Corcoran, Father James A., Overbrook, Pennsylvania, to Archbishop John Baptist Purcell, of Cincinnati, Ohio, 1873 May 10

In reply to Purcell's letter Corcoran submits the following opinion. Looking at the case as presented he does not believe Mr. Bunbury was under censure. The positive laws of God and Church do not bind under "grave incommodum." That was Banbury's case, and there was no contumacy in his actions. In the concrete case under American law, Bunbury was just exercising his right. Canon 155 of the Second Plenary Council of Baltimore forbids laymen to go to court against ecclesiastics without necessity, and this Bishop Caspar Borgess hints at. Canon 156 forbids strictly ecclesiastical affairs be dragged to civil tribunals by ecclesiastical personages. The original canon was made in the Provincial Council of 1837 but was tempered to its present form by Rome. Corcoran quotes in Latin the words of Cardinal Mai, Sept. 2, 1837. Thus the American bishops say priests must not bring civil actions against priests, but Rome says "not in such general terms." Thus the law applies only to purely ecclesiastical matters. Priests are free to sue in temporal matters; a fortiori laymen. Corcoran feels that Bishop Borgess is bound in conscience to some kind of restitution, and that Mr. Bunbury had been cruelly wronged. :: II-5-f A.L.S. 4pp. 12mo.