who ride

into Mexico on a fifteen-day excursion

ticket and emerge as exj^erts and

expounders, ready to write books

and give lectures and interviews,

“I know that ruthless religious

persecutio\is are in full swing. So

do the Catholics. So do Plutarco

Calles and his surrogates the big,

middle and little jacks in office of his

factional Revolutionary government

who are running things below the Rio

Grande as they please and telling th^

world including the bewildened and

distraught officials in our own De-

partment of State, whem to go if
they don’t like it.

The unbiased observer can-

not believe that religion in geneml
•and the Catholic church in particular

must be rigidly restricted or wholly

destroyed in Mexico to enable th-ei

Mexican people to be “rescued” by
the self-proclaimed Revolutionary

“redeemers of the liberties and ^"igbt^

Qt the people/'



38

The Revolutionary Constitution of

1917, Art. 24, provides:

*‘Every man is fre^e to profess the

religion of his choirce and to practice

the rituals, devotions or acts of the

respective) creed in the churches or

in his hom^^ providing they do not

constitute a crime or an offense

punishable! by law.”

“But is every man in Mexico free

to worship according to the dictates

of his own conscience “in thie chuixh

or in his home”? He is not. Every of-

ficial and violent means is being

e?,xerted by the government to prevent

or discourage him from doing it. The

manner in which this article of the

Constitution is being applied by Dal-

les and his agents mahes it complete-

ly meaningless, the deadest Of all the

scores of dead letters that embellish

the statue books of Mexico,

“Although the current persecution

campaign is primarily direloted against

the Catholic Church it is in opposi^

tion to all churches, all creeds^ all

religion. The Catholics say that it

is simply the product of anti-religious

hatred on the part of those in power.

Some of the nomCatholic observers

assume that the persecution is the

r«asult of avarice on the part of of-

'licials who 'find it profitable.”

I submit Mr, Murray’s findings as

fair and unbiased and certainly more

authoritative than if they came from

a writer with little or no actual ^ex-

perience in Mexico, or one with

either p»ersonal or political inteuests

at stake.



39

THE TEXT OP THE BORAH

RESOLUTION, JANUARY 31, 1935

Whereas serious anti-religious

outbreaks have occured in Mexico

under the regime of the National

R’evolutionary party, and

Whereas the persecutions of Christ-

ians of all faiths now being practiced

in Mexico have around indignation

and protest throughout the civilized

world, and.

Whereas American citizens of th’e

Christian faiths have been outraged

and railed, their homes invaded,

their civil rights abridged, and their

lives placed in jeopardy; and

Whereas the vindictive anti-religious

policy of the present Mexican govern-

ment has arbitrarily and unwarrant-

ably restricted the number of min-

isters, priests and rabbis permitted to

officiate in some States within the

bounda»ries of Mexico and has ia other

States entirely forbidden and pro-

hibited the ordinary spiritual admin-

istration of clergymen of all creeds

thus resulting in the complete denial

of the rights of the people to practice

the religion of their own choosing;
and

Whereas it has been the national

policy of the government and the

dominant Revolutionary party of

Mexico to discourage religious pro-

fession and obliterate religious wor-

ship; and

Whereas the present Mexican

Government prohibits the tim’e-

honored practice of private religious

instruction and education of chUdren



40

and compels parents as an only al-

ternative to i,gnoranc« to leduottto

theit children in schools teaching

hostility to orthodox religion; and

Whei’eas such anti-'religious activity

in Mexico is contrary to the tradition

off freedom of conscieince and liberty

of religious worship which are the

cherished attributes of all civilized

g|Ov<]jmments
;
and

Whereas many distinguished head-

ers of the Protestant, Jewish and

Catholic faiths as well as outstand-

ing religious and interdenominational

organizations and societies have

emphatically denounced and register-

’ed protest against such policies cH

the present government of Mexico;

