The Problem of Authority

A central problem in jurisprudence -- and, therefore, and important challenge for Catholic Legal Theory -- is that of Authority.  That said, here is an interesting post, by Rod Dreher -- inspired by the current situation in Poland -- about the problem of Authority.  A bit:

I can't quite get out of my head the problem of Authority in the contemporary age. As Rieff and others have explained, for various reasons we live in a place and time in which authority has devolved to the individual. The Polish bishops say that only the Holy See has the right to judge a bishop, and as a matter of ecclesiology, they're right. But as a practical matter -- as a matter of the sense of the faithful -- I suspect they're wrong. They would certainly be wrong in the West; it's only a question of how far along the path Poland is. When I say "authority," I'm talking about the way their authority in (canon) law is perceived in the hearts of the faithful. As recently as 30 years ago, it would have been unquestioned in Poland. Fifty years ago in the US, same deal. But today? No.

Understand that I'm not saying this is how it should be. I'm saying that's the way it is. This is why Rieff was pessimistic about the old culture ever reappearing. How do we recapture the old way of thinking, of seeing? And all of us have to deal with that. The problem is more acute for those of us who are members of hierarchical churches, because as a matter of faith we believe that God has created an authoritative hierarchy. The challenge for those of us who do believe in the hierarchy's authority in principle is to figure out how to respond when the men who possess that authority misuse it. And this is where I think having grown up in modernity puts us at either an advantage or disadvantage, depending on how you look at it. On the down side, it is simply impossible for many, even most, of us to act by force of will to ignore what we learn about the way the authorities have behaved. You can't un-learn these things, and if you choose to ignore them, you do so at a great price to your conscience. You can choose to follow a strategy of ironic detachment, trusting in the authority of the office even as you dismiss the man occupying it. Or you lose your faith in the institution entirely -- even against your own will. Rightly or wrongly, the discrepancy one perceives between the authoritative office and the man or men who inhabit it become too difficult to bear -- intellectually, emotionally, psychologically -- and you cease to believe. It has always been possible for men to make these decisions, but it seems so much easier to make them in conditions of modernity, when we are acculturated to believe that everything is, and should be, a choice. Even if we reject that in theory, it's impossible to fully get that mindset out of our system. . . .

People cannot live without authority. What characteristics will those persons and institutions who wish to accumulate and to preserve authority now and in the near future have to have? I think one non-negotiable characteristic is transparency, and an eagerness to accept fault and make substantive and visible efforts to remediate error. Had George W. Bush not been so defensive for so long, and had been willing to make changes early on, he wouldn't have fallen to such low esteem in the public's eye. Had the US Catholic bishops done the right thing to start with regarding the sex abuse scandal instead of trying to cover up, they wouldn't be in such bad shape today. In my own church, the OCA, the attempt to hide or deflect or suppress the financial scandal surrounding the Metropolitan is actually subverting the authority of the hierarchy, not protecting it. That's something that those in secular and religious authority can't seem to grasp: that in the present day, genuine humility is the key to maintaining authority, and power.

A second question: what disposition toward authority do we ordinary people have to maintain for our own good? We cannot be permanently and corrosively suspicious of all authority; that way lies madness, and at least social dissolution. How much reality are we prepared to allow ourselves to ignore, for the greater good? Is it ever moral to turn away from knowing the truth about the authority's behavior, because to know the truth would not set us free, but would make us prisoners of our own chronic mistrust?