States of Christian Life and Vocation, According to the Doctors and Theologians of the Church/Part 1/Section 2/ARTICLE I. The State of Tendency to Perfection, or the Religious State/CHAPTER VI. IS THE RELIGIOUS STATE A COUNSEL.
CHAPTER VI. IS THE RELIGIOUS STATE A COUNSEL.[edit]
" THE state of perfection," says Suarez, "is not of precept, but of counsel."[1] From what we have hitherto said, it can be clearly inferred that the religious state is in itself better, more perfect, and more advantageous, than the common Christian life: melior et perfectior et utilior ; it is therefore absolutely a matter of counsel. [2] We conclude from this that the state may be desired, vowed, and counselled : appeti et voveri et consult potest.[3] These are the words of Suarez : " The religious state not only is a state of perfection, but, furthermore, it is an excellent thing to desire it, to ask for it, to embrace it : modus obtinendi ilium, ipsum appetendo, petendo et procurando, optimus est. Hence one acts all the more perfectly and prudently in embracing it, the more spontaneous and free his action is in so doing. It is quite another thing with respect to the cure of souls. The more we fear that burden the greater our security in taking it up, especially when we resign ourselves to it out of obedience to superiors."[4]
St. Thomas had said before Suarez: "It is meritorious to desire the religious state. The religious state does not presuppose perfection, but leads to it; whereas the episcopal dignity presupposes it. To desire perfection and wish to attain it does not appear to be presumption, but a holy emulation to which the apostle exhorts us: Be zealous for the better gifts." (i Cor. xii, 31.) On this account it is praiseworthy to embrace the religious state, while it is too presuming to aspire to the honors of prelacy."[5] After a parallel between a king and a monk, and having shown how far happier is the lot of the latter than that of the mightiest monarch, St. John Chrysostom concludes in these eloquent words : " When you see a rich man passing, splendidly dressed, all ablaze with gold, and pompously drawn in a magnificent chariot, do not say, 'That man is happy.' Riches are only an apparent good, that is as transitory and fleeting as life itself. But, when you see passing a modest and recollected solitary with mild and kindly look, envy the lot of that man, imitate his wisdom, and long to resemble the just man. 'Ask,' says the Lord, 'and you shall receive.' These are the real goods, the goods that save and last forever."[6] From these words of the holy doctor, we can easily infer that it is good to beg of God a religious vocation. And if the religious state is the surest means of salvation for him who solicits the grace, God will certainly hear his prayer, provided it fails in none of the conditions which he requires. Has not our Lord promised to grant all we shall ask in his name ? From what precedes, it follows, also, that a vow to not embrace or seek the religious state is in itself illicit arid invalid, unless some special circumstances excuse it;[7] while it is in itself a very good thing to bind one's self by vow to enter religion.[8] This last proposition is certain and of faith, says Suarez: certa de fide. Since it is an act of virtue to enter religion, arid more praiseworthy to practise an act of virtue under vow, they deserve praise who, not being able to enter religion, take a vow to do so.[9] Such is the reasoning of St. Thomas. "We consider here the vow in itself; for, to judge whether it is advantageous for this or that person in particular, circumstances must be taken into consideration ; and, first, to take a vow of the kind, one must have the requisite age. There is an age required for its validity, and an age for its opportuneness. To take the vow validly, it is enough to have reached the age of reason, and to have employed on it as much deliberation as is necessary for a mortal sin. Though such a vow taken by a girl not yet twelve, or by a boy not yet fourteen, is valid, it has not, however, its full force ; for it can be annulled by parents in case they did not ratify the vow after their daughter reached her twelfth, or their son his fourteenth, year.
" In order that the vow to enter religion should be opportune, it must be made at a proper age and with serious deliberation, more serious, in fact, than for other vows or for temporal affairs. Children, therefore, should not be exhorted in a light way to make such a vow ; for, as it is easy to induce them, so they change very readily. When consulted on the matter," says Suarez, from whom all we are here saying is taken, "if, after due reflection, we think the person asking counsel could to advantage enter the religious state, and is exposed to alter his mind unless he strengthens himself by a vow, we may very well encourage him to make the vow, not, indeed, by annoying requests, but by reasons drawn from faith."[10] St. Thomas is still more explicit than Suarez on this question.[11] He who has vowed to enter religion is bound to keep his vow. He must consequently take steps to obtain his admission into some religious house, and, if admitted, he should enter. This vow, even when taken in early youth, always binds, unless it has been annulled. If, when taking the vow, one determines in his mind and promises the time for carrying it out, he is obliged to enter religion at the time so determined ; but, when he does not fix the precise date of this entrance, he is bound, however, to enter as soon as possible. Yet the fulfilment of this kind of a vow may for just reasons be deferred. Guilty negligence and voluntary delays do not remove the obligation. Therefore, even when the time for entering mentioned in the vow is passed, the one who made the vow remains bound to his engagement, unless and this rarely occurs he had, when making his vow, a formal intention to the contrary. Although a reasonable cause suffices for putting off the execution of such a vow, yet care is to be taken lest delays should bring on entire faithlessness, and we should fear the sins that may be committed in the world. A long delay, having no excuse in its favor, would be grievously sinful. He who vowed to enter religion, but has not succeeded in gaining admission, though he took all the necessary steps to secure it, is freed from the obligation of his vow, provided he has no hope of gaining admission at some future day.[12]
Vows to enter the religious state properly so called are reserved to the Sovereign Pontiff; that is, he alone has the power to dispense from them, or to change them. The vow to enter a society not approved of by the Church, is not reserved to the pope.[13] The same is true with respect to communities of women as now existing in France, except Savoy.[14]
Footnotes[edit]
- ↑ Suar., lib. I, c. xi, n. 12.
- ↑ Ibid., c. xxi, n. 5.
- ↑ Ibid , c. xviii, n. 1 1.
- ↑ Ibid., lib. I, c. xxi, n. 5.
- ↑ Opusc. 18, c. xix.
- ↑ Migne, t. I, col. 392.
- ↑ Suar., lib. I, c. xxiii, n. 13.
- ↑ Id., lib. 4, c. i, n. 2.
- ↑ St. Th., opusc. 17, c. xii.
- ↑ Suar., lib. 4, c. i, n. 3.
- ↑ Opusc. 17, c. xii.
- ↑ Suar., lib. 4, c. i, n. 3.
- ↑ Opusc. 17, c. xii.
- ↑ Gautrelet, Traits de l;etat leligieux, t. I, p. 62; Gurj, Cas. Consc., t. 2, n. 98.