and

Whereas the government of Mexico

has even encouraged an economic

boycott against those sincerly profesi-

sing and practicing the Christian re-

ligion; and

Whereas Christians are expelled

from public office and driven from

professions
;
and,

Whereas Christiaa residents of

Mexico who complain of such in-
tolerance are flagrantly mistreated

and abused; now therefore, be it

RESOLVED that the Senate of the
United State in Congress assembled

deems it fitting and proper to protest

the anti religious campaign and

practices of the pres»ent rulers ol

Mexico; and that it views with the

gravest concern such ruthless persecu-

tion of helpless men and women
who have becom^e the innocent



41

victims of anti-religious persecution r

be it further

Resolved, that it strongly con-

demns the cruelties and brutalities

that have accompanied the campaign'

of the present Mexican Government

against the profession and practice of

religious beliefs by our nationals of

ait religious faiths now domiciled in

Mexico; and be it further

Resolved that it calls upon the

government of Mexico in the name of

humanity to cease denying funda-

mental and inalienable rights to

those of our nationals who may be

lesldent in Mexico, regardless of

religious convictions; be it further

Resolved that the Committee on

Foreign Relations of the United

States Senate or a subcommittee

thereof be authorizfed to conduct

hearings and receive such evid’ence as

may be presented relating to religious

persecution and anti...religious compul-

sion and agitation in M’exico for the

purpose of determining the policy of

the United States in reference to this

vital problem and in that way we may

best serve the cause of tolerance

and religious freedom.

For the purpose of tnis resolution

the committee or any duly authoriz-

ed subcommittee thereof is author-

ized to hold such hearings^ to sit

and act at such times and places

during the sessions and recesses

of the Senate in the Seventy-

fourth Congress, to employ sy,cb

clerical and other assistants to

jequipe §ubpoepa gv gtb'^rwise



42

the attendance of such witnesses and

the production of such books
^

papers

and docum’ents, to administer such

oaths, to take such testimony, and

to make such expenditures, as it

deems advisabte.

The cost of stenographic service

to report such hearings shall not be

in excess of 25 cents pe^r 100 words

The expenses of the committee, which

shall not exceed $10,000, shall be

paid from the conting’ent fund of the

Senate upon vouchers approved by

the chairman.

The Mexican Embassy in a state-

ment of January 31st, 1935, said:

'‘There is no religious persecution

in Mexico. The resolution in regard to

this matter which was presented at

the senate today is probably due

either to partial or incomplete in-

formation.

“Catholic clergymen, as well as

those belonging to other faiths who

have complmd with the laWiS are

exercising their ministry in Mexico

City and throughout the republic

without being molested in the least.’

Please note the phrase “who have

complied with the laws,’ the trick

loophole used by Calles and his

tribe when cornered by facts which

they cannot deny.

Representative William P. Con-

nery, Jr., of Massachusetts, in a

speech on the floor of the House of

Representatives on February 8^, 1935

said

:

“I believe that the Honorable

Joseph Daniels and other represents-



43

tives of the American Goremment

in Mexico who for som^e unknown

reason are cooperating With the

tyrants of Mexico to enslav^e the

Mexican people, should be summon-

ed back to the Unitad States and forc-

ed to tell the truth of the conditions

which exist in that country <at this

time.”

Representative Connery, continued:

“The question may be pertinently ask

ed, What right have we the people of

the United States, or the Government

of the United States, to interfere

with what might seem to be en-

tirely a Mexican domestic problem?^

“In the first place,’ be said “if we

wish to be consistent, we have only

to look back to the time of the Mexi-

can revolution, to the agreement en-

tered into by Mr. Lansing, the Secre-

tary of State under President Wilson

and the defacto Mexican Govern-

ment, which was asking at that time

recognition of the United States. The

United States demanded as a con-

dition precedent to recognition by this

country that the Mexican Govern-

ment should grant absolute freedom

of worship to all of the Mexican peo-

ple. To this the Mexican Govern-

ment agreed without any reservation;

it was not a question of interfering in

the domestic affairs of Mexico; it

was a question as to what liberty they

should grant the Mexican people if

they desired such recognition Mr.

