Fr. Noailles had spent several years in a lawyer’s office and he lived at a time when questions of Canon Law were closely linked to the social and religious life of the era. The precise question of the rights of religious was a burning issue. Fr. Noailles, therefore, could not just theorise about it, especially as his work took a very original form; in fact, he was extremely preoccupied about it. The documentation on this point is important and extends over a long period.1 But two factors have made the analysis rather difficult; on the one hand, the complexity of the law at that time and, on the other hand, the complexity of the Holy Family itself. We shall try, then, to clarify the situation and here we are, perhaps, approaching the most crucial and delicate point of our study. To grasp the situation thoroughly, we must refer constantly to the background described in the first chapter and be extremely attentive to the vocabulary. This is no longer the same as in the present time; the meaning of several words has changed. Fr. Noailles used a vocabulary of his own. The same word may be used by him in one sense but have a slightly different meaning in the society of his time and, eventually, over the years may have acquired a still different meaning. For the moment it is sufficient to be aware of this fact; things will become progressively clearer, we hope, with the reading of this chapter. In the course of our analysis, we shall once again let the founder of the Holy Family speak; he has fully explained his intention. But we must constantly endeavour to clarify his words. We risk serious misrepresentation if we look at them in the context of our own culture, when they must be read in the context of the founder’s culture.