Following Orders, in Church and elsewhere

A couple of really great posts at Disputations and Internet Monk collided in my brain. I have pieced together the wreckage to form some insights on how people relate to Church and to God. I am really stepping out on a limb because I am going to disagree substantially with Disputations, a very risky enterprise. He describes an order given to his ROTC father to shine a ship’s bell  and draws some lessons on the difference between obedience to Church doctrines and agreement with Church doctrines—an important distinction. He makes the point that if we don’t assume the right of the church to command obedience then mere agreement allows us to pick and choose those church doctrines we agree with and will consent to follow. I hope I summarized this right—if not, I apologize.

I’m critical of the approach because, shockingly for Disputations, it’s set up as an “either-or” proposition where I definitely see this as a “both-and.” I don’t dispute obedience as a necessary virtue but I believe that a large part of obedience follows and requires “agreement” and exploring agreement is necessarily part of a good faith attempt to follow the Church's orders even when not doubting the Church's overall authority.

His bell order analogy is so useful, I’d like to expand it to highlight my own points. Thousands of cadets in the seagoing military services have been given this very same order. For those of you who have not been to sea, this ranks as a singularly stupid order. Ship’s bells, made of brass, corrode quickly in sea and salt air. A shined bell will revert to its former condition within hours or days. The corrosion is surface corrosion only, affecting only the bell’s appearance-- it does not affect the operation of the bell. It takes decades of non-polishing before the bell is even slightly affected. Bells are typically shined only for visits by dignitaries and admirals.

I was once also a cadet and was given, if possible, an even more stupid order. I was ordered to shine the brass rudder of the ship’s small boat stored on deck. The visiting admiral would have to walk pass the small boat and “everything” in his field of view was to be "shiny." The brass rudder was rectangular, about 18 inches by 2 feet. It is subject to even more harsh conditions than the bell. It is actually frequently immersed in salt water whenever the small boat is used. I had several hours of mind-numbing grueling labor ahead of me. To entertain myself in this 1970’s project, I decided to begin the project by “shining” a large “peace symbol” into the rudder. I had finished the peace symbol, but not the rest of the rudder when a passing officer noticed my handiwork. Words like ‘berserk” and “apoplectic” are inadequate to describe the officer’s reaction. He did immediately order a work party of 7 more cadets to polish the entire rudder to obliterate the peace sign. Hours later, we were mostly successful, but the peace sign was still slightly more shiny than the rest of the rudder and was faintly visible until the rudder retuned to its natural corroded state a few days later. As a postscript, these seven cadets really need lessons in forgiveness and “letting go” because they still bitterly remind me of this incident 30 years later.

This is a lead-in to the observation that there are many kinds of military orders and the Church’s orders are no different. How we respond is not as black and white as it might first appear. Some orders are very direct. In fact, the military has established step-by-step standard procedures for routine yet dangerous operations like ammunition handling, fueling operations, live firing exercises and similar events. This is what is meant in the military when something is done “by the numbers.” The point of such a “by the numbers” order is to reduce independent thought, establish conformity in thought and action, and to make sure some idiot doesn’t exercise creativity in stacking ammunition in, for example, a peace symbol shape. The church gives us similar “by the numbers orders.“ Conformity and uniformity of action are often virtues. I agree with Disputations on how we should respond to these orders.

There is another type of military order that is at the exact opposite end of the spectrum. Amazingly, in light of the rudder incident (and others) I had a successful military career. Orders at the other end of the spectrum are as vague as you can imagine, yet no less enforceable. This type of order is instantly recognized by fans of Star Trek (which itself adopted naval terminology). Some crisis aboard the Starship Enterprise would erupt, usually in the engine room, as the failing dilithium crystals needed repair and change out in the middle of a battle with Klingons. Repairs would have to be done in a hurry, in combat and while operating at full maneuvering speed dodging photon torpedoes. Scotty would explain the whole situation, the logistical nightmares, lack of time, manpower and materials necessary to do the job right and await the orders from Captain Kirk. Kirk would respond, “Make it so.” I received many such orders in my career. These essentially amount to “accomplish the mission, with inadequate resources, don’t bother me with the details and do it any way you want as long as it works. I am relying on your trained initiative and leaderhship to do the job right.” These orders are given when conditions are uncertain and unpredictable and you want the person receiving the orders to exercise maximum flexibility, creativity and freedom of action. I believe the Church often gives us these types of orders as well. Obedience alone will doom the enterprise. Full agreement in the overall mission and goals and full knowledge of the big picture is needed. A lot of advance time and effort is need to ensure that the person executing the orders is well trained, understands the orders and understands the organization’s goals and missions and has the creativity, passion and intelligence to perform in ways that cannot be predicted in advance. There are several paths to success in this scenario.