Speaker, that agreement has been

violated. In honor of ourselves, in

behalf of the guaranty of liberty of



44

conscieiice which the Mexican Qovern-

ment agreed their people would

always have if they s’ecur^d the

recognition of the American Govierix-

ment, it is th*e duty of Congiiess, the

duty of the State Department, to

notify the Mexican Geverament that

they, having violated the agreemient

thfey made with the Government of

the United States, we on our part, to

be consistent, are forced to withdraw

further recognition and to withdraw

from that country any representa-

tives We may have there.’"

In the New York World-Telegram,
February 20, 1935, Frederick Vincent

Williams said:

^‘They’Ve taken God out of the sky

down there, and you newspapers up

here haven’t heard about it.

He and Mrs Williams have return-

ed after investigating the surveil-

lance the ruling regime enforces.

“a surveillance that would make

your hair stand up if you knew about

it,” he explained^

“Here is how God stands in the

town of Chihuahua I was there, I

was at the opening of school heard

the children say, in salutation:

‘Teacher, there is no God
’

‘‘My child.’’ the teacher said, ‘‘there

never was any God.”

That sort of data the former West

Coast star reporter hobo short story

writer, has brought back, and this

w»eek he presented, at Washington,

information to Senator William E
Borah and other Senators supporting

tb§ re^oiutiopt for m investigation



45

of tlie M»exican situation to d'eter-

mine the propriety of severing dip-

lomatic relations,

“In th»e heart of Mexico City/’ he

said, “I saw one night 2,000 rebels

gathered in a patio around the body

of a comrade who had been killed

by The soldiers Agents for twenty-

five blocks around guarded them

against being found out. They had

to pay tribute in secret to the martyr,

and as his body lay on the catafalque,

they knelt and chanted:

“Viva Christo Rey” (Long live

Christ, the King )

It is the Third Internationale of

the Union of Soviet Socialist Re-

publics that has thus made a Mass a

secret rite, he said, and made school

children raise their hands in pagan

obedienoe

“Russia has spent $18,000,000 in

communist propaganda down there/^

be said,

“Ammunition for the populace op-

posing the government has be^n com-

ing in lov months. It still is coming.

There is going to be fighting that you

haven’t dreamed of

“In fourteen of the twenty-eight

states there are no priests allowed, or

rabbis or Protestant ministers. The

people will not stand it any longer

than they have to wait for enough

guns and bullets with which to "arm

and the order to go forward,'

Speaking at a mass meeting of pro-

test against the war upon religion

in Mtexico, Dr. Edward Lodge Cur-

ran of Brooklyn, New York, said:



46

'‘In the columns of the New York

Times and Herald Tribune on Satur-

day, January 26, 1935, appeared cer-

tain statements given by Lazaro

Cardenas, President of Mexico, dur-

ing an interview with foreign cor-

respondents in Mexico City,’ Dr:

Curran said: “Such statements, for

the most part, were an insult to the

intelligence of any informed cor-

respondent and a tissue of historical

and hysterical falsehoods.

“The President of Mexico was

wrong when he said that the aims of

the existing Constitution go no

further that those that most *of the

advanced countries of Europe and

America are seeking. If the Mexican

President intended to include our own

American Constitution in the cate-

gory of those with which he dared

compare the ty^rannicai and godless

Coustitution of Mexico, then he has

insulted the American Constitution^

the Americai Government and the

American people and our Federal

Administration should demand an

absolute and uncompromising apology,

“In the United States the Oon-

stitutioa is the safeguard of the

rights of humanity. The American

OonstitutioM includes freedom of

speech, fre’edom of the press^ free-

dom of assemblage and freedom of

religious worship. The Constitution of

1917, on the basis of which Mexico is

governed or rather misgoverned today

boldly and brazenly states that the

JMexican people are to possess only



47

those rights which the Co^nstitution

itself is pleased to grant them. In

other words the Mexican Constitution

is supposed to be superior to human-

ity and to God.

