Click here: to donate by Credit Card
Or here: to donate by PayPal
Or by mail to: Free Republic, LLC - PO Box 9771 - Fresno, CA 93794
Thank you very much and God bless you.
Posted on 05/02/2026 10:43:40 AM PDT by ebb tide
Just imagine waking up every day of your life and telling yourself that you have to be obedient and in communion with Cardinal Victor “Tucho” Fernandez for the salvation of your soul because of a title he holds at the Vatican.
Now imagine having to convince yourself that Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre, a respected Archbishop in good standing with the Catholic Church for decades, excommunicated himself and became schismatic because he needed to find a way to preserve the faith as it always existed for generations to come.
That’s the life of a liberal, legal positivist. That’s the life of dedicated SSPX haters.
If you engage in the online social media debates over the Society of St. Pius X’s (SSPX’s) plan to consecrate auxiliary bishops in July 2026 without Papal approval, you will inevitably find yourself trapped in the same annoying intellectual meat grinder that makes you just want to quit.
The typical debate goes something like this:
Pro-SSPX Guy: Like Archbishop Lefebvre, the Society needs to consecrate bishops in order to preserve the traditional Catholic faith and liturgy for future generations.
Anti-SSPX Guy: That’s schismatic. Consecrating bishops without Papal approval is a schismatic act that makes them no better than Martin Luther.
Pro-SSPX Guy: Well, actually consecrating bishops without Papal approval has nothing to do with the concept of schism. Even under both the 1917 and 1983 canon law codes it doesn’t fall under the category of schism.
Anti-SSPX: You’re stupid. It’s schism because you’re disobedient to the Pope.
Pro-SSPX Guy: Well, disobedience is not the same thing as schism.
Anti-SSPX: Whatever you want to call it, you’re not following the Pope, and neither did Luther. So the SSPX are just schismatic Protestants!
Pro-SSPX Guy: But the SSPX never rejected the authority of the Church or the Papal office itself or the Catholic faith. In fact, the entire point is that they are trying to preserve those things. So, it’s not like Luther.
Anti-SSPX Guy: You are stupid and uncharitable. Tucho Fernandez said it would be a schismatic act, so it is. Go back to your protestant Church and stop being schizzzy!
And so on…
Putting aside the very real obnoxious behavior of those online debaters like the fictional example above, what’s the common theme driving the anti-SSPX position?
Legal Positivism Versus True Obedience
The common theme is the positive legalistic attitude that replaces the Truth with servile obedience. Let’s first define “positive legalistic attitude.”
In short, legal positivism holds that laws are valid because they are enacted by legitimate authorities without regard for other considerations such as justice and charity. In other words, it’s the idea that just because some person or body of persons rightfully claim legal authority, their commands must be blindly followed in all instances.
According to the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, legal positivism has historical roots in ancient philosophy but developed in modern form through thinkers like Hobbes, Hume, and Bentham. Bentham’s ideas established the view of law as commands from a sovereign enforced by power.[1]
Sadly, we witness legal positivism in the American legal system every day. For example, when a validly elected state legislature passes legislation that grants the “right” to abort a child. By the simple act of the legislature (with approval of the governor), the state dispenses with any underlying moral concern and simply declares it legally acceptable to kill an unborn child. Where does this “right” come from? Nowhere but the human sovereign body of legislators and certainly not from God. And what happens if you obstruct this man-made right? You go to jail.
Legal positivism is a creature of liberalism. Hobbes, Hume and Bentham all rejected the Church. Both liberalism and legal positivism reject the role of the Social Kingship of Christ. Both place man above God.
We can contrast legal positivism with a proper Catholic way of considering obedience and authority. The key difference is that a Catholic understanding necessarily implies a moral element that is not subject to the arbitrary and capricious will of the human lawgiver.
According to the Catholic Encyclopedia,[2] obedience is complying with a command or precept. However, it is regarded as “a virtue or principle of righteous conduct.” Righteous conduct is always going to have God in mind. The Catholic Encyclopedia goes on to explain that
“As to whom we are to obey, there can be no doubt that first we are bound to offer an unreserved service to Almighty God in all His commands…On the other hand the obligation to obedience to superiors under God admits of limitations. We are not bound to obey a superior in a matter which does not fall within the limits of his preceptive power… Neither can a superior claim our obedience in contravention to the dispositions of higher authority. Hence, notably, we cannot heed the behests of any human power no matter how venerable or undisputed as against the ordinances of God. All authority to which we bow has its source in Him and cannot be validly used against Him.”
