The
Good of Authority
Is truth above authority
or authority above truth? What are the relations between both?
Even at the natural level, man first needs authority to learn
the truth: all children first learn upon the authority of their
parents and teachers, and later will be able to know by themselves
what they had first learnt by way of authority. Even then in adulthood,
there remain many truths which most people know upon authority
(e.g. how many adults know how to prove that the surface of a
disk is
pr2.
Most people know it upon the authority of their school teachers).
Yet at that natural level, man can reach some knowledge of reality
(truth) without authority.
But at the supernatural level, man cannot reach the knowledge
of supernatural realities (such as the mystery of the Holy Trinity)
without revelation. Thus St Thomas Aquinas teaches: “This
[sacred] doctrine is especially based upon arguments from authority,
because its principles are obtained by revelation: thus we ought
to believe on the authority of those to whom the revelation has
been made. Nor does this take away from the dignity of this doctrine,
for although the argument from authority based on human reason
is the weakest, yet the argument from authority based on divine
revelation is the strongest.” (Ia q.1 a.8 ad2m).
When God speaks, man must believe. This is the “principle
of Dogma” which was so important in Cardinal Newman’s
life: “First was the principle of dogma: my battle was with
liberalism; by liberalism I mean the anti-dogmatic principle and
its developments... From the age of fifteen, dogma has been the
fundamental principle of my religion: I know no other religion;
I cannot enter into the idea of any other sort of religion; religion,
as a mere sentiment, is to me a dream and a mockery” (Apologia,
ch.2).
Revealed truth must be proposed with authority; hence the “bible
alone” is not sufficient! If one relies on one’s own
interpretation, one cannot have the Catholic Faith, the true Faith.
Indeed where does the authority of the bible come from, if not
from the fact that the Church teaches it? St Augustine said: "I
would not believe the Gospels unless the authority of the Catholic
Church moved me thereto" (Contra Ep. Fund., 5.6). Without
that authority, faith is a mere opinion. Hence St Paul says: “how
shall they believe him, of whom they have not heard? And how shall
they hear, without a preacher? And how shall they preach unless
they be sent,” (Rom. 10:14-15). Our Lord Jesus Christ preached
with authority (Mt 7:29), and sent His apostles endowing them
with His own authority: “He that heareth you, heareth me”
(Lk. 10:16). A preacher without that “mission” has
no authority, and cannot preach the true Faith! This is how essential
authority is to the knowledge of revealed truth.
Now the rejection of authority is the mark of liberalism, the
heart of modern philosophy: one finds it both in those endowed
with authority, who do not know how to use it (e.g. Paul VI’s
1968 Credo is simply his profession of Faith: he did not impose
it), and those subject to authority who resent orders. Hence the
drama of Vatican II, when they wanted to propose the faith to
modern man in the language of modern man, without using solemn
judgements, without definition, thus without using supreme authority.
In the subsequent confusion, how could the faithful discern what
to believe? Faith is not in response to human authority, but to
divine authority: hence there is need that the human person endowed
with authority in the Church be transparent to our Lord Jesus
Christ, so that the faithful can see Jesus speaking in him. Now
that transparency essentially consists in the fidelity to transmit
that which he had received: indeed a window is transparent when
the image seen through it does not come from it (as from a TV
screen), but comes from behind and “passes through”
the window without deformation. Then it is clear that what he
teaches is not his own personal opinion, but that which came from
Christ himself, through the centuries of Faith. Hence novelty
is the sure sign of heresy, and fidelity to Tradition the sure
sign of orthodoxy.
But what if a faithful is deceived in that discernment and without
fault is led to believe certain errors because they are taught
by someone endowed with authority in the Church today? If the
object of his faith is “that which the Catholic Church believes
and teaches” for the motive that God has revealed it and
entrusted it to the Church, even if he is in error as to the content
of it, he has the true faith. Even Saints had been in error as
the content of the faith, even St Thomas whose notion of the Immaculate
Conception was inaccurate, or St Cyprian as to rebaptism. But
as St Augustine teaches, it was his love of the unity of the Church
(=the fact he put the Faith of the Church above his personal thinking)
that saved him (de Baptismo, 6:1,2-2,3).
However, if someone repels the authority of the Catholic Church,
even if he continues to hold certain truths that the Church teaches,
he no longer holds them “because they are taught by the
authority of God through the Church”: he has lost the very
motive of the Faith, he has lost the virtue of Faith. This is
how essential authority is to the true Faith.
Not only is authority necessary for Faith, it is also necessary
for evangelical perfection. Indeed St Thomas Aquinas – with
the whole Tradition of the Church – teaches that religious
perfection consists chiefly in the imitation of Christ, especially
of His obedience (IIa IIae q.186 a.5); now obedience requires
a superior with authority. And indeed it is a great blessing:
it is often very difficult to discern what is the Will of God
for us in concrete circumstances; in the daily life of devout
faithful, how can they know whether they are doing God’s
will or their own personal will? Within the boundaries of God’s
commandments, how can one discern between personal will and the
Will of God? That is where authority comes in: when one obeys
legitimate authority, especially religious authority, then one
knows he is doing God’s will. Even if there may be fault
on the part of the superior, so long as the command is not intrinsically
wrong, then one is still right to obey: the typical example is
assignments in a religious order; or to take the example of Archbishop
Lefebvre: when he was sent as Bishop of Tulle, perhaps there may
have been fault in those who relegated him in this small diocese
(since being an archbishop he should have been given an archbishopric),
but he did right in obeying, which he did with great humility
and without any complaint.
Take away the authority and you take away religious obedience,
you take away religious perfection, Christian perfection.
Even with regard to secular authority, the Church always upheld
the principle of authority. Cardinal Pie said: “for the
enlightened conscience of a minister of the Church, hostility
against governments is not possible, because it would be against
the very spirit of the Church, which is a spirit eminently patient
and conservative, and which, at the very time it does not approve
and accept certain acts and tendencies of (civil) power [e.g.
abortion laws, etc.], does not go to the point of ignoring the
good that can still be done through existing authority.”
And his commentator notes: “the soul of Mgr Pie is there.
He has such respect for authority that he respects it in all those
endowed with it, and, even when his duty obliges him to stand
against them, there are some means of defence that he will not
take, because while hurting the men, they would wound the authority.”
(Card. Pie, Pages Choisies, p. cii).
In our times, with such a crisis of authority, one ought not to
reject authority itself because it is abused or despised. One
ought to discern when it is still doing its duty (to provide for
common good: Rom. 13:1-5) while resisting its abuse (when it goes
against God’s Law: Act. 5:29). Those endowed with authority
(a father in a family, a superior in religious orders, etc.) ought
to strive “to be found faithful” (1 Cor. 4:2). Those
who are blessed to have good superiors – though not perfect
– should thank God for that and strive to practice even
better the virtue of obedience. To calumniate those in authority
(e.g. saying that they “prefer erring Popes to inerrant
Tradition”, which is certainly not true) do great harm in
undermining that great principle of authority, so necessary for
faith and virtue.
Fr François Laisney