‘‘Thn President of Mexico was

wrong again when he stated that ‘It

is untrue that the Government, or

any institution oonn.ected with it^

persecutes citizens because they pro-

fess the Catholic or any other re-

ligion.’ A government that permits no

more than 50i0 priests to minister to

14^000,Oido Catholic Mexicans is a

persecuting .government. A govern-
ment whose brutal soldiery has slain

innocent people for harboring priests

or for permitting religious services

to take place in their homes^ is a per-

secuting government. A government
that refuses to allow the existence

of private schools wherein religion

may be taught is a persecuting gov-

ernment A government that has con-
fiscat'ed all property ever devoted to

religious purposes, whether owned by

religious organizations or by private

persons^ and without compensation is

a highway robber as well as a pei^

secutor. A government that claims
ownership of the consci'enee of child-

ren as well as of their teachers and

text books and school buildings is a

persecuting government.’ Our Sunday

Visitor February 10th, 1935.

Washington Fteb. 27^ 1935—(N. C.)

—Taking issue with statements at-
tributed to Francisco Castillo Najera

new ambassador of Mexico to the

United States to pness reports ofifa



48

Jfew days ago. RepresiBntativ’e John

P. Higgins of Massachusetts declared

that h#3 “as well as every other in-

formed Ame4ican^“ was surprised by

remarks which signalled the arrival

in Washington of th*3 new Mexican

ambassador, Representative Higgins

letter tells Senor Najora ki his state-

ment^ ‘the agitation is outside Mex-

ico not in Mexico is indeed startl-

ing to the American public which has

been reading for months in th»s press

reports from Mexico of the unspeak-

able religious p*3rsecution and the

numerous murders of religious teach-

#3rs and citizens of Mexico as well

as the confiscation of religious prop

erty of all Christian denominations

and the exiling of teachers of all

religions^/’

“Fairminded, unprejudiced witness-

ses who have heen in Mexico more

recently than you^ declare und»3r oath

that men wom*3n and children are be-

ing persecuted pittilessly for con-

science’^ sake, the letter continues

Many Mexicans entirely loyal to

their native land^ are willing and

anxious to testify to the murders^

confiscations’ and corruption that

have disgraced the regime of the mii-

lionare socialists who are exploiting

Mexico.

•‘If, as you Mr Ambassador claim

Mexico is quiet^ indifferent^ why is

the government press daily full of

vicious attacks and slanders on the

Christian clergy and laity? Why was
it necessary for the governmexit

to organize antkGod demonstrations



4r

Sind try to compel attendance of fed-

eral employes under penality of dis-

missal? Why^ within a few weeks

were numerous internes in many hos-

pitals in Mexico discharged for this

refusal and thus restrained from ooa-

tinuing the training required for

their profession? Why did nurses in
government owned hospitals suffer

the same fate? Is the ambassador

from Mexico unaware that all the

national press se,rvices in the United

States carried this news and that it

has never been officially denied?

'Incidentally, the new ambassador

might explain why the government

of France recently protested tlbe closi-

ing of schools in Mexico conducted

by French citizens. If you really

believed what you have said^ I chal-

lenge you to publish in the United

States the solemn atheistic delara-

tion which every teacher in Mexican

schools (public and private, including

American institutions) must take in

order to hold his or her job. If'you

fail or refuse to acquaint the public

with this <mth I will supply the

authentic text and again challenge

you to deny it.*'

The pledge required of every teach-

er in the State of Yucantan when be-

ing appointed to teach in an official

school referred to by Representative

Higgins is as follows:

I
^
before the board of

federal education solemnly declare

without reservation of any sort, the

program of the S'Ocialistic sic^ool

and to be ^ propagatpr a^nd defepdey



50

of it, I declare myself an atheist^

and irreconcilable enemy of the Ro-

man Apostolic Catholic religion and

that I shall strive vigorously to de-

stroy it ridding the conscience of all

religious beliefs and being ready

to fight against the clergy in the

field whenev#9i’ this may be neces-

sary. I declare myself to be ready to

take a principail part in the campaign

far the defanaticization and to at-

tack the Catholic Apostolic and Ro-

man religion wherever thefre is need

shown. I also declare that I will not

permit in my residence religious

practices of any sort, nor will I per-

mit the existence of images; nor wil5

I permit any member of my hamily
under my control to be present lat

any act of religious character.”

