+
JMJ
The Obedience of the Jesuits
There is one religious order that is usually put forward as the paragon of obedience: The Jesuits.While according to Fr. Harvanek SJ, the Jesuit practice of obedience changed after the Second Vatican Council, we are primarily concerned with how St. Ignatius understood obedience and its ideal practice within the Jesuits. A letter to the Portuguese Jesuit, penned by St. Ignatius in 1553, describes in detail the ideal of perfect obedience.
In this letter, St. Ignastius exhorts the Portuguese Jesuits to a very high degree of obedience and as the word cloud of the top 100 words shows how the words superior and obedience dominate the letter.
Near the end of the letter St. Ignatius deals with the concept of 'blind obedience' – that if taken out of context could lead to a great deal of trouble.
The third means to subject the understanding which is even easier and
surer, and in use among the holy Fathers, is to presuppose and
believe, very much as we are accustomed to do in matters of faith,
that what the superior enjoins is the command of God our Lord and His
holy will. Then to proceed blindly, without injury of any kind, to
the carrying out of the command, with the prompt impulse of the will
to obey. So we are to think Abraham did when commanded to sacrifice
his son Isaac [Gen. 22:2-3]. Likewise, under the new covenant, some
of the holy Fathers to whom Cassian refers, as the Abbot John, who
did not question whether what he was commanded was profitable or not,
as when with such great labor he watered a dry stick throughout a
year. Or whether it was possible or not, when he tried so earnestly
at the command of his superior to move a rock which a large number of
men would not have been able to move.
We see that God our Lord sometimes confirmed this kind of obedience
with miracles, as when Maurus, Saint Benedict's disciple, going into
a lake at the command of his superior, did not sink. Or in the
instance of another, who being told to bring back a lioness, took
hold of her and brought her to his superior. And you are acquainted
with others. What I mean is that this manner
of subjecting one's own judgment, without further inquiry, supposing
that the command is holy and in conformity with God's will, is in use
among the saints and ought to be imitated by any one who wishes to
obey perfectly in all things, where manifestly there appears no sin.
(
http://www.library.georgetown.edu/woodstock/ignatius-letters/letter25
)
If someone were to read the letter, missing or dismissing the highlighted sentence, the Catholic world would be led into ruin. Without this key phrase, the Church would be led to believe that whatever "the superior enjoins is the command of God our Lord and His holy will".
While St. Ignatius differs with St. Thomas concerning the degree of virtue of simply obeying a superior's commands, they agree on the key element: A sinful command cannot be obeyed.
Your post is quite apropos of the whole mask thing discussed elsewhere.
ReplyDeleteWhat if our Abbot John, who cheerfully obeyed the command to water a dry stick for a year, were here with us today.
Would he cheerfully obey the mask mandates?
To answer that question we have to compare the two commands and their attendant circumstances.
Are the authorities legitimate?
Yes in both cases.
Are the commands rational?
Viewed from the standpoint as to whether they actually achieve good material results, no in both cases.
Are the commands for the common good?
Again, no in both cases. The stick isn't going to grow, and will produce no fruit or wood for anyone. The masks don't protect anyone.
Yet Abbot John watered the stick. Why?
For two reasons. First, from the material standpoint, there was no *harm* (no sin), either to himself or to others, in doing so. At worst, the act was simply a waste of time. Second, from the *spiritual* standpoint, this was a great opportunity for Abbot John to practice humble obedience. So it was of spiritual benefit to him personally, thus in that respect not even a waste of time.
Would Abbot John wear the mask?
No, for two reasons. First, wearing the mask is materially harmful. It is not merely useless and a waste of time, but quite likely actually increases disease of various kinds (e.g. bacterial infections around the mouth), and can cause oxygen deprivation. Second, wearing a mask is spiritually harmful. It encourages the evil authorities in their tyranny, causes dissension in communities, depersonalizes people, and worst of all, it is a perfectly clear sign that you *agree* that the mask mandate is a rational order, when it is not. If you are an informed person and are thus aware that it is not, then every time you wear the mask you are LYING to yourself and the world; pretending that you believe something you don't believe.
Finally, the stick watering thing was a matter between Abbot John and his superior alone. John surely wasn't wasting water that was needed by the community, and he wasn't scandalizing the community. Everyone knew that such "crazy" orders were given precisely in order to test the virtue of subjects. No one was expected to *believe* that watering a dry stick was a materially rational thing to do.
The mask thing is quite different. The authorities are most vigorously insisting that it is materially *rational* to wear masks. By wearing one, you declare to the community that you agree that the order is *not* crazy, when it actually is. So you are scandalizing others.
Finally, lest I cause scandal myself, I have to grant that a *particular* person has his particular circumstances to consider. Thus you may have to wear a mask even if you know better, in order to keep a job, etc. However, a pro tip: You can almost always do so while *also* letting people know one way or another that you don't believe the BS. That way you can avoid making a liar of yourself, or aiding the tyranny.
I have never once worn the mask, and I prefer to just adamantly refuse regardless. But that's just me.