On Blind Obedience

It never fails to amaze me how many pious Catholics think they should blindly obey anyone wearing a roman collar. Obedience is a virtue; blind obedience is not. This morning I was re-reading a back issue of Christifidelis, the newsletter of the St. Joseph Foundation. (If you are unfamiliar with this wonderful organization, you need to remedy the situation and meet them. They provide canonical advice to those in need and their website is a real education in Church law.) 

The article on obedience begins with a description of virtue and what it is. For a moral act to be virtuous the individual must make the decision with an "adequate knowledge of the situation, the options available, and the consequences of each option."  In other words, obeying a lawful authority is not a virtue. To obey because the authority "said so" may, in fact, be a sin. Think of all the men throughout history who committed heinous acts because they were "following orders." Obeying China's forced abortion/sterilization law is a modern example of abusive authority of a tyrannical government that may not be obeyed. To obey an order that conflicts with God's law is always objectively sinful.

Nancy Pelosi recently lectured the bishops that they should order their priests to preach the Democrats' immigration policy from the pulpit. This paragon of Catholic knowledge who thinks it's perfectly okay to disobey God's law, "Thou shalt not kill." would misuse the bishops' authority to brainwash the faithful on amnesty. And some of the bishops are doing it even without her marching orders. Cardinal Mahony, who regularly disobeys Holy Mother Church on the rubrics of the Mass and fills his catechetical conference with heretics every year, has no problem preaching his socialistic views on immigration as doctrine.

Which makes it pretty clear that the sheep in the pew need to understand the nature of obedience. As I told my children when they were attending less than faithful Catholic high schools, "Just because someone is wearing a roman collar, doesn't mean he's telling you the truth." We need the VIRTUE of obedience, not its evil twin, blind obedience. Otherwise those in authority may lead us down the primrose path of dalliance to the very mouth of hell.

Blind Obedience is not a Virtue

The latest issue of Christifidelis, from the St. Joseph Foundation, is out and it's a corker! The lead article by Philip Gray, J.C.L. is a great discussion on what obedience is and when a person is required to obey a lawful authority. Obedience is a subset of the cardinal virtue of justice which requires us to give to God and neighbor what is due to them. We owe absolute obedience to God, so all other laws are subservient to and subject to God's laws. When there's a conflict between God's law and a lower law, guess what we have to do? "We must obey the higher [law] lest we sin."

There are limits on human authority. "Directives that violate divine law must be ignored, and in many circumstances we have an obligation to resist them actively." Gray gives China's forced abortion laws as an example.

We must obey legitimate authority. However, if those in authority act outside the boundaries of their authority, they need not be obeyed. For example, parents have authority over their children, but don't have the right to demand that an adult child follow a particular vocation. So when St. Clare fled from home to become a nun she did not act in disobedience.

My own mom left Cleveland against her mother's will (but with her father's support) to fly to California and marry my dad before he was deployed to Pearl Harbor in 1940. Even if her father had joined in opposing the marriage, she would not have been disobedient to ignore their wishes because parents have no authority to choose the marriage partners of their children. (I guess that means I can't arrange any marriages for my grandchildren. Darn!)

Gray points out that "to develop the virtue of obedience, we must develop an adequate knowledge of divine laws and those human laws that regulate our lives. We have to know the limits of authority. If we do not know the limits of authority, we can be easily manipulated or used by lawful authority." In other words, just because someone has authority over me doesn't mean I'm obliged to follow every directive. He cannot demand unlawful obedience. Those who "when faced with a direction...neither seek to know options and consequences nor deliberate their choices" show an attitude that "is not true obedience nor is it virtuous." In other words, blind obedience is the cop-out of a lazy individual who doesn't want to take the trouble to study and understand the nature of obedience, its requirements and its limits.

Gray goes on to say that "we have an obligation to know the divine laws and what our obligations to God are. Only with knowledge of divine laws and the legitimate boundaries of lawful authority can we obey." The person who claims authority must also be able to prove it because "we are not bound to obey someone who cannot provide proof of his authority and who does not stay within the bounds of his power."

Gray uses the example of options for Communion as an example of the abuse of legitimate authority, perhaps because it's been so common over the years. In the Latin rite, the communicant has the option of kneeling or standing for Communion and the priest may not infringe on that right. "If a priest demands that a kneeling communicant stand, the communicant does not have to obey....If the communicant follows the priest's demand, this is not obedience. Obedience takes place only when we give authority its rightful due. In this case, the priest went beyond his lawful authority and the communicant allowed him that privilege....If the communicant did not follow the directive, he would not be acting in disobedience...because the priest does not have the authority to demand the standing posture during the reception of Holy Communion. The priest would be acting outside his legitimate bounds, and the communicant would have no obligation to 'obey.'" The same type of abuse of authority comes into play when a priest or religious education teacher instructs communicants they must receive in the hand and may not receive on the tongue. I know of a parish in Maryland where this was routinely demanded by the pastor for First Communicants. This is a serious violation of his authority as well as a violation of Canon Law.

More and more today it's essential for Catholics to understand the nature of obedience and legitimate authority and to know their rights. Last May when Notre Dame police ordered pro-lifers off what is an open campus, similar to a small town, simply because they were carrying signs showing aborted children or pushing baby strollers with dolls covered in stage blood, were they disobedient for refusing to comply? I don't think so. Under the first amendment of our Constitution people cannot be discriminated against due to the content of their speech. Since Notre Dame allowed others to carry pro-Obama and pro-Fr. Jenkins signs on campus they could not legitimately discriminate against others just because they found the content of their signs objectionable. It will be interesting to see what happens in court as the cases are heard, but I do not think those who refused to comply with the order to leave campus were "disobedient" according to Gray's article. Sidewalk counselors, videographers attending gay pride parades, protesters, etc. are all subject to abuse by over-vigorous authorities violating their boundaries.

I'll close with one personal example. About ten years ago I set up a pro-life table at my polling place. I was the proper distance from the entrance so I wasn't violating any election rules. However, someone complained about the graphic pictures and the fetal models and an election official came out, ordered me to put everything away, and called the police. The responding officer told me if I didn't remove the "offensive" materials, I'd be arrested. I complied, but went home and called the American Center for Law and Justice who telephoned the polling place. The election officer backed down (actually apologized) and I put my materials out again. Had I refused to comply I would not have been disobedient. Rather I would have been challenging the boundaries of their authority which they clearly abused. More and more today, Catholics in the public square need to know and understand God's law, the nature of obedience and legitimate authority, and the limits and boundaries of that authority. Only then can they make intelligent choices and act in ways that are truly just and prudent and will help us, as Gray says, "freely choose to exercise the virtue of obedience and gain merit directed to our salvation."