Should we obey? This question comes to the fore for traditional Catholics today. Amidst the handwringing it is easy to forget that there are precedents we can draw from as we work through such questions.
Recent events have led many Catholics to wonder if Marcel Lefebvre was right after all. Though he signed most of the documents of the Second Vatican Council, Lefebvre became the face of opposition to Conciliar reforms and the post Conciliar papacy. After setting up a traditional seminary in Econe, Lefebvre came out swinging with a public declaration in 1974 that in essence accused Pope Paul VI and the Council fathers of heretically modifying Church doctrine and practice. More ominously, he said:
It is therefore impossible for any conscientious and faithful Catholic to espouse this Reformation or to submit to it in any way whatsoever.
The only attitude of faithfulness to the Church and Catholic doctrine, in view of our salvation, is a categorical refusal to accept this Reformation.
Still, Lefebvre was not suspended until his ordination of priests in 1976 against the express warning of Paul VI, and was not excommunicated until his consecration of four bishops in 1988 against the express warning of John Paul II.
To this day, Lefebvre’s Society of Saint Pius X is not canonically reconciled with Rome, in large part because the Society worries that Rome will appoint a leader who will damage the Society’s charism and traditions.
In contrast, we consider the example of Blessed John of Parma.
John was an early Franciscan who joined the order at some point in the 1230s. He was elected Minister General in 1247. Saint Francis’ early companions rejoiced at his election, correctly hoping that he would do much to restore the order’s original charism of complete poverty. John zealously visited provincial houses from England to Spain to Germany. He appeared at the first Council of Lyons in 1245. Later, he was recalled by Pope Innocent IV on an embassy to heal the schism with the Greeks, which bore some fruit in the 1274 Council of Lyons.
Reliable sources suggest that he resigned the position of Minister General in 1257 by suggestion from Pope Alexander IV, perhaps prompted by moves against him from professors at the University of Paris. Thereafter, he retired to Greccio, where Saint Francis had reenacted the first Christmas. During this time he was prosecuted for allegedly subscribing to the Joachimist heresy, with the trial managed by his successor as Minister General Saint Bonaventure.
Hearing that the Greeks reneged on their reunion with Rome, he received permission from Pope Nicholas IV to go to Greece only to die en route in 1289.
Blessed John of Parma voluntarily resigned the position of Minister General of the Franciscan Order knowing that his successor would undermine the original rule of the order dedicated to strict poverty. He knew that this would jeopardize the many graces God intended to bestow on the Church and the world through the Franciscan order.
John also knew that in doing so he was placing himself at personal risk of persecution by his successors. Still, he consistently obeyed papal requests despite the demands of his station, and even sought out papal sanction prior to taking any initiative. He also submitted to persecution by Rome based on a very spotty pretense of heresy, knowing that the persecution likely stemmed from his total to commitment to Saint Francis’ original rule of poverty.
What are we to make of this? Was John wrong to submit to papal pressure and curial persecution? Did doing so fatally undermine the grace God wished to grant to the Church?
I cannot help but see in John’s life a better path for faithful priests and bishops chafing against authority. God’s grace can come through patient suffering and obedience as we see in the example of Saint Rita of Cascia and many others. I think we have to trust that God will always give us a path to keep and proclaim the faith while submitting to legitimate authorities in essential matters.
No comments:
Post a Comment