Religious obedience

[santodomingo]

I want to discuss the significance, difficulties and limits of religious obedience. I would be especially excited to hear from those who are presently living under obedience (that doesn´t include husbands BTW!) . I know there are a few religious on the forum. Brother JR comes to mind. How do you see obedience?

The idea is to get people to dig up quotes from the doctors and saints of the Church from way back. There are some very clever and well-read people in this forum who could enlighten us all with their contributions. How did the great saints understand and live under obedience? I would especially like to hear about the great founders of religious orders: St. Francis, St. Bernard, St. Basil, St. Benedict, St. Ignatius, St. Dominic, St. Teresa of Avila, St. Alfonsus, etc.

Is the present crisis of the Church a crisis of obedience? Is it possible to indirectly disobey by obeying the direct orders of one´s superior? What do you think of the phrase “led into disobedience through obedience”? Is the notion of BLIND obedience still valid today? Do the limits to obedience depend on the virtue or wisdom of your superior? When, if ever, is someone who has made a solemn vow of obedience justified in disobeying his superior? Is the obedience of a friar, monk, jesuit, etc. similar to the obedience promised by a lay member of a third order?

Moderator: I realize that this might seem more appropriate in the Spirituality forum, but since I only ever visit the Traditional forum, and I´ve got to know those who lurk here, it would be fun if it could remain here. Another reason is that I´m interested in discussing obedience, as understood TRADITIONALLY, not necessarily how it is generally seen nowadays.

 

[Bebekoualy]

Dear Santodomino;

I think it’s interesting you put this message on the traditional catholicism section.
Indeed I’ve noticed that among faithfuls, and traditional religious Orders, Obedience isn’t seen the same way as in modern churches.
People stick to their daily prayer, discerners get a Spiritual director and obey to him “blindly” or I would say with trust. In Religious Communities you just can’t do what you want. It is much more focused on these orthodox communities.

If I had to quote a Saint it would be St Benedict, in whose Rule Obedience is very important:

The first degree of humility is obedience without delay.
This is the virtue of those
who hold nothing dearer to them than Christ;
who, because of the holy service they have professed,
and the fear of hell,
and the glory of life everlasting,
as soon as anything has been ordered by the Superior,
receive it as a divine command
and cannot suffer any delay in executing it.
Of these the Lord says,
“As soon as he heard, he obeyed Me” (Ps. 17[18]:45).
And again to teachers He says,
“He who hears you, hears Me” (Luke 10:16).

(from RB, chapter 5 - On Obedience)

 

[santodomingo]

Cool quote from St. Benedict!

Keep´em coming!

 

[Friar_David_O.Carm]

From the Carmelite Rule.

Chapter 23: You other brothers, too, honour your prior humbly, thinking not of him but rather of Christ who placed him over your heads, and who says to the leaders of the churches, Whoever hears you, hears me; whoever rejects you, rejects me, so that you will not come into judgement for contempt, but for obedience will merit the reward of eternal life.

I can only speak for my province of the Carmelites but obedience is done in a dialogue between the prior provincial and the individual regarding ministry assignments. We have our Rule and Constitutions that we follow for our daily living such as Morning and Evening Prayer, daily Mass, and other private prayer (Lectio Divina (which we also do communally), private meditative prayer). Also other rules of the priory are discussed and decided upon in the house chapter (meeting).

For myself, obedience is being open to the needs of the Order rather than my wants.

When I entered I knew that our main ministries were retreat centers, parishes, and high schools. I said that I would never go to a high school as I did not wish to teach, Through formation I meditated on my vow of obedience and looked at some of the friars I lived with and how they lived out that vow. I decided two things. I would do as our rule states in Chapter 23 and view the voice of my superior as the voice of Christ and to trust that my superiors would not send me somewhere they knew I would fail (that they may see something within me that I do not see myself).

So longer story short, I am working as a teacher in our high school in Tucson.

Sorry for the rambling nature of my post but I hope this helps the thread along.

 

[santodomingo]

From the Carmelite Rule.

