Being Trustworthy vs Trusting Someone

JMJ

Questions:

Is Trust Subjective?
Is being Trustworthy objective?
Does a Superior have to be trustworthy?

I previously discussed whether I trust someone is subjective or objective in this article. The answer is simply yes because 'subjective' refers to a personal perspective, feeling or opinion.

My personal perspective on whether I decide to trust (place confidence in ...) another person.

Now whether a person is trustworthy is another question altogether:

Trustworthy: worthy of confidence,able to be relied on as honest or truthful. Synonyms:reliable, dependable, honest, honorable, upright, principled, true, truthful, as good as one's word, ethical, virtuous, incorruptible, unimpeachable, above suspicion;

responsible, sensible, levelheaded;loyal, faithful, staunch, steadfast, trusty;safe, sound, reputable, discreet.

Whether a person is trustworthy is another question altogether and this could be based in facts as we have a person's external actions. For example has he exhibited actions where he betrayed a confidence or acted in an untrustworthy manner.

In this meaning the majority of the hierarchy is completely untrustworthy, Pope Francis included.

Keep in mind I'm talking objective points where someone has demonstrably betrayed a trust. Not something the results for various rumours etc.

Now does this have a bearing on whether or not we obey a superiors command?

In the Summa defines the facets of obedience as below:

So 'trust' is not in the equation.

The question is whether or not obeying someone who is not trustworthy is an occasion of sin.

Here's the key element: We don't KNOW if an untrustworthy person (such as Pope St. John Paul II, at best he was weak; Pope Benedict XVI, he tried to get Archbishop Lefebvre to compromise immediately after signing the protocol; Pope Francis, just look at the FFI) is going to betray our trust, we BELIEVE it.

As discussed earlier, belief is (in this context) subjective.

So ...

While determining if a person is 'Trustworthy' can be objective, requiring greater prudence, deciding to 'trust' the person remains subjective.

There are two issues that I have in disobeying a command that meets the criteria for obedience.

First, is that it makes obedience subjective reducing authority to the opinion of the person receiving the order.

Second, we don't know the future, God does. So when someone says "I know that he is going to betray ..." this is actually a prophecy. It is an expression of a belief as opposed to knowledge.

Rome's Invitation to Engage in Discussion

Now here's something that is interesting: the interactions between the SSPX from 2001 onwards.

When Rome wanted the SSPX to engage in discussions in 2000, they decided to add preconditions ... here's what Bishop Fellay wrote in 2008:

From the beginning when Rome approached us and proposed some solutions, that is, at the beginning of 2001, we clearly stated that the manner in which Church authorities were treating the problems raised by those who desired to attempt the experience of Tradition with Rome did not inspire confidence in us. Logically we had to expect to be treated in like manner once the issue of our relationship with Rome would have been settled. Since that time, and in order to protect ourselves, we have been asking for concrete actions which would unequivocally show Rome’s intentions towards us: the traditional Mass for all priests, and the withdrawal of the decree of excommunication. These two measures were not sought directly in view of gaining some advantage for ourselves, but to re-instill into the Mystical Body a breath of traditional life, and thus, indirectly, help to bring about a sound rapprochement between the Society and Rome. (Tradicat: A Look Back SUPERIOR GENERAL’S LETTER TO FRIENDS AND BENEFACTORS #73 - October 2008 )

So how does this jive with the teaching on obedience?

Basically, prior to engaging in discussions the SSPX lacked confidence (ie trust) in the prelates because at that very moment they had instigated a canonical intervention of the FSSP. In this intervention they overturned the election of the Superior General and changed both the seminary professors and curriculum.

I'm wondering which elements of obedience were present.

What was the 'order'? Was it simply an invitation?

From Rome's perspective, the SSPX does not have a canonical structure within the Catholic, so beyond the Pope, their reporting structure is in the grey area. At that point PSJP2 was in the advanced stages of parkinson's so I have no idea how much he was able to communicate.

While Cardinal Hoyos had authority to negotiate with the SSPX, I don't think he had authority over them.

So if this is the case, obedience is optional.

This does seem to be a key element as things got really interesting when it became obvious that Pope B16 was more interested in proceeding with a canonical regularization. At that point the SSPX seemed to have examined the 'command' in the light of obedience - as it was confirmed as coming from the Pope.

How about immediate or proximate sin?

Well we know that at that precise moment (2001) the FSSP was being forced to compromise by the exact same prelate.

While this had a bearing from the perspective of prudence, from obedience it does not. It simply forces you to examine and dig in deeper to determine if sin is buried somewhere in the immediate or proximate sense.

Not knowing the exact nature of the request, it is hard to determine if obedience was an object or not.

