Frostburg mining journal. [volume] (Frostburg, Md.) 1871-1913, 1879-08-02

ded response to the letters OF the cler-
gy, but the ground taken with regard
to our criticism last week needs some
attention. We have had little time,
also, for study of the communications
and cannot therefore be thorough.
"a Minister, with remarkable tact,
seeks to turn against US our comment
cit seems to be good as far as it
goes" and adopts it as an endorse
ment of the clerical position, and then
reduces this endorsement to an alb
surdity. Through similar tactics our
entire line Of remark could have been
inverted to an inadequate occasion for
any reply at all.
Taking the lights before US at the
time of penning that curious endorse
ment as guides, we are forced to re-
affirm the only point SO skillfully
caught up and used against US. Our
information advised us to treat the
matter as at par with other sugges-
tons, indisputably secular, which en-
anate from the pulpit. Hence, dis
elimination against this led to the
charge of inconsistency.
But this entire difference may be
adjusted by simply ascertaining the
scope of the salesmen's request. On
this point understandings differ. The
ministers apprehended one thing; the
statesmen preferred another. If We
heard it Alright we are unassailable.
To return to the matter with which
we set out. Some emphasis is laid
upon the case of an impeounious
character in one OF the Savior's con-
gregations, who desired the latter to
use the force of His influence and
prestige to induce a fortunate brother
to divide with him the inheritance.
Our esteemed correspondents estab-
iish the Savior's declination so to act
upon the theory of unwillingness to
arbitrate secular disputes. Without
presumption, we rather infer that
weightier considerations prevailed, for
heemploysthe demand textually as an
admonition against cupidity and self
ishness. Moreover, the occasion was
used for the utterance of the memora-
BILE parable of the rich fool. As if He
had asked-Who made me an admin
istrator of this estate that I should
distribute an illegal portion to you ?
or why should l minister to your av-
arlce for lands, houses, money "Take
heed, and beware of covetousness y
Then follows the parable, possibly re-
1erring to the haste and persistence
which acquired the estate and the
wrong of leaving it to the scramblins
greed of rival legatees.
Clearly enough, the idea of "cove-
tousness" implies that the claimants
title was not good. CoulI he covet
that which belonged to him? The
wonderful penetration of the Master
detected something vicious in this
appeal. He disposed of it by remit
ting it to the crowd as an example of
an il!egitimate love Of gain.
1t was a secular matter diverted to
great moral importance-one in
which the question of Jurisdiction was
turned to some account anyhow. He
could afford to use it with pungency
and force why not His ambassadors
deliver q mere suggestion?
DR.. Clarke says, very significantly:
Better to leave all these things to the
civil magistrate, unless where lawsuit may
be prevented, etc.
But if the lawsuit cannot he pre-
vented except by little pulpit talk,
what then?
Comparisons are odious," particu-
larly if incomplete. Where is the
parallel between the hungry brother
and the salesman? The former most
likely asked for what was not legally
his own; the latter for time-his by
birthright and divine charter, but
wrested from him by pernicious, need
less custom. There is no similarity
here of condition, desire, motive or
object.
Yet this anomaly is cited as man
datory prohibition of jurisdiction over
secular affairs by ecclesiastical bodies.
If this be the correct view, then the
gospel imposes restrictions upon its
adherents which must in many embar-
RAISING cases be evaded. Let our con-
fssasdly able and logical correspond
ent clear this up in business style;
Il IL L