Here is such an order: “Love thy neighbor as thyself.” Make it so. No details will follow.

Finally, we recognize some orders are garbled in transmission. This happens for two reasons. The order is improperly framed, or improperly understood. Here’s an example of an order improperly framed. My 10 year old son need a physical exam to go on a scout camp. This was his first non-pediatric physical exam, and certain indignities (turn and cough) were suffered for the first time. He finally was given a plastic cup, and directed to go to  the bathroom and urinate in it, then place the snap-on lid on the cup and return it to the nurse. He had a puzzled look on his face. He could not imagine any reason why responsible medical professionals would direct him to perform such a task. Was this some kind of marksmanship test? Hand-eye coordination? Hidden camera? He shrugged his shoulders, and went into the bathroom. There, he filled the cup, as directed. Knowing that there was no possible use for the stuff now in the cup, he poured it out into the toilet, rinsed out the cup and snapped on the lid--also as directed. Exiting the bathroom, he handed the empty rinsed cup with lid to the baffled nurse. The order was not correctly given: important details were left out. It was followed precisely as directed, however.

Sometimes the Church does this, too. Ecclesia semper reformanda est. CCC 769 makes it clear that the Church is on its way to perfection. That means some of its orders may have been incomplete or expressed poorly. Here is my strongest disagreement with Disputations. I think it is not a violation of my duty to obedience to consider the possibility that the particular Church order is incomplete, perhaps mistaken or improperly expressed. Important point, however: If I conclude that is the case, that does not mean I get to ignore the order. I may however, follow what I reasonably believe to be the spirit of the order. How many parents have ever said to their children, “Do what I meant, not what I said!” That’s the concept I’m talking about here.

Another reason for confusion is demonstrated by this excellent post by Internet monk. He makes the excellent point that what we think we hear as the order is not necessarily what the order was. Here are his words:

I know it is possible to upend a lot of our Christianity under a ruthless psychological examination. The need for God to exist, the need to be right about morality and the afterlife, and the need for our answers to work are presuppositions with many of us. When we look at religion, and at Christianity in particular, we see what we need to see and what we deeply desire to see in order for life to work. The vehemence of much of what we say to one another in the name of "right theology" and "right doctrine" is bogus. Much of it is nothing more significant than the need to assure ourselves we are right.

It would be good for me to step back and remember that my voice isn't reporting the unbiased, pure teaching of scripture. Whatever I say comes along with all my psychological needs and baggage. Whatever is said to me by those who are sure they have the truth comes to me with their presuppositions and unacknowledged motivations as well.

What we see in the faith, in the scriptures and in the Gospel is highly personal. The kind of Christian we are is not automatically a reflection of Jesus. Frequently it is far from Jesus, and very close to our own dark sides.

In short, some orders are garbled in transmission, either on the sending end, or the receiving end, or both.

To summarize, “orders” of the Church, whether framed as instruction, doctrine, scripture, homily or encyclical, come in a variety of types. Some are simple and direct—by the numbers. Room for misunderstandings and “discretion” is minimal. Others are intentionally broad ranging, and we also have to factor in the possibilities that the order was not clear or that we misunderstood the order ourselves.In such cases, we are expected to use our "trained initiative and leasdership" as the military called it.  People in good faith may carry out these orders differently.

Personally, I do have the most trouble with the broad orders like “Love your neighbor.” How? Why? Even when He’s mean? Sinful? What about if he’s a drug addict or an illegal immigrant? I want specific instructions. By the Numbers!

God says “Love your neighbor. Make it so.”

Comments

[Steve Bogner]

I've never thought about obedience this way, but it does make sense - thanks for the analysis.

[bosun3rd]

UC,

You must be a Coasty.

I served in the USCGR for several years. I had a great time, though no desire to advance plus age ( its tough to be a once a month bosun's mate) made me leave.

Semper Paratus!

Bosun3rd

[Unapologetic Catholic]

"You must be a Coasty."

Guilty. My description of the rudder on a motor surfboat was easily identifiable to any sharp Coast Guard boatswain's mate! I was 12 years active duty and then 10 more in the reserves.