Chapter 23: You other brothers, too, honour your prior humbly, thinking not of him but rather of Christ who placed him over your heads, and who says to the leaders of the churches, Whoever hears you, hears me; whoever rejects you, rejects me, so that you will not come into judgement for contempt, but for obedience will merit the reward of eternal life.

I can only speak for my province of the Carmelites but obedience is done in a dialogue between the prior provincial and the individual regarding ministry assignments. We have our Rule and Constitutions that we follow for our daily living such as Morning and Evening Prayer, daily Mass, and other private prayer (Lectio Divina (which we also do communally), private meditative prayer). Also other rules of the priory are discussed and decided upon in the house chapter (meeting).

For myself, obedience is being open to the needs of the Order rather than my wants.

When I entered I knew that our main ministries were retreat centers, parishes, and high schools. I said that I would never go to a high school as I did not wish to teach, Through formation I meditated on my vow of obedience and looked at some of the friars I lived with and how they lived out that vow. I decided two things. I would do as our rule states in Chapter 23 and view the voice of my superior as the voice of Christ and to trust that my superiors would not send me somewhere they knew I would fail (that they may see something within me that I do not see myself).

So longer story short, I am working as a teacher in our high school in Tucson.

Sorry for the rambling nature of my post but I hope this helps the thread along.

Thank you so much for that, Brother David. It´s great to get a reply from someone under obedience. And I appreciate the testimony. :compcoff:

What do you think about the questions I asked in the OP? Do you believe in “blind” obedience? Or is that not a carmelite thing? I have read several quotes by St. Ignatius along the lines of unquestioning obedience to one´s superior, and also something Brother JR wrote about St. Francis. This is quite frightening to me. I think it could lead to very dangerous situations. What´s your opinion on this?

 

[Thomas_Aquinas_1]

There’s a few things to keep in mind regarding obedience that help us to understand its limits. The first thing to keep in mind is that we do not obey men for the sake of obedience to men. When we obey our superiors, we are supposed to obey God by obeying them. In the encyclicals Diuturnum by Pope Leo XIII, and Quas Primas, by Pope Pius XI, we are told that it is unworthy of a Christian to obey a man. When we obey our lawful superiors, our obedience to the particular command is supposed to be directed as obedience to God. We obey God by obeying our superiors. We don’t obey human authorities simply for the sake of obeying them.

With that in mind, it is clear that we should never obey a command of a human superior if it is contrary to the law of God, for in so doing we fail in our obedience to God. In such a case, we must obey God, rather than man.

I have more to say, but I have to get back to work now.

 

[maurin]

There’s a few things to keep in mind regarding obedience that help us to understand its limits. The first thing to keep in mind is that we do not obey men for the sake of obedience to men. When we obey our superiors, we are supposed to obey God by obeying them. In the encyclicals Diuturnum by Pope Leo XIII, and Quas Primas, by Pope Pius XI, we are told that it is unworthy of a Christian to obey a man. When we obey our lawful superiors, our obedience to the particular command is supposed to be directed as obedience to God. We obey God by obeying our superiors. We don’t obey human authorities simply for the sake of obeying them.

With that in mind, it is clear that we should never obey a command of a human superior if it is contrary to the law of God, for in so doing we fail in our obedience to God. In such a case, we must obey God, rather than man.

I have more to say, but I have to get back to work now.

Writing of obedience in his “Letters to Persons in the World” St Francis de Sales writes:

If it is done lovingly, there is no danger in complaining, nor in begging cure, nor in changing place, nor in getting ourselves relieved. But do this with love, and with resignation into the arms of the good will of God.

What you wrote above, Aquinas, reminded me of this. I hope it it was fitting.

 

[Sirach2]

A very good excerpt from St. Francis de Sales chapter on obedience (here).

"There are two kinds of obedience, one necessary, the other voluntary. The first includes a humble obedience to your ecclesiastical superiors, whether Pope, Bishop, Curate, or those commissioned by them. You are likewise bound to obey your civil superiors, king and magistrates; as also your domestic superiors, father, mother, master or mistress. Such obedience is called necessary, because no one can free himself from the duty of obeying these superiors, God having appointed them severally to bear rule over us.

