Sistema Regional de Información
en línea para Revistas Científicas de América Latina,
el Caribe, España y Portugal

Resistance and compliance cannot be considered as circumscribed and conflicting realities. Where does compliance finishes and resistance emerges? If among the members of the so‑called high clergy there seems to be a relative consensus on the model of action, regarding the more dependent clergy, the border zone between those who comply with the Republican rules and those who resist extends across a very diffuse area where we can find pensioners and non pensioners (one might even extend it to Republicans and Monarchists). Economic interests, solidarities and dependencies, more or less “vanguardism” of local authorities, unmet pressures, cross each other in a multitude of hues that is not legitimate to hide or simplify. On numerous occasions, the political divisions of the time of the Monarchy – in which, not rarely, the priest was a key part in the conflicts between electoral clientele – were refreshed in the new regime, because the new situation provided opportunities for vendetta, now that the otherwise influent priest, for reasons that are not restricted to the political field, was seen as a symbol of a rejected past.

The law of separation from 1905 clearly represents a rupture, by ending both the Concordat and the anti‑clerical control of the Church by the State. The entry of the law in December 1906, raised the fear for a serious political and religious crisis. In fact, the conciliation sought both by the clergy and local authorities allowed the parish life to continue without major changes from the previous period. The separation made two important and lasting ruptures on the French church, freedom and poverty. To build the material autonomy of their dioceses, the bishops were forced to rely on the laity, that after 1905 occupied a new place within the Church. But the freedom won by the bishops for the management of the clergy and the diocese had to face the resistance of the clergy and population, because of the Concordat.

The establishment of the Republic in Algarve reflects the aftermath of the fratricidal struggles of the 19th century between the supporters of the party of Dom Pedro and Dom Miguel. The religious and secular clergy took part in the partisan struggle and the Church in Algarve was totally disorganized. Evangelization was abandoned. When the Republic was established, a good number of those who claimed to be Christians were anticlerics. Bishop António Barbosa Leão did not ignore the critical politics of the prevalent situation and the dichotomy among those who claimed to be Christians.  In the presence of mutism and the shrug of many, he extolled all those who spontaneously, notwithstanding threats and oppressions, lived their faith.  He prevented the reoccurrence of the behaviours and attitudes of the 19th century. He did not allow the interference of the clergy in politics. In the face of lootings and assaults on the properties of the church and the ferocious persecution on the clergy, before multiples accusations and anticlerical speeches, the church in Algarve is going to respond with new evangelization, with social and cultural realizations, and put aside any discussion and unproductive idle talk and quarrelling. Bishop António Barbosa Leão wrote and defended the truth as if he was defending life. Irrespective of all disappointments and persecutions, he defended the persecuted clergies, condemned exaggerated laicism and ended up chanting victory for being liberated from regalism. The spokesman was the Diocesan Journal Bulletin of Algarve.

The decree 3.856 of the 22th February 1918 has been the main reference for discussions on the revision of the Separation of the Republic Law of the post Great War. The Act called Moura Pinto divides Catholics between those who think it should serve as a starting point for a revision of the Separation Law of 1911, and those who see it as just a variant of the Separation Law that must be rejected. This article covers the internal debate within the Catholic Church on the issue and the different positions of the Portuguese bishops. In the Republican field positions differ between those who want to improve the Moura Pinto Law in a more favorable direction to the Catholic Church and those who fight for the restoration of the “intangible” Separation Law from April 20th, 1911. As we will see, the informal understanding between the Portuguese State and the Catholic hierarchy in the Republic of the post Great War does not constitute a revision of the Separation Law to consolidate relations between the Catholic Church and the Republican State.