Article III. On the Vow of Obedience

I say. The object of the vow of obedience, which is the most excellent of all the vows of Religion, because through it the Religious offers to God goods most intrinsic to himself, extends itself to all and only those things which the superior truly and properly commands, and which are contained either implicitly or explicitly in the rules and constitutions of the Order. - Cf. St. Alphonsus, n. 38.

Question 1. What distinction intervenes between the virtue and the vow of obedience?

Resp. The same which was indicated above concerning poverty; namely, the object of the vow is the external execution of the mandate of the superior, while the virtue reaches even to internal submission and makes obedience itself perfect. But by a Religious there are diligently to be avoided not only sins against the vow, but also against the virtue, which indeed is usually wounded more frequently. For sometimes it happens that a subject obeys the command of the Prelate wholly in external action, but with a reluctant, sad, and sick will; and then, although he satisfies the vow, nevertheless he recedes far from virtue. Moreover one must inspect of what sort that reluctance is; for if it is natural and consonant even with well-ordered nature, and yet does not delay or diminish the affection for obeying, it detracts nothing from the perfection of obedience, as the example of Christ the Lord counsels. Cf. Suarez, de Relig., tract. 10, lib. 4, cap. 15, n. 19. - Baller., note (a), p. 109.

Question 2. Are one or rather two sins committed in violation of the vow of obedience, no otherwise than in violation of chastity?

Resp. Only one, at least probably; for there would be two sins for this reason: one against the natural precept which prescribes submission to a legitimate superior, and the other against the vow, insofar as independently of the vow the superior has the right of commanding. But the whole right of the superior comes from the vow alone. Therefore . . . - Cf. St. Alphonsus, n. 46. - Varceno, vol. 1, p. 205, edit. VIII.

Question 3. When does a Religious sin gravely against the vow of obedience?

Resp. He sins gravely in the following cases, which rarely occur; namely, 1st, when he refuses to obey in grave matter a superior commanding in virtue of holy obedience, or in the name of Jesus Christ, or through other similar formulas, which are to be employed very rarely by Superiors; 2nd, when to a superior commanding he responds, "I do not wish to obey, I do not wish to do it, I will not do it," or something similar which smells of formal contempt of the authority commanding, even if the matter of the precept in this case is not grave; 3rd, when from disobedience there follows grave scandal of others, whether of subjects or of seculars, or grave inconvenience either for the community or for others, for example, for the salvation of souls, etc. But since the aforesaid cases rarely happen, commonly sins of Religious against obedience are to be reckoned as venial. Much more rarely still do sins committed against the virtue alone become mortal.

Question 4. Whom must one obey?

Resp. By force of the vow, one must obey only Superiors properly so called, that is, those who, either in the house, or in the province, or in the whole Religious family which they govern, have no one above themselves, unless the special constitutions of some Order dispose otherwise. The reason is that only with Superiors properly so called does authority reside. - I said by force of the vow, because right order and the prescription of the rule, and therefore the virtue of obedience, altogether demand that simple officials be faithfully obeyed in all things which pertain to their office.

Question 5. How must one obey?

Resp. That obedience may be altogether perfect, one must obey: 1st, from a supernatural motive, as the Apostle prescribes, Coloss. iii, 22: "Not serving to the eye, as pleasing men . . . serve the Lord Christ"; otherwise obedience, even if it were immune from sin, nevertheless would lack all merit and would be merely material; 2nd, cheerfully, or with joy and a willing soul, for in II Cor. ix, 9 it is said: "God loveth a cheerful giver"; 3rd, promptly, that is, either at once, or at the prescribed time and with due care, without sluggishness; 4th, completely, or by completing the whole work prescribed.

Question 6. Can religious Superiors command their subjects, even in virtue of holy obedience, that they themselves celebrate according to the intention prescribed by the constitutions or established by the Superiors themselves, with exceptions sanctioned by the constitutions or by legitimate custom being safe?

Resp. Affirmatively, the Sacred Congregation de Religiosis, on the day 23 March 1914.

Concerning the privileges of religious the new Code establishes a general principle:

§1. Any religion enjoys only those privileges which either are contained in this Code or have been granted directly to the same by the Apostolic See, any communication being excluded in the future.

