Article — Gury-Ballerini, Compendium of Moral Theology (8th ed., 1884)
Article III. On the Vow of Obedience
The vow of obedience is the most excellent of all the vows of Religion, since through it the Religious offers 1 and consecrates wholly to God the goods most intrinsic and most excellent to himself, namely the will and the intellect itself. Hence it is said, 1 Kings 15:22: "Obedience is better than victims." And Prov. 21:28: "An obedient man will speak victory."
1 ** Nevertheless note the things which the Author shortly after adds, n. following, that the matter of the vow does not extend itself to the internal faculties, but to the external execution alone of the command.
- Principles. - I. A Religious from the vow of obedience is held to all things which the Superior commands according to the rules and constitutions of the Order, either directly and expressly, or indirectly and implicitly. - St. Ligorius, n. 58. Nevertheless, that there be sin against the vow, it is required that the Superior truly command, and not only counsel; which indeed will be plain from the words, the manner of speaking, and the various circumstances of things.
II. The Superior has the right of commanding not only those things which are had explicitly in the rule or constitutions, such as abstinence, silence, etc., but also whatever things are implicitly contained in them, such as penalties against transgressors, and whatever pertains to the offices of the Community duly to be performed, or to its right administration. The reason is that a Religious binding himself to observing the special constitutions of the Order 2, obliges himself to all those things which have been wisely established or are prescribed for attaining this end.
2 ** This is not to be taken as if by vow a Religious binds himself to observing the Constitutions of the Order.
III. A Religious by force of his vow is not held to obey a Superior commanding a thing impossible, or evidently illicit, or gravely harmful to himself. - St. Ligorius, n. 47, etc. And surely he could not oblige himself to an impossible thing, since no one is held to the impossible; nor to a thing certainly illicit, since a vow cannot be a bond of iniquity; nor finally to a thing gravely harmful to himself, because this is alien to the mind of Religion, and heroic acts do not commonly and implicitly fall under the vow, just as they do not fall under a precept. Except, however, if there is question of offices to be fulfilled within the limits of religious life, for example, of caring for pestilent Religious, etc.
Hence a subject is not held to obey a Prelate ordering him to walk upon waters, etc.; but if examples are reported by which it is established that such obedience was approved by God and confirmed by miracles, it must be said that then the divine good pleasure by a singular and heavenly light was manifested both to the one commanding and to the one obeying.
- Questions. - QUESTION 1º. What difference intervenes between the virtue and the vow of obedience?
Resp. The same as was indicated above, n. 155, concerning poverty; namely, the object of the vow is the external execution of the command of the Superior, while the virtue reaches even to internal submission and effects perfect obedience itself.
But by a Religious there are diligently to be avoided not only sins against the vow, but also sins against the virtue, which indeed is more frequently accustomed to be injured. For it happens, would that it were more rarely, that a subject obeys the command of the Prelate integrally indeed by external action, but with a reluctant, sad, and sick will. Then, although he satisfies the vow, nevertheless he recedes far from the virtue 3.
3 ** One must inspect what sort of affection is repugnant to obedience. For if it is natural and also consonant with a nature well instituted, and nevertheless does not retard or diminish the affection of obeying, it takes nothing away from the perfection of obedience, as the example of Christ the Lord suggests. But if the repugnance is from the inordination of nature or custom, then either, notwithstanding the contrary impulse, the man promptly obeys, and thus nothing is taken away from the perfection of virtue; indeed, because of the difficulty overcome, the act will seem in some way more perfect. But if the repugnance retards or diminishes the affection of the will otherwise executing the commands, then obedience indeed will be imperfect, insofar as the contrary affections are voluntary; but the account of fault will be taken not indeed from the imperfection of obedience, as if the grade of perfection in the will obeying fell under precept, but from the inordination of affection toward other things, by which it happens that one sins in another kind of virtue. Cf. Suarez (De Relig., tr. 10, bk. 4, ch. 15, n. 19).
