By Fr. Jerry Pokorsky.

Subservience is ever ancient, ever new. In that respect, the hierarchy of the Church is not much different than the hierarchies of business and government. But servile obedience can foster a culture of self-destructive tyranny even within the institutional Church.

By God's design, the Church is a hierarchy, not a democracy. The successor of Saint Peter is at the top of the pyramid - or, from another point of view, at the bottom of an inverted pyramid. The office of the papacy identifies the pope as the "servant of the servants." The pope rules the entire Church and enjoys, by divine institution, the "supreme, full, immediate, and universal power in the care of souls." (CCC 937)

The bishops are the successors of the twelve apostles. Jesus, through His Church, confers authority on the bishops (by the "laying on of the hands") as "priests, prophets, and kings." Their role is conservative - in the proper, non-political sense. They are dutybound to conserve, proclaim, and hand on the apostolic truths. They abide by the truths of Sacred Tradition - G.K. Chesterton's "democracy of the dead."

The authority of a priest is inextricably bound to the authority of his lawful bishop (or sometimes through a religious superior). During ordination, a priest solemnly promises to respect and obey his bishop and his successors. Bishops are also bound in obedience to the Deposit of Faith.

Church bureaucracies cannot substitute for the inherent religious authority of bishops and priests. A parish council is advisory and has no authority over the pastor. The United States Conference of Catholic Bishops (USCCB) has its delegated administrative duties but does not have doctrinal authority over individual bishops. USCCB policy positions do not carry authoritative doctrinal weight unless individual bishops ratify the statements as their own. Even then, the faithful have a right to distinguish between the principles of Catholic doctrine and the prudential judgments of the bishop.

A bishop or a pope may have varying opinions on, say, immigration policy. The first principles of the faith bind in conscience. We insist upon the inestimable dignity of every human being and the tenets of the Decalogue. Summary execution of illegal immigrants - to take an outlandish example that no one has suggested - would clearly be immoral. A country has a right, however, to secure borders and the rule of law. Furthermore, violating immigration laws may be an infraction against the secular law, but not necessarily a violation of God's law.

Breaking the traffic speed limit is not immoral under two conditions (according to traditional moral manuals): 1) We are not acting unsafely, and 2) we pay the traffic fine - if we're stopped for speeding. Thus, at a minimum, persons who illegally enter the country for economic or political reasons, but must abide by the just laws of the host country.

The right to protect a nation's (and a family's) sovereignty with appropriate border control is always open to debate over particulars. The prudential application of Catholic moral principles by the clergy in matters beyond their competence does not bind in conscience, and often tramples on the rights of the laity.

In a recent letter to the American bishops, Pope Francis said deporting people who fled "extreme poverty, insecurity, exploitation, persecution or serious environmental deterioration in their home nations," regardless of how they enter the U.S., "damages the dignity of many men and women, and of entire families, and places them in a state of particular vulnerability and defenselessness."

Archbishop Timothy Broglio, President of the USCCB, unsurprisingly thanked the Holy Father for his encouragement to continue the pastoral work of the American bishops for those most in need. His letter, however, did not much endorse what seem to be the pope's policy judgments.

The Trump administration's "border czar," Tom Homan, has not received the papal opprobrium like ...