Posted on by Kurt Bodling

St. Benedict on silence

“Let us do as the prophet says: ‘I have said: I will keep my ways so that I will not offend with my tongue. I have guarded my speech. I have held my peace and humbled myself and was silent, even from speaking good things’ (Ps. 39:1-2). Here the prophet demonstrates that if we are not to speak of good things, for the sake of silence, it is even more vital that we should not speak of evil lest we sin, for we shall be punished for that as a sin. No matter how perfect the disciple, nor how good and pious his speech he rarely should be given permission to speak for: ‘In much speaking, you shall not escape sin’ (Prov. 10:19). The master should speak and teach, the disciple should quietly listen and learn. No matter what must be asked of a superior, it must be done with humility and reverent submission. We always condemn and ban all small talk and jokes; no disciple shall speak such things.”

Saint Benedict. The Rule of St. Benedict. Translated, with introduction and notes by Anthony C. Meisel and M.L. del Mastro. NY : Doubleday, 1975, page 56.

Note: This is the whole 6th chapter; but not the only thing Benedict says about Silence in his Rule. He would today have included some proscriptions about social media, I’m sure. Including, no doubt, blogs that quote the Rule.

His condemnation here of levity probably strikes us as too harsh. But haven’t you noticed that so much of what passes for comedy and joking is done at the expense of someone else? It can really hurt and isn’t necessarily assuaged with an “Oh, I was only joking.”

Posted on by Kurt Bodling

suffering obedience

Note:
We may say we want to ‘be like Christ’ or to ‘follow Jesus.’ But saying that we often forget that Jesus is always the Suffering Servant. It’s simple: We want to be like Jesus; Jesus suffered; therefore we will suffer. We won’t necessarily suffer to the point of the cross, but we can’t avoid some amount of suffering in this world so out of whack with what God wants.

Quote:
“Christ is the measure of all things for our faith and for our obedience. What characterizes this obedience of Christ and makes it a mark of his messianic quality, as well as an example for his disciples, is not the external performance of good works, which the Pharisees also practiced, but his patient suffering. On this point the evangelists and the other writers of the New Testament are in full agreement. Obedience under the authority of Christ is first and foremost suffering obedience. The ethos of the Sermon on the Mount is first and foremost suffering obedience.” (p. 248)

Source: Elert, Werner. The Christian Ethos. Philadelphia: Muhlenberg Press, 1957.

Posted on by Kurt Bodling

motivations for our obedience

Note:
The difference between motivations based in the Law and motivations based in the Gospel is clear. The one is compulsion, the other is freedom. The one arises from fear, the other from love. The one from threats, the other from acceptance.

Quote:
“Obedience under the authority of Christ differs, therefore, from obedience under the law. The law as a law of retribution compels obedience because it offers hopes of reward and the threat of punishment. Motivation springs from a desire for self-preservation. Obedience under Christ’s authority, on the other hand, includes renunciation to the point of sacrifice of self. It is not enough to serve isolated commands, we must fit ourselves into the law of life of him who is the measure of all things. That requires faith, unconditional confidence in his person and his divine authorization.” (p. 248)

Source: Elert, Werner. The Christian Ethos. Philadelphia: Muhlenberg Press, 1957.

Posted on by Kurt Bodling

religious obedience

Note: Obedience in the sense of the evangelical counsels is a vow taken by religious which assumes that the superior will not demand anything contrary to the will of God. These vows don’t restrict persons so much as free them up from the necessity of making so many decisions; someone else becomes responsible for that and the vowed person can focus on God more readily. At least in theory, I suppose. It seems that it would have to be really hard for someone who has taken this vow to stand up and tell a superior, “No, what you’re telling me to do is contrary to God’s will.” And it seems that it could be easy for a superior to abuse the relationship. You understand, of course, that I have not taken a vow of religious obedience and don’t personally know how it goes.

Quote:
“Religious obedience 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 constitutions of their order. It consists, according to Lessius (De Justitia, II, xlvi, 37), in a man’s allowing himself to be governed throughout his life by another for the sake of God. It is composed of three elements:

  • the sacrifice offered to God of his own independence in the generality of his actions, at least of such as are exterior;
  • the motive, namely, personal perfection, and, as a rule, also the performance of spiritual or corporal works of mercy and charity;
  • the express or implied contract with an order (formerly also with a person), which accepts the obligation to lead him to the end for which he accepts its laws and direction.

Religious obedience, therefore, does not involve that extinction of all individuality, 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 guidance of another. The choice of a superior, the object of obedience, the authority of the hierarchical Church, all exclude the idea of arbitrary rule.”

Source: Vermeersch, Arthur. “Religious Obedience.” The Catholic Encyclopedia. Vol. 11. New York: Robert Appleton Company, 1911.