^ Mexico City Correspondent N, C.^

Feb. 28, 1935,—The theory advanced
by General Calles in his speech at

Guadalajara on July 19^ 1934, in

which, assailing the church he pro-

claimed we must now enter into and

take possession of the co^isciences

of the children^ of the consciences of

the young^ because they belong and

should belong to the Revolution.'' has

become more tangible with the recent

dissemination in Mexico City of a

circular urging children to despise

and hate their parents, and the

pledge required by teachers in the

offcial schools of Yucatan.

GHASTLY LENGTHS

Since the announcement by Presi-

dent Cardenas that all propaganda re-



SI

garding Socialistic education and oth-

er features is to be directed by the

executive of the six.year plan com-

mittee of the National Revolutionary

party, the Bloc of Revolutionary

Y'ouths has come into existence. Since

this circular has to do with Socialistic

education, and has not been repudiat-

ed by the National Revolutionary par-

ty, it is assumed that this party has

gone to ghastly lengths—that of ad-
vising children to despise and hate

their parents and to deprive them of

that most natural devotion, filial love.

In reproducing the circular in its is-

sue of February 14, Omega carried a

black-faced banner headline: “Fails to

Counsel ‘Kill Your Parents’ in Order

to Round Out the Liberator's Deca-

logue.’’

The handbill, addressed to “Child or

Youth,” says:

“If your tyrannical parents prevent

your attendance at the schools that

the Revolution has prepared for you,

despise them. Neither favor nor grrat-

itude is due them, for you were not

the fruit of suffering but of vile plea^

sure. They want to keep you always

in the fanatical and egotistic darkness

of their despotic care: they want you

to follow' like an abject slave their

stupid caprices as they did those of

their retrograde ancestors; hate them.

“Look over the scho»ols of your

town and you will find in them many

children or youths like yourself who

have obtained complete liberation from

those called parents. Take an example

from us who have succeeded in de-



52

stroying the brutal and inhuman yoke

of oul' exploiters, our progenitors, and

of those hypocrites, the pastors. Your

parents and your pastors have been

allied in oppressing and exploiting

you. Unite with the Revolutionary

teachers in our schools and they, with

their Socialistic orientation, will teach

you to be free. The schools are crowd-

ed with children and youth who hun-

ger and thirst for proletarian justice.

'‘Do not remain behind the times:

break the bestial yoke of your so-

called father or your sto-called mother

and hasten to join with your free com-

panions who, in the schools of the

revolution, are miaking common cause

with their protectors, the socialistic

teachers.”

FREEDOM OF PRESS

“The President of the republic has

promulgated a decree changing the

laws on the general means of com-

munication so that use of the mails

will be prohibited to correspondence

that involves the propagiation or dif-

fusion of any religious doctrine. Pres-

ident Cardenas has issued this decree

by virtue of “extraordinary faculties

granted the executive by congress by

decree of Dec. 29, 1933,” although the

presidential decree is in violation i^f

article 25 of the constitution of 1917,

which savs: “Gorresnondence which

under cover, circulate throuerh the

mails shall be free from search, and

Its vioiatioa shall be punishable hy



53

law.^*—The Denver Register, Marsh 3,

1935.

The new decree has been issued be-

cause “one of the “ideological tenden-

cies of the present government is to

combat fanaticism and religious pre-

judices by all legitimate means, with

the firm purpose of carrying out the

spiritual liberation of the people,” av>d

“to accomplish this object it is proper

to dictate all those methods of a le-

gal character which tend to facilitate

free governmental action.”