Therefore a Religious disobedient to a Superior truly commanding commits a double sin, the one against the natural precept, which prescribes submission to a legitimate superior, and the other against the vow. Hence in pious congregations of men or women leading life in common under the same Rule without the bond of vows, the disobedient are not exempt from sin if they are rebellious against superiors, but they commit one sin.
- QUESTION 2º. How does the solemn vow of obedience differ from the simple vow?
Resp. 1º Dispensation can much more easily be obtained from a simple vow than from a solemn vow, which can be dissolved only by the Pope and from a most grave cause.
Resp. 2º A simple vow indeed renders illicit an obligation which is contracted by a subject without the consent of the Superior, yet it does not per se make it invalid, unless perhaps the Superior by force of power over the will of the subject wishes to irritate such an obligation. But the solemn vow so binds the will of the subject to the authority of the Superior by an absolute, perpetual, and irrevocable oblation that the Religious can validly contract no further obligation, neither natural nor civil 4.
4 ** Understand this as to those things which are subject to the power of the Superior. For if the subject, for example, promises someone a secret, or a secret is committed to him, he certainly contracts an obligation concerning which there is no authority for the Superior. But as to those things which can be matter of obedience, the subject can indeed contract an obligation, for example, of celebrating Mass according to the intention of another, yet conditioned, namely unless the Superior disposes otherwise.
QUESTION 3º. Is a Religious held to obey in doubt whether the thing prescribed is licit or not?
Resp. Affirmative, because then presumption favors the Superior. Moreover the opposite opinion would disturb order in Religious families. - St. Ligorius, n. 47, and others commonly.
- QUESTION 4º. When does a Religious sin gravely against the vow of obedience?
Resp. He sins gravely in the following cases, which rarely occur, namely: 1º when he refuses to obey in grave matter a Superior commanding in virtue of holy obedience, or in the name of Jesus Christ, or by other similar formulas, which are very rarely to be used by Superiors; 2º when he responds to the Superior commanding: "I do not wish to obey, I do not wish to do it, I will not do it," or something similar which smacks of formal contempt of the authority of the one commanding 5; 3º when from disobedience there follows grave scandal of others, whether of subjects or seculars, or grave inconvenience either for the Community or for others, for example, for the salvation of souls, etc.
5 ** This has force even if the matter of the precept, viewed in itself, is not grave.
In other cases disobedience does not exceed venial sin; but since the aforesaid cases of mortal sin rarely occur, commonly the sins of Religious against obedience must be regarded as venial. - Much more rarely still will sins committed against the virtue alone become mortal.
- QUESTION 5º. To whom must obedience be given?
Resp. Obedience must be given not only to major Superiors, but also to inferiors, or ministers, or those placed over others who command from the mandate of superiors, since the authority which enjoins the command is the same 6.
6 ** These things are to be understood of the virtue of obedience; for a precept which constrains the subject by obligation of vow is usually reserved to the Superiors alone of the whole Convent or house, unless the special Constitutions of some Order dispose otherwise.
QUESTION 6º. How must obedience be given?
Resp. That the full perfection of obedience may stand, one must obey 1º from a supernatural motive, as the Apostle prescribes, Coloss. 3:22: "Not serving to the eye, as pleasing men.... Serve the Lord Christ." For otherwise obedience, even if it were immune from sin, would nevertheless lack all merit and would be merely material 7. - 2º Cheerfully, or with joy and a willing soul; for God loves a cheerful giver, 2 Cor. 9:7. - 3º Promptly, that is, either immediately or at the prescribed time, and with due care, without sluggishness. - 4º Entirely, or by completing the whole prescribed work.
7 ** That one obey the Superior as Christ the Lord is not required for the formal account of the virtue of obedience (see Suarez, De Relig., tr. 10, bk. 4, ch. 14, nn. 2-3); nor again is it required for the account of merit that someone act from a supernatural motive, as has been shown elsewhere (see tom. 1, n. 32, qq. 6, 7, 8).