Therefore do you obey their commands as of right,
…** but if you would be perfect, follow their counsels, and even their wishes as far as charity and prudence will allow: obey as to things acceptable;**
as when they bid you eat, or take recreation, for although there may be no great virtue in obedience in such a case, there is great harm in disobedience. Obey in things indifferent, as concerning questions of dress, coming and going, singing or keeping silence, for herein is a very laudable obedience. Obey in things hard, disagreeable and inconvenient, and therein lies a very perfect obedience.
Moreover, obey quietly, without answering again, promptly, without delay, cheerfully, without reluctance; and, above all, render a loving obedience for His Sake Who became obedient even to the death of the Cross for our sake; Who, as Saint Bernard says, chose rather to resign His Life than His Obedience."
The difficult part seems to be the last paragraph about “promptly, cheerfully, without reluctance” which often goes against the grain of our humanness.

 

[santodomingo]

There’s a few things to keep in mind regarding obedience that help us to understand its limits. The first thing to keep in mind is that we do not obey men for the sake of obedience to men. When we obey our superiors, we are supposed to obey God by obeying them. In the encyclicals Diuturnum by Pope Leo XIII, and Quas Primas, by Pope Pius XI, we are told that it is unworthy of a Christian to obey a man. When we obey our lawful superiors, our obedience to the particular command is supposed to be directed as obedience to God. We obey God by obeying our superiors. We don’t obey human authorities simply for the sake of obeying them.

With that in mind, it is clear that we should never obey a command of a human superior if it is contrary to the law of God, for in so doing we fail in our obedience to God. In such a case, we must obey God, rather than man.

I have more to say, but I have to get back to work now.

I agree with this. However, that just about rules out “blind” obedience, doesn´t it? If you have to discern whether your superior is telling you to do something that is according to God´s will, your obedience is not unthinking. I´m getting a bit confused, because I thought that for the religious the will of God WAS the will of his superior. But obviously sometimes it isn´t.

 

[Thomas_Aquinas_1]

The difficult part seems to be the last paragraph about “promptly, cheerfully, without reluctance” which often goes against the grain of our humanness.

Right. But that’s why obedience is so beneficial. By obeying others, we mortify our own will. Imagine a religious who does nothing without permission. By such perfect obedience, he mortifies his own will. What a perfect way to live, and what a sure road to heaven.

The difficulty comes it when the superior is a wolf in sheeps clothing who has lost the faith. If a person blindly obeys a wolf, even in things that are contrary to his conscience (note: contrary to his conscience, not merely contrary to his will), this person will likely end up in the same pit as his superior.

Obeying in that which is contrary to our will is very beneficial, but obeying in that which is contrary to our well formed conscience is dangerous - and that is often the situation good Priests are faced with today.

 

[Sirach2]

In my previous post, St. Francis alluded to voluntary obedience, and gave this example from St. Teresa of Avila.
Voluntary obedience is such as we undertake by our own choice, and which is not imposed by others. Persons do not choose their own King or Bishop, or parents–often not even their husband; but most people choose their confessor or director. And whether a person takes a vow of obedience to him (as Saint Theresa, beyond her formal vow to the Superior of her Order, bound herself by a simple vow to obey Father Gratian), or without any vow they resolve to obey their chosen spiritual guide, all such obedience is voluntary, because it depends upon our own will.
Some may not be aware of this incident from St. Teresa’s Life, but it is very significant. Having made this simple vow to Fr. Gratian, she had received a command from Our Lord to found a convent in a certain city in Spain and shared the Lord’s direction with Gratian. He denied the request, even though he knew well enough that St. Teresas locutions were authentic. He preferred another location for her to found the new convent.

St. Teresa was exceedingly disturbed and asked Jesus what she should do with this contradiction. He told her to obey, but that He would hold Gratian responsible for the consequences. I never forgot this example – even though the Lord Himself may issue a command, we are still to obey those He places over us as superiors.

 

[Friar_David_O.Carm]

Obedience can never be “blind”. No superior can order one to sin or go against any of the Church’s Laws unless he is able to dispense from it. As a superior is an ordinary he can dispense as a bishop can.

