1. Parochial schools have been founded by the Catholic Church with its funds.

The funds were not intended just for some bishops, some priests or some lay faithfuls to take their posts with the school organizations.
Accrued money from offertories, obligations, and widows’ mites was not intended just for such posts.
The funds were intended really for teaching students who or whose parents want to receive the Catholic education.
The right to nominate and dismiss the directors of the parochial school corporation by the authority of the Catholic Church is a prerequisite for the intended education.

The voting right to nominate and dismiss is a property right.
Property is 'that which is peculiar or proper to any person ; and that which belongs exclusively to one.’ The term extends to 'every species of valuable right and interest'. Property right is the right to dispose of a thing of value, to possess it, to use it, and to exclude every one else from interfering with it.
The property right is not limited to one’s ownership of his/her house or land: In other words, it goes beyond rights to corporeal things that are standardized in the civil law such as easements, superficies, collateral securities and the rights of pledge: It includes various rights to intangibles in credit relations or other relations such as claims, obligations, debentures, partnership rights, shares, convertible bonds, voting rights.

Property rights are not restricted to tangible corporeal things.
Supporters of the Amendment of Private School Act dated Dec 9, 2005 insist that the Catholic Church has no property right with regard to the incorporated school, as the money, the bonds, the land or the shares cease to belong to the Church and begin to belong to the school because the Church has contributed them and nominated board members and manages it in accordance with the articles of incorporation, which are the charter of that foundation.
According to their arguments, the Republic of Korea may take properties away from its citizens by way of legislation after they have invested their properties in the incorporation of legal person.

But you could say that money, bonds, land or shares have left the Church and gone to the school corporation, but you should admit that the property right, that is, the voting right has come to the Church and now belongs to the Church.
The Amendment stipulates that more than one fourth of directors and one auditor shall be nominated by an association formed by Teachers Union Members or teachers and some parents.
It is that a part of voting rights of the Church authority shall be confiscated without compensation and thereupon its ideals will be checked and sometimes denied.
How could you interpret these stipulations otherwise?
Although leaders of the party in power explain that they have no check and denial against the Church in mind, the amended Private School Act is, of course, being applied to every private school corporation including every parochial school.
There is no reasonable excuse only for the voting rights of the Church school not to be impaired, while those of private schools incorporated by
the other people with good intention are all impaired.


2. Supporters of the Amendment insist on as follows;

The deprivation of a part of voting right of the private schools to be handed over on behalf of some Teachers Union Members or some teachers and some parents, is being endorsed by state (the party in power, in exact) and
is reasonable, because the private schools are receiving subsidies from state for the payment of teachers and members of staff.
Private schools of our country are being given administrative orders not to receive more than meager fraction of tuition fees or not to receive some tuitions and are being forced instead to receive subsidies from education tax paid by citizens for the payment of the employees.
According to their arguments, such a situation justifies confiscating a part of voting right of private school.


3.Some people among the supporters of the Amendment are supposed to think inwardly that it is fair for the Catholic Church to yield properties to public interests, for it has also been one of the establishments with wealth of properties.

Long history of the Church has the experiences receiving property from powers or being deprived of property by powers.
The land of Lateran and Basilica of St Peter’s was bestowed on Pope by Emperor Constantinus on Pope, about AD 313.
On 1648 after 30 Years’ War, Kings or Princes who were not on the Roman Catholic Church side robbed it of estates and cathedrals to hand them over to the churchs of other creed.

But all properties of Korean Catholic Church were from the faithfuls.
Myungdong Cathedral was built with money given by many of frugal French faithfuls on the house site of a martyred Korean and the adjacent land purchased by French missionary.
The private schools being run by Korean Catholic Church have been set up with faithfuls’ offertories of a pitiful penny or two and donations with intention right in accord with God by people in good faith.
『every man has by nature the right to possess property as his own.
(Rerum Novaurm 6)』

『 If the citizens, if the families on entering into association and fellowship, were to experience hindrance in a commonwealth instead of help, and were to find their rights attacked instead of being upheld, society would rightly be an object of detestation rather than of desire.?(Rerum Novaurm 13)』

『Hence, it is clear that the main tenet of socialism, community of goods, must be utterly rejected, since it only injures those whom it would seem meant to benefit, is directly contrary to the natural rights of mankind, and would introduce confusion and disorder into the commonweal. (Rerum Novaum 16)』

『the State must not absorb the individual or the family; both should be allowed free and untrammelled action so far as is consistent with the common good and the interest of others. (Rerum Novarum 35)』

Do you know any occasion, when the Church did incorporate a private school and harm to other citizens?
Or do you know any occasion, when other private schools did harm to other citizens?
Supporters of the Amendment say they are worried about those certain ill-natured directors deciding illegal personnel managements.
But the Labor Commission of State is there to provide remedy for it.
They say they distrust those certain crook directors who embezzle school money.
But there are policemen, prosecutors and judges, to investigate and convict such criminals.
(My column next will be 『School is no Rationing Place of Education』, another will be 『The Aim of Power to interfere with Schools』)