In addition to our biological parents, the Fourth Commandment also speaks to our relationships with other authority figures. These would include those we have with employers, the Church, the schools that we attend (i.e. the teachers, coaches and administration who are a part of those schools) and the civil authorities that have jurisdiction over the places we live. 

 

It is interesting how we often refer to some of these authorities using parental language. For example, one might refer to the Church as “Mother,” or a school one attended as “alma mater” (dear mother), or even to one’s country of origin as the “fatherland” or “motherland.” 

 

As such, some of the same basic principles of “honoring our father and mother” are applicable in these relationships as well, taking into account the nature of the relationships involved. 

 

As with our biological parents, respect, gratitude and fulfilling our responsibilities towards those with legitimate authority over us should normally be a given — at least so long as such institutions or persons are fulfilling basic obligations toward us and not using their authority in harmful or destructive ways. However, in any of these relationships, there is always the possibility that we will need to disengage from them (at least in part) in order to preserve ourselves or keep our relationship with God healthy. 

 

After all, God, as the source of all parenthood, is the one whom we are ultimately to honor through our respect, gratitude and the fulfillment of our responsibilities. As Peter says in the Acts of the Apostles when he is facing the religious authorities of his day, “We must obey God rather than men.” (Acts 5:29) 

God being the source of all parenthood, and indeed the ultimate parent, is made clear in a particularly insightful paragraph in the Catechism of the Catholic Church that isn’t speaking about the Fourth Commandment directly, but nevertheless has important implications for our understanding of it. Paragraph 239 explains what we as Christians believe about the parenthood of God. 

 

For example, it speaks of God being understood by the image of motherhood in addition to that of fatherhood, and reminds us that “God transcends the human distinction between the sexes. He is neither man nor woman: He is God. He also transcends human fatherhood and motherhood, although He is their origin and standard… .” 

 

In that same paragraph we also read: “The language of faith thus draws on the human experience of parents, who are in a way the first representatives of God for man. But this experience also tells us that human parents are fallible and can disfigure the face of fatherhood and motherhood.” 

 

It is this “disfiguring” of motherhood and fatherhood that can be so problematic for us. In some cases, it may require us to separate from, or even disobey, those “parental figures” in our lives — be they biological, institutional or civic — who prove to be a threat to us. This is why the catechism goes so far as to say that we have a duty, under the Fourth Commandment, to disobey the otherwise legitimate authority figures when their directives are “contrary to the demands of the moral order, to the fundamental rights of persons or the teachings of the Gospel.” (CCC 2242)

 

This is why a child who has been abused or suffered neglect may, in good conscience and insofar as they are able, need to cut ties with or set serious boundaries with a biological parent. Or why an employee may seek new employment rather than work for a company that is engaged in immoral practices. Or why a citizen may need to refuse to follow certain civic laws. 

 

“Honoring father and mother” will never mean freely allowing ourselves to be treated in a way not in keeping with being God’s beloved child. Nor will it ever mean choosing to obey another authority that puts us at odds with God’s authority.