“For these reasons,” the decree

says, “it is ^requisite to amend the dis-

positions relative to the law on gen-

eral modes of communication so as to

prevent the acceptance or circulation

in the mail of publications, printed

matter, a*nd correspondence in gen*

e*ral which involves the propagation

or diffusion of any religious creed.

Since the mail is one of the most pow-

erful auxiliaries in the work of spread

ing culture, it would be unsatisfactory

to allow the use of this public serv-

ice for the traffic of ideas contrary to

the desired cultural development.’^

El Universal, a Mexican newspaper,

in its issue of Feb. 16, 1935, attacked

the constitutionality of the decree

which requi*res an “irregular explana-

tion whether it is considered from the

legal viewpoint, or from the social or

purely administrative.”

The journal cites article 6 of the

constitution, which provides:

“The expression of ideas shall not

be the subject of any judicial or ex-

ecutive investigation, unless it offend



54

good morals; impair the rights of the

third parties, incite to crime, cyt cause

a breach of peace.” This wording is

retained from the constitution of 1857

in that of 1917.

Article 7, El Universal points out,

provides that “freedom of writing and

publishing writings on any subject is

inviolable. No law or authority shall

have the right to establish censor-

ship, require bond from authors or

printers, nor restrict the liberty of

the press, which shall be limited only

by the respect due to private life,

morals, and public peace.” To say

what publications shall or shall not

be circulated by mail, El Universal

remarks, is equvalent to censorship

and violates the freedom of writing

and publishing writings.*’ But, what is

a constitution between friends?

PRIESTS HUNTED, JAILED IN

MEXICO

El Paso.—Specific instances of the
persecution of religion in Mexico are

furnished in affidavits of three priests

now resident here and the contents

of a letter sent to a Mexican layman

by a municipal president in the state

of Chihuahua forbidding religious

teaching “either in the temple or in

private homes.”

The letter, signed by Alfredo Elias,

mmiicipal president of Rosales, Chi-

huahua, was sent to a citizen of Ro-

sales whose son is an official of a

Catholic organization. It said:

“I take the liberty to advise you

that superior authorities have com-



55

municiated to this presidency that it is

prohibited to give religious or doc

trinal teaching in view of the fact

that it constitutes a violation of arti-

cle 3 of the general constitution ot

the republic. Religious doctrine can-

not be taught either: in the temple or

in private homes.

“As you probably have some per-

son in your family who is participat-

ing in such acts, I would appreciate

that you take the necessary steps to

refrain from doing so in order that I

may not be forced to punish the in-

fraction and assess the corresponding

punishment.”—The Denver Register,
March 3, 1935.

One of the priests, the Rev. Arturo

Balderrarpa, has made affidavit to the

persecution to which he was subject-

ed. As pastor of the Church of the

Sacred Heart at Madeia, Chihuahua,

he was informed by the landlord of the

house in which he was residing that

the latter had been directed to “tell

Father Balderrama to leave this town,

as I understand there is an official

committee from the centl:*al govern-

ment of Chihuahuia coming here to

investigate and see if a Catholic priest

is practicing his ministry.” The mes-
sage, Father Balderrama’s affidavit

says, came from the municipal presi-
dent. This was about June 4, 1934.

The priest then went to Matachic,
a mission of Madera, where, he .says,
he ceased practicing his ministry, as
it was forbidden there by law. “I had
been in Matachic three cwr four days,”

he continues^ “when I received a let-



56

ter from the presidente municipal,

asking me to come to his office. 1

answered his call immediately, and he

personally told me: ‘I have been ad-

vised that you have been administer-

ing here and you have therefore vio-

lated the law, and I want you to leave

this jurisdiction immediately.’ Hc add-

ed: ‘I have strict orders from the

central government in Chihuahua that

we be on the watch for priests and

not to allow priests here.’ I the* re-

turned to Madera.”

He then went to another mission,

where he received information that

Jose Blanco, municipal president of

La Junta, had gone to Guerrero Cit/

to place a complaint against him,

charging that Father Balderrama had

been administering in the mission of

Basuchil. The priest then fled to Chi-

huahua City.

