The Intermountain Catholic. (Salt Lake City [Utah] ;) 1899-1920, 1902-12-06
CONVERSATION TX. (Continued.)

his uncle to reject. uncle Jacks reply
opens the conversation this week.J
CONVERSATION TX. Continued
Uncle Jack-It shows that my dis
tinction between governing temporais
in the respect that they are spiritually
related, and governing them as related
to a temporal end, has high authority.
| The difference, moreover, is very OBJ
vious, as we'll as important. NJ Cos
| selin contends that the power exer-
cised over temporal sovereigns by the
popes was concession made to them
by Catholic princes and nations; the il
lustrious cardinal holds it to be spirit
ual, within the ordinary spiritual ju-
risdiction of the soYerign pontiff; a
power which he holds and exercises, not
as temporal sovereign, or as sovereign
in temporals, but as the vicar of Jesus
| Christ; therefore. jure divine. and not,
as NJ Gosselin maintains if l under
stand him, simply jure humane.
Nephew Dick-But the cardinal does
not sustain you in your doctrine, as TO
the deposing power, for he cites with
appreciation Fenelon, who denies That
the pope either deprives or institutes
lay princes.
Uncle Jack-As supreme temporal
lord, or by virtue of an act of his own
will, at his own pleasure, agreed: but
as the interpreter and judge of Inc
law under which the prince holds and
to which he is bound to conform, he
does not deny it, but in effect asserts
it. The doctrine of Fenelon is, that the
pope cannot deprive or institute a lay
prince by an act of his own will and
pleasure, and that he can only declare
prince deprived, when he is so by the
law under which the prince holds: and
then it is not the pope who deprives
him, but the law, of which the pope is
simply the divinely appointed minister,
or judge. The pope has no proper
civil jurisdiction, and can intervene in
reference to the action of the temporal
government only when moral or spir-
itual question arises, and. there is a
reason under the divine and natural
| laws for his intervention in his quality
of sovereign pontiff or as the vicar of
Jesus Christ. This is the sense in which
/ understand Fenelon, and as he con-
cedes that the pope may as spiritual
sovereign declare a prince fallen from
his dignity, and his subjects absolved
from his allegiance he evidently con-
cedes the deposing power in the only
sense in which [ or my friend of
Brownson's Review have ever asserted
1t. His eminence Cardinal Gousset GER
tainly goes as far, as is evident from
the principles he establishes in his re-
marks on the first part of the first ar
ticle of the declaration of 1852, and IN
his claiming for the pope the authority
to pronounce judgment in the case of
disputes between the people and their
temporal sovereign.
Nephew Dick-After all the cardinal
asserts only a directive and ordinative
authority in regard to temporal sover-
eigns, as Gerson does land if you go no
further what more do you assert than
the directive power conceded by NJ
Gosselin and his school?
Uncle Jack-That the words cited
from Gerson are as strong as the car
dinal would sprefer may be doubted,
for they are the words of an opponent,
and cited asia concession; but, how
ever that may be, he evidently holds
it to be real and effective power
Whether 1 assert more or not than M.
Gosselin conceded by the potestas di-