Richmond dispatch. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1884-1903, 1889-01-06
Dr. mcOonald SO bishop Kahn.

To the Editor OF the Dispateh:
We might complain somewhat of the scant
courtesy OF Bishop Kahn. HIS constant accu-
sation Of the ignorance OF his opponents
does not prove the superiority OF his own wis
dom. Thoughtful people will relegale such
railing words 10 the arena OF childish con-
flictS | have no desire to proiract tins
controversy Thanking you for the past
favors viii not abuse your generosity, but
make my reply rs brief - can. May state
the facts which led 10 this correspondence !
I'm the paper which read felt justified in
making q rapid summary Of the evidence 10
the fact that the Roman Catholic Church
had again and again allied herself with civil
governments.
Bishop Kain admits in his article the fact
of such union. quoted from the syllabus
OF 1854, In which Plus TX. declares the
teaching Of the Church In regard TO the very
matter l was discussing. lie condemns
among many other errors OF like import me
following proposition: "rhe Church ought
10 be separated from the state and the
State from the Church" | showed that the
practice and policy Of the Church in form
ing such alliances Il sustained 10y the lntalll'
bic declaration OF the late Plus ~. sup
posed there could be no intelligent doubt As
to its meaning. The words are clear, posi-
tive, authoritative. They are uttered by an
iufilhble Pontif that the Church may be
"kept away by them from the poisonous
food OF errOrv (see dogmatic decree OF in
tallbility). Judge my surprise when read
the Bishops criticism that "ii had read
what pretended 20 quote" ] would not
have been guilty Of such misrepresenla'
ton.
lie accuses me OF "pretending" 10 quote.
The extract which l quoted from the syiia-
bus rs the pspsl condemnation OF the sepa'
ration of the Church and state, and IN as
clear language as could he used.
Bishop Kahn turns away from the main
point as 10 what the Pope really Taught aud
the use made OF It, and as an expert in the
gradatlon of offences according 20 the canon
law, saws that thls is not 4" hercsy," but ca
sin OF 4 very different kind, the sin OF dis
obedience aud disrespect TO lawfully consti-
tuted aathor ity." The difference IL prae-
tically tMeedle dee and tweede dun. The
common, popular use OF heresy as choice
In opposition TO constituted authority may
be very properly applied, especially choice
against the lafslhble utteranee OF the Pope.
But do not care straw how the offence Is
graded according 20 canon law. However
regarded, the Pope denOunces the separation
OF the Church bis Chureh-irom the State
aud the Bishop echoes bis masters condem-
nation and proBounces IL In the words
above ga sin OF disobedience aud dis
respect 10 lawfully constituted authority"
Bishop KAN earnestly denies that The offence
committed by those against whom the syila:
bus d directed Is hefesy," but only "sin
OF disobedlenee." But the Bishop else
where saws that In fact the condemned
proposition on the lips OF those haters OF the
Christian name MAS worse than the rdnsest
heFesy." Thus he e6eetusly disposes OF the
alleged impropriety OF using tbs term
"beresy" TO designate :he offence by de.
nouacing ii "a worse than the rankesi
heTesy. Yet the whole attempt of tue
Bishop Il to show that heresy ought NOT 70
be applied 10 the offence. thank thee Tor
that word, Bishop, "worse than the rsnkest
kerey." What showed was that the papll
teschlnE supported the papal practice by
quoting the exact words OF tue syllabus, the
very record Of the papal decision on this.
very subject. As TO the quantum OF gilt
and penalty or grade OF the offence rs taught
BY canen law, leave this 10 men whose iu-.