“From about the middle of Septem-

ber, 19'32, to Nov. 19, 1934, when I

crossed to the United States,” Father

Balderrama said, “life was unbearable

and miserable. I was always hounded

and watched, so I decided to come to

the United States us a refugee.”

—

Denver Register, March 3rd, 1935.

And yet we are told there is no

persecution of religion in Mexico

These few instances can be multiplied

by the hundreds and thousands, even

from the meager information which

trickles past the censors out of Mex-

ico. But, if the whole truth could be

learned concerning the inhuman but-

chery going on at our very door, it

would make our government withdraw



57

its recognition or insist upon the ori-
ginal conditions of recognition beivig
observed.

From the Houston Chronicle we
quote an interview by M. E. Walter
with Fortes Gil, until recently, Attor-
ney General of Mexico) wbo told bim
a man could wear a Roman Collar in
Mexico and that the Catholic Churcn
could conduct seminaHes there to
train future priests. Walter continues;

“That evenmg I had dinner with a
group of foreign correspondents and,
of course, described the talk I "had
had with Mr. Gil.

“They laughed raucously.
“
‘He said any priest could walk *on

the streets wearing a clerical collar?’
they asked.

“
‘Yes,’ I answered.

Well here is 100 pesos that you
can’t turn your collar around aiid go
two blocks without landing in the
jug.’

How about the seminaries?’ I
asked.

There are none,’ they all answer-
ed. ‘They may not be specifically for-
bidden but they would come under
the heading of a private school aMd
you can’t operate a private school
without a government permit. Just try
and get a permit for a seminary. Fur-
thermore, if you operated one with-
out a permit the property would be
subject to confiscation by the govern-
ment since it would be used for re-
ligious purposes. You can be sure of
one thing. There isn’t a seminary ru^n-
ning in the country’.’’



58

A PROMINENT BUSINESS MAN’S

VIEW

The next man I talked with was a

prominent business man and inciden-

tally a Mason.

“Go^iditions in Mexico today are a

crying shame,” he declared. “The gov-

ernment does not have even 10 per

cent of the people behind it. But what

can the masses do. Thy are unarmed

and a thousand men can do little be-

fore a couple of well armed soldiers.

If one military leader ever threw his

weight to the other side the whole

government in Mexico City would flee

before the revolters got within 100

miles of the place.

“FORCE OP ARMS”

“I am not a Catholic, but I think it
is a disgrace the way a small mhior-

ity has been able to oppress them.”

“How is such a small minority able

to hold control?” I asked.

“By force of arms. They have a

garrison in every city. Any revolt that

might start would be nipped in the

bud. And the United States is behind

the government.

“So long as it refuses to allow any-

one except the government to buy

arms and ammuriition it is actually

supporting the government and should

feel responsible for its acts.”

“How about elections Can’t the op-

position party do something in them?”

“The elections are conducted by the

revolutionary party. They count the



59

,

votes. That ought to answer your

' Question,” he replied.

“The American ambassador here is

,

V 4 nice kind old man, but be doesn’t

know what it’s all about. He likes to

|nake everyone happy so he pats ev-

eryone on the back that comes to see

him and agrees with anything he

says.”

NINETY PER CENT CATHOLIC

“But is it true that 90 per cent of

the population is Catholic? Are they

^
actually Catholics or only Catholics in

name?

i “They are Catholics. After the con-

quest many Indians were taken into

the Church that were not adequately

instructed. They were Christians in

name but pagans in reality. But the

missionaries finally got them instruc-

ted. This talk you hear back in the

States about the Indian being a pagan

in reality while professins: to be a

Christian is all bunk.’’

“What do you consider the biggest

mistakes the Church has made in the

last few years? Say in the last half a

^.century. Since the government is so

bitter against it there must be some

reason?”

The man thought for a moment with

a puzzled frown on his face.

