The Intermountain Catholic. (Salt Lake City [Utah] ;) 1899-1920, 1902-11-22

CONVERSATION TX. (Continued.)
Nephew Dick-But as you say that
all temporals have spiritual relations,
under your doctrine the power OIL the
church would extend to everything anu
you would claim for her all the func-
tons of the government. both spiritual
and temporal. She would thus be the
only real government of society, would
absorb the state and leave it no au-
tonomy. Here is the objection Which
both Gallicans and we Protestants
bring against you, and unless you can
show that it is unfounded, you must
stand condemned.
Uncle Jack-I understand you. The
papist. as 1 have told you, asserts two
distinct orders, one spiritual and the
other temporal, and two distinct gov
ernments, one the church and the other
the state, each independent and SUI
preme in it's own order, for governing
them Therefore, he says, Render I'M
to Caesar the things that are Caesars,
and unto God the things that are
Gods
Nephew Dick-Wherein then, do you
differ from the Gallicans?
Uncle Jack-In nothing if they con-
sistently carry out one set of their
principles; but when they do not we
differ from them in the respect that,
the supremacy of the state in it's own
order, we deny its independence and
supremacy in relation to the spiritual
order. In relation to that order, we
hold that it is subordinate and indie
pendent.
Nephew Dick-But you seem to me
now to contradict yourself. After hav-
ing asserted the independence and SUI
premacy of the state in its own order,
now you assert it's subordination and
dependence in regard to the spiritual
order
Uncle Jack-Things are not always
what they seem to those who under
stand them not. 1 assert that the state
is independent and supreme in it's own
order, by which l mean that in the
temporal order which is it's own or
der the state has no superior, and
holds its power from no other-the only
sense in which any man, not an atheist,
can pretend that the state is indie
pendent and supreme The state holds
its power from God for no est potestas
nisi a Dec, therefore depends on him, is
subject to his law, and of course, in
relation to him who is King of kings
and Lord of lords, is not independent
and supreme. If we would not fall into
absolute political atheism, the sense IN
! which we must understand the indie
| pendence and supremacy of the state
| is, as SuareZ defines it, that it hold
from no other and has no superior in
it's own order, while in relation to an
other and superior order it is subordi-
nate and dependent.
THE contradiction you imagine does
not exist, because the independence
and supremacy of the state denied are
not in the same order with the indie
pendence and supremacy asserted.
Even the authority of the spiritual
over the temporal, which 1 assert, only
indirect, and the dependence of the
state on the church is not direct, that
is, for the sake of temporals as such,
or as directed to a subordinate and
temporal end, as Suarez says in con-
| tinuation of the passage L have just
cited: lila dependentia vocatur indi-
recta, quia lila superior potesta circa
temporalia non per Sc, aut propter Sc
sed quasi indirecte ct propter aliud in
terdum versatur.'"
Nephew Dick-But, my dear uncle
this distinction Gallicans will tell YOU
is of no value. If the spiritual power
extends to the government or the whole
temporal order, it evidently matters
nothing in what. respect this is done
or by what name it is called. 1t is the
substantial claim that is important
The title or classification of the power
is of no consequence:
"a rose
By any other name will smell as
sweet"
Uncle Jack-Not by the name OF
skunk2s cabbage, l am inclined to be-
lieve, Shakespeare to the contrary not
withstanding. But the Gallican, if he
goes so far as to say this, forgets his
philosophy.
Nephew Dick-That is severe.