In short, according to Catholic principles, the duty to obey the commands of a human superior is limited to those areas in which the superior maintains authority and can never be exercised in a way contrary to the divine or natural law.
Obeying one’s superiors, including Church authorities, is a matter of obedience. But like other virtues, this involves balancing two opposing forces to maintain that middle virtuous ground. With obedience, failure to follow the righteous command of a superior is the vice of disobedience. But insisting on obeying the commands of a superior contrary to the commands of a higher authority is the vice of servile obedience.
A Call to True Obedience
At the end of the day, those who criticize the SSPX for its attempts to maintain Catholic Tradition in the face of the Vatican II revolution imbibe the poisonous theories of legal positivism and liberalism.
To maintain the veneer of virtuous (false) obedience, they require the average Catholic to submit to the will of such men as Tucho Fernandez at the expense of obedience to God. Whether Tucho believes and teaches in accordance with Catholic Tradition, and what we believe as Catholics, is totally irrelevant to them.
The SSPX objectors view “unity” to be solely a rigid juridical one with those who claim valid authority, regardless of whether those men cooperate with the divinely revealed truth found in Catholic Tradition.
Those who loudly object to the SSPX consecrations, often with the air of righteous indignation, are not viewing the situation through a Catholic lens, but a revolutionary, legally positive lens that corrupts the virtue of obedience.
Legal positivists often prioritize their own interpretation of virtue over what is genuinely good and true, pretending to be obedient followers of God. However, much like the annoying Eddie Haskell from “Leave It to Beaver,” they are actually undermining those they claim to be the most loyal to in a backhanded way.
The SSPX is consecrating new bishops in order to maintain Catholic Tradition as revealed by God and as always taught by the Catholic Church. To maintain Tradition, you need priests who understand Tradition and minister to the laity. To have such priests, it is necessary to have bishops to ordain them. This is not some novelty; it has always been what God asks of us.
Under the current regime occupying the Vatican imposing a new synodal church, it is not possible to maintain Catholic Tradition or the faith if one follows its commands and teachings. This certainly leads to other questions, such as whether they have authority in the first place. That question is not necessary to resolve here.
Whether they legitimately occupy the office they use to oppress the Catholic faith or not, it is a duty of the Catholic always to obey the higher authority—in this case, God and the Catholic faith. That’s what virtuous obedience looks like.
Do not be a liberal legal positivist. Be a Catholic.
[1] “Legal Positivism (Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy),” October 10, 2025. https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/legal-positivism/.
[2] Delany, J. (1911). Obedience. In The Catholic Encyclopedia. New York: Robert Appleton Company. https://www.newadvent.org/cathen/11181c.htm
|
|
Click here: to donate by Credit Card Or here: to donate by PayPal Or by mail to: Free Republic, LLC - PO Box 9771 - Fresno, CA 93794 Thank you very much and God bless you. |
Under the current regime occupying the Vatican imposing a new synodal church, it is not possible to maintain Catholic Tradition or the faith if one follows its commands and teachings. This certainly leads to other questions, such as whether they have authority in the first place. That question is not necessary to resolve here.
Whether they legitimately occupy the office they use to oppress the Catholic faith or not, it is a duty of the Catholic always to obey the higher authority—in this case, God and the Catholic faith. That’s what virtuous obedience looks like.
Ping
Just imagine waking up every day of your life and telling yourself that you have to be obedient and in communion with Cardinal Victor “Tucho” Fernandez for the salvation of your soul because of a title he holds at the Vatican. Not me.
Agreed, but a question regarding obedience to higher authority: where, when, and how should obedience to one’s informed conscience be considered in such a decision-making process?
It should be no problem for anyone who has a well formed Catholic conscience.
Blessing homosexual couples, giving Holy Communion to unrepentant adulterers, etc., should be a no-brainer as to whom one should, or should not, "obey".
So unless the Church declares a new pope there’s a problem with the framework here.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.