There are also other areas where obedience is not required. One area that comes to mind is the political realm. A superior can not order you to vote a certain way, nor can he order you not to vote at all.

As I said, in my province much is done in a dialogue.

 

[Thomas_Aquinas_1]

In my previous post, St. Francis alluded to voluntary obedience, and gave this example from St. Teresa of Avila.
Voluntary obedience is such as we undertake by our own choice, and which is not imposed by others. Persons do not choose their own King or Bishop, or parents–often not even their husband; but most people choose their confessor or director. And whether a person takes a vow of obedience to him (as Saint Theresa, beyond her formal vow to the Superior of her Order, bound herself by a simple vow to obey Father Gratian), or without any vow they resolve to obey their chosen spiritual guide, all such obedience is voluntary, because it depends upon our own will.
Some may not be aware of this incident from St. Teresa’s Life, but it is very significant. Having made this simple vow to Fr. Gratian, she had received a command from Our Lord to found a convent in a certain city in Spain and shared the Lord’s direction with Gratian. He denied the request, even though he knew well enough that St. Teresas locutions were authentic. He preferred another location for her to found the new convent.

St. Teresa was exceedingly disturbed and asked Jesus what she should do with this contradiction. He told her to obey, but that He would hold Gratian responsible for the consequences. I never forgot this example – even though the Lord Himself may issue a command, we are still to obey those He places over us as superiors.

Very interesting. I think there is a distinction that can be employed here. The distinction is between positive and negative precepts. A positive precept is something that we are told to do, such as feeding the hungry, admonishing the sinner, etc. A negative precept is something that we are forbidden from doing, such as worshipping false God’s committing adultery or fornication or stealing, etc.

A negative precept can never be violated. A positive precept, on the other hand, should only be done when it is prudent, or reasonable. For example, if a friend or family member is living a bad life, and we realize that admonishing them will do more harm than good, we should refrain from doing so. Similarly, if there is a bum living in our area who is capable of working, yet refuses to work because he is too lazy, we should not give him food, or money. As St. Paul says “if he will not work, neither let him eat” (or something like that).

Now, the example of St. Theresa is a positive precept, rather than a negative precept. It is interesting to see that, in this case, even though the positive precept was given directly by Jesus, our Lord told her to follow the contrary advice of her director.

If the advice of the director was for her to violate a negative precept (such as committing fornication with a man who was tempting her), we can be certain that Jesus would not have counseled her to follow that advice.

 

[santodomingo]

Right. But that’s why obedience is so beneficial. By obeying others, we mortify our own will. Imagine a religious who does nothing without permission. By such perfect obedience, he mortifies his own will. What a perfect way to live, and what a sure road to heaven.

The difficulty comes it when the superior is a wolf in sheeps clothing who has lost the faith. If a person blindly obeys a wolf, even in things that are contrary to his conscience (note: contrary to his conscience, not merely contrary to his will), this person will likely end up in the same pit as his superior.

Obeying in that which is contrary to our will is very beneficial, but obeying in that which is contrary to our well formed conscience is dangerous - and that is often the situation good Priests are faced with today.

Exactly!!

Wouldn´t you say that the “auto-demolition” of the Church that we have seen since the Council is due largely to vows of obedience? Without obedience it would have been virtually impossible for the “wolves” in sheep´s clothing to destroy so much. The great virtue of the CC was also Her great weakness. All the Enemy had to do was place a few wolves in place of power and the whole edifice came tumbling down. Look at what´s left of some congregations…

If a superior orders you to take off your habbit, stop praying the Rosary, etc. should he be obeyed?

 

[Sirach2]

What was so horrifying to read is that the city in which Gratian wanted the new foundation caused immense suffering to the nuns who accompanied St. Teresa. I was quite astonished to ponder that Our Lord did not intervene in some way with Gratian to warn him of these dangers and “consequences” of his bad decision. I suppose it is a matter of trust, knowing that despite our human failings, God can bring good out of the most dire circumstances.

