Orionthehunter:
… Dave, if I may, I’d like to slightly modify this quote using bold. I think it is a pretty good summation of what our general attitude and disposition needs to be. Without these changes, it appears to effectively define all civil disobedience as illicit and sinful.
I have difficulty with civil disobedience probably because my experience (17 years in the military) doesn’t cotton much to disobedience excepting when military orders are manifestly unlawful or when necessity makes dispensation impossible. The evil effects of rebellion are very grave such that rebellion is rarely justified. However, just rebellion is certainly conceivable.
The response one takes probably differs with respect to the kind of justice we are speaking of. There are three kinds of justice… 1)
commutative justice: justice owed between two (or more)
equal people, states, countries, etc.; 2)
Distributive justice: justice owed by a superior to his subordinates, and 3)
Legal justice: the justice subordinates owe superiors.
If we are speaking of a breach of
legal justice, that is, when the subordinate fails to give the justice owed to their superiors, the governing authorities typically have penalties and censures they exercise for enforcement.
If we are speaking of a breach in
commutative justice, that is, if I have a complaint against one of my fellow citizens, ordinarily it is dangerous to the common good of society to take things into my own hands. Instead I ought to resolve it through a lawsuit, assuming that other methods are not successful. If a person arrogated to himself the task of taking care of such things on his own, the result woud be chaos, vendettas, etc. However, if the ordinary mechanisms of the state cannot or will not handle such matters, it is allowable for the individual to enforce his rights personally, for otherwise our rights become meaningless.
When there is a dispute of
distributive justice, that is, when the superior fails to give the justice owed to their subordinates, then matters get even more difficult. Ordinarily, due process provides for appeals to higher authority. To do much more would be to use private force against the state, ie. to engage in rebellion–something which given the amount of evil it brings is ordinarly not justified. Again if ordinary mechanisms cannot or will not handle such matters, then it is possible for the individual to enforce his rights personally. Rebellion is however ripe for abuse and historically, they rarely end well. The moral principle of the lesser-of-two-evils and/or the principle of double-effect ought to be considered.
Do we have an obligation to obey unjust laws and or commands of our superios? Some laws command something unjustly, while others command something that is truly immoral. In the case of the former it
may be disobeyed but does not have to be disobeyed. In other words, there is nothing immoral on my part about
suffering injustice. Such would be rather what Christ and the apostles endured. However, regarding the latter form of unjust law, ie. the law commanding something immoral, it
must be disobeyed.
The classic example discussed in ethics courses is the military draft. Many conscientiously believe that in some instances, such a law can be unjust. Others disagree. The circumstances of rebellion against such a law ought to be prudentially weighed and a judgement made on a case-by-case basis. We must follow our properly formed conscience.
Consequently, St. Thomas taught, “
we may distinguish a threefold obedience; one, sufficient for salvation, and consisting in obeying when one is bound to obey: secondly, perfect obedience, which obeys in all things lawful: thirdly, indiscreet obedience, which obeys even in matters unlawful.” (ST, IIb, 104, 5).
I reject the concept of danger if it implies only matters of life and death. If I’m obligated by law to sanction that which is immoral, I’m free to disobey even if the matter isn’t a matter of life and death.
I believe the sense of “necessity” that St. Thomas speaks of concerning “sudden peril” is not limited to mere bodily peril, but
includes peril to one’s soul or moral peril.