§2. The privileges by which a regular Order rejoices belong also to nuns of the same Order, insofar as they are capable of them (Can. 613).

Therefore in the future communication ceases to be the source of the privileges of religious in the way in which it was before. Every religion must recognize its privileges well.¹

¹ Cf. Addenda, p. 1113, n. 59.

Concerning Exemption. 1st. Regulars, novices not excluded, whether men or women, with their houses and churches, except those nuns who are not subject to regular Superiors, are exempt from the jurisdiction of the local Ordinary, except in cases expressed by law (Can. 615). - Cf. Can. 615; 618; 631, §1; 1261, §2.

2nd. Therefore they are exempt from the visitation of the Bishop both as regards persons and as regards monasteries and churches. Except: 1st, monasteries of Nuns not subject to Regulars, and also of those subject to them as regards the custody of enclosure, for the care of which Bishops, as delegates of the Apostolic See, watch over them; 2nd, churches of seculars whose Parish Priest is a Religious; 3rd, churches of Regulars, if they are parishes, but only as regards those things which pertain to the parish and to the Parish Priest, insofar as he carries out that office, as is established by Benedict XIV, Const. Firmandis, 6 Nov. 1744. - Cf. Can. 512, §1, 2.

§1. Religions of simple vows do not enjoy the privilege of exemption unless it has been specially granted to them (Can. 618). Cf. St. Alphonsus, loc. cit. n. 75.

Concerning the Sacrament of Penance. In an exempt clerical religion, for hearing the confessions of the professed, of novices, and of others dwelling day and night in a religious house because of service, or education, or hospitality, or infirm health, delegated jurisdiction is conferred not only by the local Ordinary but also by their own Superior, who can grant it to priests from the secular clergy or from another religion. Cf. Can. 875 and 514, §1. The Superior grants, as also the local Ordinary does, this delegated jurisdiction for his professed, novices, and others above mentioned. He can grant this faculty not only to his own priests, but also to priests from the secular clergy and another religion.

As Regards Begging. §1. Regulars who from their institute are called and are mendicants can seek alms in the diocese where their religious house is established by the permission alone of their Superiors; but outside the diocese they need, moreover, permission given in writing by the Ordinary of the place in which they desire to collect alms.

§2. Let Ordinaries of places, especially of neighboring dioceses, not deny nor revoke this permission except for grave and urgent causes, if the religious house can in no way live from begging in the diocese alone in which it is established (Can. 621).

Concerning Irregularities and Vows. Major Superiors of an exempt clerical religion can dispense their subjects from all irregularities arising from an occult delict, except that which arises from voluntary homicide or abortion, or another brought to the judicial forum. Cf. Can. 990. Cf. St. Alphonsus, n. 109.

Superiors of an exempt clerical religion can dispense and irritate non-reserved vows with their subjects. - Cf. Can. 1313; 514, §1. They can commute the same. Cf. Can. 1314. The same also, as regards a promissory oath, can both dispense and commute. - Cf. Can. 1320.

Concerning Mass, Communion, and the Last Sacraments. §1. In every clerical religion, Superiors have the right and duty, by themselves or through another, of ministering Eucharistic Viaticum and extreme unction to the sick professed, novices, or others dwelling day and night in a religious house because of service, or education, or hospitality, or infirm health (Can. 514). - Cf. St. Alphonsus, nn. 121 and 122.

If there is question of a house of an exempt religion, the major Superior can grant permission of celebrating outside a church and oratory upon a sacred stone and in a decent place, but never in a bedroom, only for a just and reasonable cause, in some extraordinary case, and by way of an act. Cf. Can. 822, §4.

Concerning Particular Cases. 1st. They can dispense their subjects, with cause, in ecclesiastical laws, as Bishops can, for example, concerning fasting, abstinence, etc.; because they have quasi-episcopal jurisdiction.

2nd. Through an indult legitimately granted by the local Ordinary, the obligation of the common law ceases also for all religious dwelling in the diocese, with the vows and proper constitutions of any religion being safe (Can. 620).

This must be much attended to, lest someone think Canon 613 is opposed to this canon. Canon 620 contains the rule applied before and everywhere. S. C. de Rel., 1 Sept., 1912.