The San Francisco call., 1896-03-04
a voice-Why, you.)

".
statement here, because he says that in case
the church and the government oppose each
other the church says, oh, the government
ought to win"
It is hardly necessary, Mr.. Editor, to com
ment on this extraordinary and ludicrous de-
scrlption ofmy denial. When deny the state
ment that 1t never SHOWS in California
no sensible person supposes that the present
abeTrations OF the weather-man are the normal
condition OF things IN our State.
CASES OF CONFLICT.
When we bear in mind that the '.ciyil DOW
ers" are civil governments or civil institutions
or persons invested with civil authority, and
that the "eccleslastical powers" are church
governments or church institutions or ecclesi-
astical persons, We can well I'M magIne that many
cases of conflict may occur. There might be
eonf1fct hefyeen the United States Govern
ment and the whole church, there might be
dispute between parish aad county, there
might be trouble between Bishop and
Mayor, there might be row between police
man and q sexton. According TO the proposi-
ton in all these cases, the United States Gov
ernment the county, the Mayor and the police
man should quietly and submisslvely step
aside and make room for the ecclesiastical
Even an a. P. A. can see the absurdity of
such a statement. Evidently d. Ross saw 1t
himself. Instead of trying to prove the sub
stance OF the proposition he neglected all
other ecclesiaStica and civil powers and con-
centrated his attention on the Legislative
faculty and triumphantly declared that he had
proved his point when he discovered quota
ton which said that in d conflict OF laws the
civil law should give way.
A SPECIMEN.
This Is his last ditch. He has given up the
claim that he took the propositions out of
Catholic publications. He has abandoned the
atternpt 10 prove the substance OF the state
ment. He hopes, however, that IL ne can snow
one case in which the ecclesiastical prevails
against the civil he has won his point
His first quotation and his first proof give
in his own words and wonderful words they are:
.rs- lylTg of q
and the Government: The state is only an ln-
ferior court, bound TO receive the law from the
supreme court (the chureh) and Is liable to
have its decisions reversed on appeal.
ssNhen there is g conflict between one power
which claims to be the supreme court and the
decision OF the superior court, the superior
court IS the one whose !uogmeht shaIl pe
laid aside and the inferior court has no power
over the superior court, but that the superior
court is the one whose judgments ana whose
decisions ought 70 carry weight ana the otner
ought to go down. Yet Bronson declares that
the church is the supreme court and the state
is the inferior court. Place them thus against
each other showing at once the supreme
court the church ought TO prevail, and has
the right OF altering the decisions OF the gov
ernment OF the state when those decisions
differ from the decisions OF the will OF the
supreme bedy-the church.
Let us see what Brownson Is talking ABOUT.
D. Ross swore before high heaven that he was
absolutely honest and that he strove in every
case to give the true spirit OF the writer. Let
the reader judge.
The extract is taken from long article treat
ing OF tae church and state, which may be
found il the tenth volume or brownson's S
works, page 129. BroWnson is speaking not OF
civil law or OF ecclesiastical law, but OF the
natural and moral law. Webster defines moral
law as 1.-The law OF duty, as regards what Is
right and wrong IN the sight OF God; specin-
ca1y, the ten commandments" HIS thesis Is
that this moral law is obligatory on en-
perors, kings, princes, commemorative, as
upon private individuals, upon politicians as
-z1a hu1fl In rhQr
words he is demonstrating that state has no
more right TO steal than an Individual, and
that politician is as much bound 10 be hon
est in politics as the merchant in business.
/ do not suppose that any one VIII seriously
dispute this proposition. Now he holds that
the church has the right 20 teach this moral
law, and consequently has the right to say
when il is broken. Every Sunday-School in the
country exercises this right ana every
preacher When DR.. Case gets into his pulpit
and declares that the Supervisors are violating
the moral law in allowing certain advertise
ments to offend oursense of deeency, ne Is only
doing what Browuson claims for the church.
Now comes the question Whose duty IS ii to
declare this law or where are We TO find the
moral law? Dr. Case would say in the Bible.
The Bible, therefore, is the supreme court Tor
the moral law He interprets the Bible 10
command such and such actions, and he claims
the right 10 judge, 10 warn, 10 rebuke when
he finds these actions neglected
If the Supervisors took II into their heads 10
declare that stealing was lawful Dr.. Case would
would reverse the declaration OF the super
visors and in his own words he would 'cTy
aloud and spare not.
Now. Mr. Editor. would any one think that,
If these things happened, DR.. Case was consti-
tuting himself Mayor or a supreme court
with civil authority over the Board OF Super
visors? Would any sensible man refer TO Dr..
Cases action as conclusive proof that the
Methodist church Is trying TO gobble up the
State?
Yet this is all Brownson claims for the
phUrgl |
that you may see that BroWnson'S teaching IS
good, sensible, American doctrine. The quo
tation, IL is true, Is somewhat long, but i am
not an adept in the art OF seizing two or three
words in an argument and presenting them as
the spirit of the author:
1.-The state holds under the law OF nature,
and has authority only within the limits of
that law. As long as 1t confines itself within
that law and faithfully executes its provisions
1t acts freely, without ecclesiastical restraint
or interference. But the church holds from
God under the supernatural or revealed law,
which includes, as integral in itself, the law OF
nature, and is, therefore, the teacher and
guardian OF the natural as well as OF the re-
vealed law. She is, under God, the supreme
Judge of both laws, which for her are but one
law; and, hence, she takes cogniZance in her
tribunals OF the breaches of the natural law as
we'll as OF the revealed, and has the right TO
take cogniZance OF its breaches by nations
well as OF its breaches by individuals, by the
prince as well as by subject, for it is the. su-
preme law for both. The state is. therefore,
only an inferior court bound to receive the
law from the supreme court and liable 70 have
its decisions reversed on appeal.
"This must be asserted If we assert the su-
premacy of the Christian law and hold the
church 20 be its teacher and judge, forno man
viii deny that Christianity includes the natu-
raj as well as the supernatural law. Who with
any just conceptions or any conceptions at all
OF the Christian religion will pretend that one
can fulfill the Christian law and yet violate
the natural law?-that one is a good Christian
If he keeps the precepts OF the church though
he breaks every precept of the deealogue, or that
state to learn the law. of nature, or what
we term natural morality? Grace presupDoses
nature. The supernatural ordinances OF Gods
law presuppose the natural and the church,
which is the teacher and guardian OF faith and
morals can no more be so without plenary au-
thority with regard 70 the latter than to the
former. Who, again, dares pretend that the
moral law is not as obligatory on emperors,
kings, princes and common wealths as upon
private individuals upon politicians as upon
priests, or simple believers Unless, then, you
exempt the state from all obligations, even
10 the law or nature, you must make II amen
bic to the moral law as expounded bT the
church divinely commissioned TO teach and
declare it. We Ved hardly say that
we advocate no amslgamation of the civil and
ecclesiastical administrations; they are in
their nature, as we have said, distinct, and the
supremacy OF the church which We assert is by
DO means supremacy OF the clergy as politi-
clans. We have no more respect for clergymen
turned politicians than we have for any other
class OF politicians OF equal worth, perhaps not