I refer you to what Bl Cardinal Newman said on the subject '**In an actual case, a Catholic would, of course, not act simply on his own judgment; at the same time, there are supposable cases in which he would be obliged to go by it solely—viz., when his conscience could not be reconciled to any of the courses of action proposed to him by others.
In support of what I have been saying, I refer to one or two weighty authorities:—
Cardinal Turrecremata says, “Although it clearly follows from the circumstance that the Pope can err at times, and command things which must not be done, that we are not to be simply obedient to him in all things, that does not show that he must not be obeyed by all when his commands are good.** To know in what cases he is to be obeyed and in what not … it is said in the Acts of the Apostles, ‘One ought to obey God rather than man:’ therefore, were the Pope to command anything against Holy Scripture, or the articles of faith, or the truth of the Sacraments, or the commands of the natural or divine law, he ought not to be obeyed, but in such commands is to be passed over (despiciendus).”—Summ. de Eccl., pp. 47, 48.
Bellarmine, speaking of resisting the Pope, says, {243} “In order to resist and defend oneself no authority is required … Therefore, as it is lawful to resist the Pope, if he assaulted a man’s person, so it is lawful to resist him, if he assaulted souls, or troubled the state (turbanti rempublicam), and much more if he strove to destroy the Church. It is lawful, I say, to resist him, by not doing what he commands, and hindering the execution of his will.”—De Rom. Pont., ii. 29.
Archbishop Kenrick says, “His power was given for edification, not for destruction. If he uses it from the love of domination (quod absit) scarcely will he meet with obedient populations.”—Theolog. Moral., t. i. p. 158.
Leaving aside the question of whether this applies to the case of the SSPX, as it is not a question I wish to be involved in, I am merely addressing your assertion that one must obey the pope unless he commands you to sin. That is not the belief of Bl Cardinal Newman and unless we believe him to be incompetent or wrong it cannot be the belief of those he cites in his support either.
Go back and read Newman and stop pushing him as if he were the pope. He would be embarrassed to see you using his work in this manner and in this case. Neither the bishop nor the pope are promoting the destruction of the Church. Such a judgment is a subjective one. Newman would not support it. It has to be an objectively provable case.
Read the red. They are in fact saying that you can disobey in cases of sin. They are saying that you have the moral duty to ask yourself if you’re being asked to sin. You have to read these statements in the context of their entire collection of writings, because this topic comes up again and in the context of their lives. Read what they wrote and watch how they lived it.
ConstantineTG;8590111:
Does this apply to Eastern Catholics too? When I go back home to the Philippines, there’s only Roman Catholicism. The only way to live my new Eastern spirituality is to go to the Greek Orthodox parish.
No, because you have another Catholic alternative.
Br Jr
You seem to be going further than the documents and Rome itself has gone,
Cardianl Hoyos said this.
If there is a regularization, he will have to learn to live with it.
No he does not have to accept their presence in his diocese. No one may enter a diocese without the permission of the Ordinary. This is only allowed to the Jesuits and the Opus Dei.
Franciscans, Dominicans, Benedictines, Carthusians, Sisters of St. Joseph, Sisters of St. Dominic, etc etc, must get a decree of erection to enter a diocese. Only the bishop can grant this decree. Even the FSSP cannot enter a diocese without a decree of erection. This also applies to secular orders, lay associations (ie. Legion of Mary, Cursillo, K of C, Catholic Answers, EWTN).
A bishop is the highest ranking authority in a diocese. The pope can intervene, but that has only happened when the pope himself sends them on mission.
No bishop has to live with anyone in his diocese except the local diocesan clergy. Even there, the bishop decides of the man in the seminary has a vocation. No one can be ordained for his diocese without his order.
Once a bishop grants a decree of erection, it is very difficult to retract it. He can never retract it if the decree is given to a religious community or to the Secular Franciscans, Lay Dominicans, or Secular Carmelites. Once he approves their presence, they’re there until their superior pulls them out.
A non religious organization, such as the SSPX, can be deprived of the right to use the name Catholic. While the bishop cannot suppress them, once he has erected them, he can issue a decree to his diocese that their institutions are not Catholic and that the faithful may not attend them.
The bishop never loses his right to approve who enters his diocese. Only the bishop can give permission to keep the Blessed Sacrament in your house or chapel, even if you’re religious.
Fraternally,
Br. JR, OSF