“I can’t think of any,” he finally

said. “That is, I can’t think of a^iy_

thing that would be a mistake in a

free country. It’s true that when a

government official would stand up

and announce that he was an atheist



60

and that he did hot believe hi God

01* religion some pHes't or bishop

would condemn hirh. And when .some

other official would stand lip arid say

that a country can hot exist without

religion, that civili'z,at‘’on is impossible

without the restraints of religion,

some pishop or priest would prais:

him. That was probably a mistake

down here. But it would not be in th)

United States or any free country.”

CHURCH LEADERSHIP

‘•‘What about the leadership in the

Church?” I asked.

‘‘Most of the bishops have been ex-

iled or expelled from their dioceses.

•‘However, Archbishop Diaz has

been able to hold on and the fact that

he is still in Mexico shows he is a

politician of no small merit. Diaz is a

full blooded Indian, but he is a highly

educated, a cultured gentlemavi and a

Teal Mexican. He has done a great

deal to keep down revolt. He has ap

pealed to his followers to resort to le-

gal methods only and not allow the

country to go through the horrors of a

civil war.

The curse of Mexico is its passio i

for experimenting with goveToment.

Every president we have had sine ^

Porfirio Diaz has been a little mor

radical. Everyone has had to try out

something new.

“Maybe that is our hope. I can’t

imagine them stopping their experi-

menting and it seems that they have

gone about as far in radicalism as



«1

they can go. Maybe the next experi-

ments will be in conservatism.”

REAL “IRON MAN”

“Is Calles i*eally the iron man of

Mexico?”

“No question about it. The rest of

the party follows him like a bunch of

sheep. If he were to take a rosary in

his hand and start out tomorrow on

a pilgrimage to Guadalupe, before he

got there every member of the gov-

ernment would be following on his

heels trying to look sanctimonious.”’

“Why is he so bitter against re-

ligion?”

“I don’t know. Nobody knows. And

nobody knows what are his »real sen-

timents. Maybe all this anti-religion

campaign is just for political effect.,

Maybe it’s being done to hold his par»

ty together. So long as there is bitter

opposition, they have to ^tick togeth-

er. If that fear died down they would

begin trying to cut each other’s

throats.

“Calles was a Catholic, but he left

the Church to become a Mason, and
he is as poor a Mason as a Catholic.
Masons are required to believe in a

God. He professes atheism.
“When he went to the States, for his

operation (last fall) he went to a

Catholic hospital and insisted on hav-

ing the Sisters take care of him. -Yet

back here no hospital can be operated

by a religious d^romination and no

woman may become a nun.



62

GRANDCHILD CATHOLIC

“When his grandchild was baptized

a Catholic he was its godfather.

“Yet he is behind the educational

laws that require children to be given

atheistical training.’*

This sketch of conditions in Mexico

has been prepared in order to give

publicity to the little known facts

about that unfortunate country. The

secular press for the m'ost part has

been silent even in the face of most

horrifying conditions. By its silence,

it has lent comfort to the enemy,

which it, may some day regret. Sovie:

Russia is backhig the anti-religious

campaign in Mexico and has already

announced that the United States is

next in line after the complete over^

throw of religion in Mexico. She ha ;

long been active in our Colleges and

Universities and has made alarming

gains in producing a generation of

radical socialists among our inteller

tuals who will be the leaders ot to

mor^row and willing tools of Russia

when the eomnaand to revolt is given.

This is not a vague dream nor is it

the wild imagination of an alarmist,

but a simple warning based on in_

controvertable evidence of the activi-

ties of the most diabolical organiza-

tion, the “Third Internationale”, the

world has ever known.

The result of the recent Literary

Digest Poll, showing nearly 17% of

112,200 students of our Unive^rsities

and Colleges who answered the ques-

tionnaire, as stating that they would



63

not bear arms for their country even

if our borders were invaded, is evi-

dence to me that that 17% are already

Commu'iiists. Think it over.

H. J. THOLEN.
May 1st, 1935.