Obedience - A Maligned and Misunderstood Virtue

JMJ

The principle of obedience as laid down by St. Thomas says 'nothing' about trusting one's superiour. Probably because to make a principle subject to how one feels about the person issuing the command is the essence of liberalism.

The Catholic principle is laid out as follows:

The person issuing the command is in a position of authority over the inferior
The command is within the scope of the superior's authority
The command does not require the inferior to sin, either in the immediate or proximate case.
If the above conditions are met then the person has an obligation to obey. Disobedience in this case is sinful.
Whereas if #3 is lacking (sinful command) then the person has an obligation to disobey
Whereas if #1 or #2 is lacking the person practice greater virtue in obeying a command that is not obligatory.

Now if conditions 1,2, and 3 are met - then the inferior whether they trust the superior or not are obliged to obey and it is sinful not to do so.

The point is that you have to trust God.

In this case the person is obedient and places their trust in God to protect them because they (the inferior) have established within their power that the command does not constitute an immediate or proximate sin.

An example of these principles put into practice, in my opinion, is present in the discussions between Rome and the SSPX, more particularly between the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith (CDF) and Bishop Fellay, the Superior General of the SSPX.

Reference: Summa Theologica Second Part of the Second Part, Question 104

Comments

A Reply to Martin Blackshaw’s FLAWED Remnant article titled: FLAWED: SSPX Advice on Abortion-tainted Vaccines

+ JMJ An article has appeared in the Remnant (link to article) and I am afraid that there are a number of flaws in it that need to be addressed. The author, Martin Blackshaw, believes that both the Church and the SSPX are misapplying the principle of Moral Theology called 'Cooperation In Evil'. Unfortunately, Mr. Blackshaw rests most of his arguments on citing authors that support his position, without considering the possibility that they are wrong. This highlights a key factor in this crisis: ignorance of the faith and its application . I don't am not singling out Mr. Blackshaw for this criticism, I have observed that it applies to laity and religious, superior and subject a like. No one seems immune in this enduring crisis, myself included. I further believe that this ignorance is why so many Catholics, both traditional and non, rely on their gut feeling or "Catholic conscience" for charting their way through this crisis of the faith. While...

What Archbishop Lefebvre Said About the New Mass - SSPX.org

+ JMJ The New Mass is many things and one thing that it is is ambiguous. While there are a few Catholic elements in the Novus Ordo, but even those are lost in the morass of protestant simulation. It truly is a case of : P^3 Courtesy of SSPX.org: What Archbishop Lefebvre said about the New Mass

Rome,the SSPX and this time of Crisis - Updated

+ JMJ Obviously there's lots of events right now. First we have the April 1st - I almost thought it was April Fools - meeting between Pope Francis and Bishop Fellay. Nothing really news worthy as this is a natural progression as Rome appears to be considering fulfilling Archbishop Lefebvre's wish to 'accept us as we are'. Second we have the April 8th publication of what will be a verbose exhortation of the Synod of the Family. I'm willing to bet that the Pope will give with one hand (unilateral regularization of SSPX) and take with the other (ambiguous document that opens the flood gates of sin further). Much to pray for. P^3

Does the SSPX 'Reject the conclusions of the Second Vatican Council'? (Updated 2026-08-03)

+ JMJ Update: Dr. Lamont, in a Rorate article (link) , pointed out that : It is notable that the profession does not reject any text of the Second Vatican Council, but only states that the influence of the Council promoted deviations from the faith. Catholics may hold that the influence of an ecumenical council was noxious in some respects. It is only the authoritative teachings of a council that demand their assent; they do not have to approve of all the historical results that it led to. One may, for example, reasonably hold that the definitions of papal infallibility and universal jurisdiction of the First Vatican Council led to an exaggerated and harmful conception of papal power, while accepting the definitions themselves. Further what the SSPX actually wrote (link) : I acknowledge in particular that modern errors represent a dreadful threat to the whole of the Catholic order, and that their penetration into the life of the Church, under the influence of the Second Vatican ...

The Vatican and SSPX – An Organizational Culture Perspective

Introduction The recent and continuing interactions between the Vatican and the SSPX have been a great opportunity for prayer and reflection. The basis for the disagreement is theological and not liturgical. As noted by Dr. Lamont (2012), the SSPX theological position on the four key controversial aspects of the Second Vatican Council are base on prior theological work that resulted from relevant magisterial pronouncements. So it is difficult to understand the apparent rejection of the theological position of the SSPX.

Tradicat

Search This Blog