So, from a sphere of authority, it appears that obedience was optional (assumption that due to their lack of a canonical situation, the SSPX is outside of the normal lines of authority).

From a perspective of sinfulness, would it be sinfully imprudent to engage with Rome when they are persecuting an order that arose from the SSPX in 1988?

On this question I am less settled.

However, in the area of prudence, placing pre-conditions was obviously a good idea, especially as the freedom for the Tridentine Mass was earlier discussed by Archbishop Lefebvre.

In addition we find on the SSPX.ca copy of the letter that Rome attempted to impose an ultimatum on the SSPX:

Clarifying the ultimatum from Cardinal Castrillon Hoyos. In 2007 the traditional Mass is freed for all priests, but before the decree of excommunication is withdrawn, Cardinal Hoyos wants to impose conditions upon us. We launch a new Rosary Crusade to obtain the withdrawal of the decree of excommunication. (Source: SSPX.ca)

Well, at least we know have that played out.

P^3

The myth of the Hermeneutic of Continuity - Rorate Caeli

+ JMJ Interestingly the complete acceptance of the Second Vatican Council (without reservations) is required of the SSPX. Just when people are starting to wonder how it came to this! Courtesy of Rorate Caeli P^3

A Look Back: Archbishop Lefebvre’s Prophetic Address to The Remnant, 1976

+ JMJ Looking back is important to understand why we are where we are in this crisis. Courtesy of RemnantNewsPaper P^3 FOR THE FIRST TIME ONLINE: Archbishop Lefebvre’s Prophetic Address to The Remnant, 1976 Written by Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre Introduction by Michael J. Matt More than forty years ago—during the disastrous reign of Pope Paul VI, the latest candidate for a Vatican-issued Halo Award, by the way—my father, Walter L. Matt, organized the first large scale public reception in the U.S. for the late Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre. It was held at the Radisson South Hotel, Minneapolis, on Tuesday, May 12, 1976, and its stated purpose was to assist the Archbishop in gaining a stronger foothold for the Society of St. Pius X in the States during the unprecedented crisis Blessed Pope Paul had helped unleash on the Church. On that occasion Archbishop Lefebvre delivered ...

Of the Church and the Pope - Fr. Calmel O.P.

+ JMJ Once again, looking back to see if the 'Traditional Catholics' in the early days of this crisis of the Church had a sufficient view to realize the roots of the crisis. The root: The Pope Hence when the Pope is 'righted' the Church will be 'righted'. P^3 Courtesy of SSPXasia Fr. Roger Calmel, O.P. This essay by Fr. Roger Calmel, O.P. (1914-75) helps us in these difficult times to preserve our love of the Church. More than 30 years after its first publication, this article retains all its relevance, so much so that it even seems to have been written for our time, in which the crisis in the Church deepens at an unprecedented pace. This essay will help the reader to think clearly, keep the Faith, and maintain serenity in the troubled times we are navigating. “My country has hurt m e,”wrote a young poet in 1944 during the purge 1 when the head of state [Charles De Gaulle] implacably pursued the sinister job that had been in the wo...

Canonical Mission and State of Emergency - A Response to Mr. John Salza - Part B

+ JMJ I was trying to think of a way to map out the time course I discussed in Part A of this article. Early this morning it came to me that this is more about obedience and duty than canon law. As is my wont, I mapped out my thoughts (see image) to draw linkages between the core concepts. My conclusion is that, at least subjectively, Archbishop Lefebvre had sufficient information to make good decisions concerning whether or not he was obliged to obey. I know that the Jesuits, some Sedevacantists and the priests that left over the years will not agree with my thoughts. So be it. The core pieces of information include: Attacks against the SSPX were launched because they kept the Tridentine Mass and the pre-conciliar understanding of the Truths of the Faith. The authorities in the Church were willing to go against the laws of the Church. The same authorities encouraged the various dangers to the Faith embedded in popular interpretations of ambiguo...

Validity of new rite of episcopal consecrations - Courtesy of SSPX.org

+ JMJ In the blogosphere there are number of responses to this crisis in the Catholic Church that lead to conclusions that run counter to Catholic Doctrine and Dogmas - if taken to their logical conclusion. The validity of the New Rite of Episcopal consecrations is one such hotspot within more extreme sections of the 'traditionalist' culture. Validity of new rite of episcopal consecrations Courtesy of SSPX.org Why the new rite of episcopal consecration is valid Introduction This comprehensive study was compiled to settle a debate that has been circulating in traditional Catholic circles. Some writers have examined the new rite of episcopal consecration and concluded that it must be invalid. Since this would cause manifest problems if it were true and due to the heightened awareness of such a theory, we present a study of this question concluding that it is valid. Following the Council, in 1968 a new rite for the ordination of bishops was promulg...

Tradicat

Search This Blog