OBEDIENCE
18ii
OBEDIENCE
The element that difTerentiates it adequately from
other good habits is found in the last part of the defini-
tion already given. Stress is put upon the fact that
one not only does what is actually enjoined but docs
it with a mind to formally fall in with the will of the
commander. It is in other words the homage rendered
to authority which ranks it as a distinct virtue.
Among the virtues obedience holds an exalted place
but not the highest. That distinction belongs to the
\artues of faitli. hope, anil charity (q. v.) which unite
us immediately with Almighty God. Amongst the
moral virtues obedience enjoys a primacy of honour.
The reason is that the greater or lesser excellence of a
moral virtue is determined by the greater or lesser
value of the object which it qualifies one to put aside
in order to give oneself to God. Now amongst our
various possessions, whether goods of the body, or
goods of the soul, it is clear that the human will is the
most intimiitely personal and most cherished of all.
So it happens I hat obedience, which makes a man yield
up the most dearly prized stronghold of the individual
soul in order to do the good pleasure of his Creator,
is accounted the gre;itcst of the moral virtues. As to
whom we are to obey, there can be no doubt that first
we are bound to offer an unreserved service to Al-
mighty God in all His commands. No real difficulty
against this truth can be gathered from putting in
juxtaposition the unchangeableness of the natural law
and an order, such as that given to Abraham to slay
his son Isaac. The conclusive answer is that the ab-
solute sovereignty of God over life and death made it
right in that particular instance to undertake the kill-
ing of an innocent human being at His direction.
On the other hand the obligation of obedience to su-
periors under God admits of limitations. We are not
bound to obey a superior in a matter which does not
fall within the limits of his preceptive power. Thus for
Instance parents, although entitled beyond question
to the submission of their children until they become
of age, have no right to command them to marry.
Neither can a superior claim our obedience in contra-
vention of the dispositions of a higher authority.
Hence, notably, we cannot heed the behests of any hu-
man power no matter how venerable or undisputed as
against the ordinances of God. All authority to which
we bow has its source in Him and cannot validly be
used against Him. It is this recognition of the au-
thority of God vicariously exorcised through a human
agent that confers upon the act of obedience its special
merit. No hard and fast rule can be set down for de-
termining the degree of guilt of the sin of disobedience.
Regarded formally as a deliberate scorning of the au-
thoritj' itself, it would involve a divorce between the
soul and the supernatural principle of charity which is
tantamount to a grevious sin. As a matter of fact
many other things have to be taken account of, as the
greater or less advertence in the act, the relatively im-
portant or trifling character of the thing imposed,
the manner of enjoining, the right of the person who
commands. For such reasons the sin will frequently
be esteemed venial.
RlcKABY, Aquina.1 Elhicui (London, 1896); St. Thomas Aqcinas, Summa Theologica (Turin, 1885); Tapparelli, Dritto Jfaturale (Rome, 1900) ; Spiraoo, The Catechism Explained (New York, 1899).
Joseph F. Delant.
Obedience, Religious, is that general submission which religious vow to God, and voluntarily promise to their superiors, in order to be directed by them in the ways of perfection according to the purpose and consti- tutions of their order. It consists, according to Lessius (DeJustitia, II, xlvi, 37), in a man's allowing himself to be governed throughout his life by another for the sake of God. It is compo.sed of three elements: (a) the sacri- fice offered to God of his own independence in the generality of his actions, at least of such as are ex- terior; (b) the motive, namely, personal perfection,
Jind, as a rule, also the performance of spiritual or cor-
poral works of mercy and charity; (c) the express or
implied contract with an order (formerly al.so with a
person), whichaceeptstheobligationto lead him to the
end for which he accepts its laws and direction. Re-
ligious obedience, therefore, does not involve that ex-
tinction of all individuahty, so often alleged against
convents and the Church; nor is it unlimited, for
it is not possible either physically or morally that a
man should give himself up absolutely to the gui<lance
of another. The choice of a superior, the object of
obedience, the authority of the hierarchical Church,
all exclude the idea of arbitrary rule.
I. — The Canonical Rule of Obedience. — A. — The Su- periors. — By Divine law, religious persons arc subject to the hierarchy of the Church; first to the pope, then to the bishops, unless exempted by the pope from episcopal jurisdiction. This hierarchy was instituted by Christ in order to direct the faithful not only in the way of salvation, but also in Christian perfection. The vow of obedience in the institutes approveil by the Holy See is held more and more to be made equally to the pope, who communicates his authority to the Roman congregations entrusted with the direction of religious orders. The superiors of the dilTcnnt or- ders, when they are clerics and exempt from cpiscoijal jurisdiction, similarly receive a jiart of this authority; and every one who is placed at the head of a commu- nity is invested with the dumestii^ authority necessary for its good government; the vow by which the re- ligious offers to God the obedience which he promises to his superiors confirms and defines this authority. But the right to demand obedience in virtue of the vow does not necessarily belong to all superiors; it is ordinarily reserved to the head of the community; and in order to enforce the obligation, it is necessary that the superior should make known his intention to bind the conscience; in certain orders such expressions as "I will", "I command", have not such binding force. The instructions of the Holy See require that the power of binding tlie conscience by command .shall be employed with the utmost prudence and discretion.
B. — The liniits of the obligation. — The commands of superiors do not extend to what concerns the inward motion of the will. Such at least is the teaching of St. Thomas (II-II, Q. cvi, a. 5, and Q. clxxxvi, a. 2). Obedience is not vowed absolutely, and without limit, but according to the rule of each order, for a superior cannot command anything foreign to, or outside, his rule (except in so far as he may grant dispensations from the rule). No appeal lies from his order, that is to say, the obligation of obedience is not suspended by any appeal to higher authority; but the inferior has always the right of extra-judicial recourse to a higher authority in the order or to the Holy See.
II. — The Moral Significance. — The religious is bound morally to obey on all occasions when he is bound canonically, and whenever his disobedience would offend against the law of charity, as for instance by bringing discord into the community. By reason of the vow of obedience and of the religious profession a deliberate act of obedience and submission adds the merit of an act of the virtue of religion to the other merits of the act. This extends even to the obedience of counsel which goes beyond matters of regular ob- servance, and is also limited by the prescriptions of higher laws, whether human or Divine.
III. — The Evangelical Foundation. — The evangelical foundation of religious obedience is first of all found in the perfect accord of that obedience with the spirit of the Gospel. Freedom from ambition which leads a man to choose a position of inferiority, implies a spirit of humility which esteems others as superior, and willingly yields them the first place; the sacrifice of his own independence and his own will presupposes in a high degree that spirit of self-denial and mortifica- tion which keeps the passions under proper restraint;
