Reading through today's news, I came across two distinctly different articles with two distinctly different messages. The one thing they had in common is that both are from the 'teachers' of the Roman Church.
The first comes from Cardinal George, who has removed a priest from his parish and forbade him from sacramental duties because said priest refused to become the president of an RC high school. Why would this priest do so? Because he felt unqualified and inexperienced.
"A Catholic priest's inner life is governed by his promises, motivated by faith and love, to live chastely as a celibate man and to obey his bishop. Breaking either promise destroys his vocation and wounds the Church....If that is your attitude, you have already left the Catholic Church and are therefore not able to pastor a Catholic parish." (link)
The second comes from Bishop William Lori, speaking at the National Catholic Prayer Breakfast.
“Religious freedom is the core of all human rights. The church and state are distinct, but they are also inter-related. … We must not be afraid to enact on our religious values in public and in private." and "Religious freedom, of course, belongs not only to individuals but also to churches, comprised of citizens who are believers, and who seek, not to create a theocracy, but rather to influence their culture from within. ...We look to the State not to impose religion but to guarantee religious freedom, and to promote harmony among followers of different religions." (link and link).
So,whom do we listen to? The cardinal who says that obedience is key or the bishop who says we should not be afraid to enact on our religious values? Is one to argue that there are different rules for laity and clergy, or are we all the Body of Christ? Does a dog collar prevent a man from exercising his conscience? Blessed Cardinal Newman didn't thinks so.