 

[thomas_jd]

Obedience can never be “blind”. No superior can order one to sin or go against any of the Church’s Laws unless he is able to dispense from it. As a superior is an ordinary he can dispense as a bishop can.

There are also other areas where obedience is not required. One area that comes to mind is the political realm. A superior can not order you to vote a certain way, nor can he order you not to vote at all.

As I said, in my province much is done in a dialogue.[/QUOTEce?iedien]

If I may ask, what are your feeling toward a Lay Carmelite’s vow of Obedience?

 

[Friar_David_O.Carm]

Exactly!!

Wouldn´t you say that the “auto-demolition” of the Church that we have seen since the Council is due largely to vows of obedience? Without obedience it would have been virtually impossible for the “wolves” in sheep´s clothing to destroy so much. The great virtue of the CC was also Her great weakness. All the Enemy had to do was place a few wolves in place of power and the whole edifice came tumbling down. Look at what´s left of some congregations…

If a superior orders you to take off your habbit, stop praying the Rosary, etc. should he be obeyed?

As long as it does not violate the Constitutions/Rule then yes, he should be obeyed.

As our Carmelite Rule states, the voice of the superior is the voice of Christ.

 

[Friar_David_O.Carm]

If I may ask, what are your feeling toward a Lay Carmelite’s vow of Obedience?

I have not studied the vows of the third order.

In the novitiate we studied the Evangelical Counsels, the Vows, as made by religious and what they mean to us.

I would have to do research on the third orders and their vows as I am sure they are very different than how religious view and live out the Vows.

 

[santodomingo]

St. Ignatius, in his “Letter on Obedience” insists on “blind” obedience. St. Bellarmine, in deffence of this Letter, defines blind obedience thus: "obedience which is pure, perfect, and simple, with no discussion of what is commanded or why, but remaining satisfied that a command had been given.”

Allow me to quote from this site:

therealpresence.org/archives/Virtues/Virtues_003.htm

Bellarmine concludes in typical controversial style by answering the most serious objection which even Catholics sometimes make to the blind obedience of religious. “It is dangerous,” the argument runs, “for religious to trust their superiors so blindly, because the latter as fallible men are often mistaken, and therefore what began as obedience may end as a widely propagated error, or even as heresy.”

The St. Robert answers the objections with a parallel situation that exists in the Church as a whole:

If the danger in question is to be measured by the obedience of religious, much more should it be measured by the obedience of the simple people, who listen to their pastors or bishops preaching publicly and with all the adjuncta of authority. For although the people take no vow of obedience to their pastors or bishops, they are still bound to obey them according to the teaching of St. Paul. So that, willing or not, they have to render them blind obedience and credence in those things which are not obvious to them already.

Of course it can happen that a bishop or priest may be a secret heretic, trying to seduce the people and propagate his heresy. But God Himself and the vigilance of other pastors of souls will not permit this to go on for very long before it is properly referred to the judgment of the Holy See. Moreover, even though somewhere, by God’s permission, a credulous people should be easily seduced by their pastor, no Catholic would dare say that therefore the people should be discouraged from obeying their prelates, or should themselves become judges of their pastors, and decide on the doctrine that is being preached to them.

We know from present experience among the Lutherans that the danger of heresy is far greater by making this kind of concession to human liberty, than it will ever be from the simple obedience of the people. . . . Consequently, if the ordinary faithful must simply trust their pastors in the things which appertain to God, and render them corresponding obedience and respect, much more should religious obey and be subject to their superiors, perfectly and simply, and in that sense blindly, in whatever does not manifestly contravene the law of God.

 

[Friar_David_O.Carm]

St. Ignatius, in his “Letter on Obedience” insists on “blind” obedience. St. Bellarmine, in deffence of this Letter, defines blind obedience thus: "obedience which is pure, perfect, and simple, with no discussion of what is commanded or why, but remaining satisfied that a command had been given.”

With this definition, we do not practice this within my province. As I said, we have an open dialogue. For myself though (I can only really speak of the way I live out the Vow of Obedience), the ultimate decision is my superiors and I will obey.