The Intermountain Catholic. (Salt Lake City [Utah] ;) 1899-1920, 1902-12-27

| SplrltudlS ana COHCeueS his MedhIIeSH
and erroneous impressions of the sub
ject discussed. The nephew begins
| with his usual IF"
But if the two governments are
equally necessary to the government
| OF society according to the divine or
! dination, why do you assert that the
| state is subordinate to the church"'
Because the temporal by the law of
| God is subordinated to the spiritual,
and because the state, which repre-
sents the former, cannot but be de jure
subordinated to the church, in case she
| represents the latter. ! do it also.
! because otherwise l must practically
subject the church to the state, AS
all human acts have temporal relations,
| the absolute independence of the state
in regard to the spiritual power would
give it authority, under pretext of gov
erning the temporarily of temporals,
to extend its power over the whole
spiritual order The state might think
! that monastic vows, celibacy, religious
| houses and such like things, affecting
as they certainly do questions of poll
| tical economy, are Incompatible with
| the temporal good of the community,
So it would, under pretense of govern
| ing the temporarily proceed to forbid
them; it might be annoyed by the num-
Der of holidays instituted by the spif-
itual power and proceed to suppress
them, as we have lately seen in the
kingdom of Sardinia; it may take it in
to its head that 1t is contrary to it's
dignity and welfare of the empire to
allow the church to have the supreme
control OF ecclesiastical seminaries, or
the bishops and clergy within its do
minions to have a free correspondence
with the spiritual chief of the church,
and therefore forbid all communication
with Rome except through the secular
administration, and proceed to place
the ecclesiastical seminaries under the
control of the state, as did Joseph IL
of Germany; it may regard the spirit
ual dependence of the state on a power
whose chief does not happen to reside
within it's dominionS as contrary to Its
temporal dignity and independence, ana
therefore separate the national church
from the center of unity, as did Henry
VIII and the parliament of England
in the sixteenth century, as Louis XIV
seemed for a moment disposed to do III
the seventeenth and as the French peo-
pie actually did by their constitutional
church in the eighteenth it may allege
that to acknowledge the spiritual SUI
premacy of the pope is Incompatible
with loyalty to the republic, and there
fore forbid the profession and observ-
ance of the Catholic religion within its
dominionS, as you and your rightly
named Know Nothing friends are at
tempting to do here, and as was long
done in every Protestant state in Eu-
rope. If you will believe English his
tory, the devout English government
did never fine, imprison, exile, massa-
ere or hang at Tyburn, Catholics as
Catholics, but only as traitors to the
q re 9n0l0-
gists, it alTsys respected religious lib
erty, and has prosecuted Catholics on
ly because, being Catholics, they could
not but be traitors. Moreover, the
government may say, that holding and
protesting such views as yours, my
dear Dick, is incompatible with the
temporal welfare of the state, which l
think is perfectly true, and for that
reason forbid you to hold them, and
subject you to pains and penalties II
you punish them. If we allow it to be
independent in the face of spiritual
power. as all these things certainly
have temporal relations, we cannot de-
ny it's right to govern them as it
pleases, and therefore we necessarily
subordinate their spiritual relations to
their temporal relations, and thus the
spiritual to the temporal, which, in
principle, is the subordination of the
soul to the body, eternity to time, God
to man"
But l might retort and say, since
you extend her authority over all hui
man acts, the church might under pre-
tense of governing spirituals, appropri-
ate to herself the Whole government of
temporals; and this seems to be what
is supposed by some to be necessarily
the result of the views of your friend,
tho oditcY, nf Paxyieur''
I'VE have seen what would result,
nay, what has resulted and is every day
resulting, from the assertion that the
temporal power is independent Of the
spiritual See now what would result,
if we asserted the mutual independence
of both powers. The church says, and
says truly, that all these things or
dered or forbidden by the state are
spirituals; the state says, and says
truly, that they are all temporals, for
they all have temporal relation Sboth
are independent each of the other;
each is equally supreme, and each COM
mands the contradictory of the other. |
Here is a decided conflict of rights and
duties. Two coequal authorities both
from God, commanding contradictory
thingsi Tell me which / am to obey |
since to obey both is impossible, or
how I can with a good conscience dis
obey either? Here is a very grave |
practical difficulty, and every man of
sense knows that it can only !
be removed only by denying the rela-
ton of equality between the two pow
ers, and asserting the subordination of |
one in authority, as we'll as in excel |
lence, rank or dignity, to the other. |
You Protestants subordinate the spirit |
ual to the temporal; we Catholics SUBJ
ordinate the temporal to the spiritual.
One or the other must be done, and no
body with any just claims to a relig-
ous comprehension can doubt which
Is the true course"
But you have not yet met my OBJ
lection.
1.-The church claiming only spiritual
and knowing precisely and
nfallibly where the distinction be-
.ween the spiritual and the temporal
les, neither will nor can encroach on
he DOMAIN of the state
What security have you of that,
when vol hold the state to be subord-
late to herr"
When the question is asked by
I answer, l have the security
If the fact that she is Gods church.
md is Endorsed by him, which is a good
security 1 think as there is to oe given
II as any reasonable man can ask If
he question be asked by a mono Cath !