The Republican., 1896-03-19
ECCLESIASTICAL COLUMN.
Rev. komanus MattinglN, pastor st. Peter
Catholic Church, Editor.
Restitution and decentralization.

GloAeu III Ine UOSpei, saw tnaG ne
would lose his situation because of
malfeasance in Office, he asked him
self the question; "What shall | do
for my lord taketh away from me
the stewardship" Why does he
ask this question? Does he repent
of his malfeasance, and has he the
will to repair 1t as best he can? No
such thought enters his mind; he
thinks rather of some means to
eXtricate himself from his predica-
ment. Instead of repairing his in
justices he commits new ones; he
makes great abatements to the debt
ors of his lord, hoping that they
will be grateful to him and provide
for his support.
Many people act like the unjust
steward. They live beyond their
means and get into difficulties.
They take the property Of others in
various ways, commit many Unjust
ices in business in general, but
hardly ever think of making restl-
tuition or reimbursing for loss or
damage.
Restitution and indemnifcation
are necessary for salvation,
l. Because the obligation is t0un-
ded on tile lGW of nature. The nat
ural law which God has inscribed in
the heart of everyone tells us: "Do
unto others as you would haye 9th
ers do unto you" If anyone has
taken something from us unjustly,
or has done US some damage, we
certainly wish him to give back
what he has taken, and to indem-
Nifty us. According to this princi-
pie we must deal with our neighbor;
we must restore to him what we
have take away unjustly, and repair
the damage. He who does not do
this sins against the natural law.
Restitution and indemnlication
are necessary,
II. Because cod eapreSSey COM
mands 1t, eff any man steal an OK
or sheep and kill it, or sell it, he
shall restore five oxen for one OK;
and four sheep for one sheep" Ex-
odus 22 4. We see here that the
law of Moses required not only a
simple restitution, but according
to circumstances a four and five
fold. In regard 20 indemnifcation
we read in the law of Moses: eff
any man hurt field or a vineyard,
he shall restore the best of whatso-
ever he hath in his own field, or in
his vineyard according to the esti-
nation Of the damage" Exodus
22:5.
Restitution and indemnification
are necessary,
III. Because 2yithOut ii no for
gioeness Of sin IS possible. No
power on earth can dispense from
the obligation of restitution. 1t is
a law of nature, and God is the
author of nature. Almighty God
himself cannot dispense from it, for
infinite justice, as well as every
other perfection, is one Of Gods
attributes, and Almighty God can
no more annul one of His attributes
than he can deny his own nature,
or cease to be God. The duty of
restitution and indemnlfcation
never falls under the right of limi-
tation. Let it be twenty, thirty or
forty years and longer since you
have stolen, cheated or done dam
age, you are just as vigorously
obliged to restitution and indemni-
ficatlon as if you had committed the
injustice Yesterday or to-day.
} Only the i0ap0ssibi7ity frees from
the obligation of restitution. No
one is bound to the impossible is
principle of ethics. But the i'm
possibility must not be fancled,
but a true and real impossibility; or
remission. when the injured party
voluntarily RENTS the obligation.
On the circumstances of restitu-
tion and indemnification, we may
consider the following questions:
1st. Who must restore or lndem-
nifty? In the first place, lie wh0