Question — Noldin, Summa of Moral Theology
Question First. On Vocation to the Clerical State
751. On vocation itself and its necessity. 1. By the name of clerical state here is understood the condition of those who have received sacred order: for since the condition of those who have been initiated only in minor orders is not yet constant and immovable from obligation, clerics of minor orders do not yet have a state properly so called.
A twofold vocation is distinguished: external, which consists in this, that the one to be ordained, having been approved and elected by the bishop, is admitted to the clerical state; internal, which consists in the decree of divine providence by which, from the common state of laymen, some are chosen to the clerical state and fitting helps are prepared for them for fulfilling the special obligations of this state.
That external vocation is required is clear from this: that the bishop must approve those whom he admits to the ecclesiastical state before he confers orders on them.
In this sense are to be understood the words: Nor does anyone take honor to himself, but he who is called by God as Aaron was;2 and elsewhere the Apostle says: Impose hands quickly on no one.3 But let these (deacons) first be proved, and so let them minister, having no crime.4
- That internal vocation is required for the clerical state is gathered both from the nature of divine providence and from the singular excellence of the state itself, and from the condition of the Christian Church.
a. Since divine providence directs all things to their ends, a special end demands a special decree, which destines to the end and prepares for those destined means consonant with the end; but the clerical state constitutes a special end distinct from the common end of other men and more excellent, which because of its excellence demands more abundant and more perfect helps of grace.
b. Since the Church of Christ is on the one hand perpetual, but on the other cannot endure without ministers, divine providence must at no time fail to prepare for the Church ministers suited by vocation to the clerical state.
- He who does not follow a divine vocation to the clerical state certainly known does not seem to sin gravely, but he certainly sins lightly.
a. Since this vocation is only an invitation to a higher state and does not involve a strict precept, he who does not follow it does not commit a sin properly so called because of this. Moreover this would be a sin insofar as he who does not follow God calling deprives himself of the graces necessary for obtaining salvation; but God denies to no one graces sufficient for salvation; indeed through the help of prayer efficacious graces also can be obtained.
b. But he sins lightly, because, supposing a divine vocation certainly known, the one called cannot be carried to declining the will of God except by motives not consonant with reason, such as weariness of labor, sensuality, desire of worldly liberty, etc.
- He who enters the clerical state without a vocation certainly known does not seem to sin gravely, provided he has a good will of fulfilling all the obligations of the clerical state and is duly admitted by superiors to receiving orders.
He who lacks vocation must be kept from orders, even if he is imbued with good morals. But if one who feels himself destitute of vocation nevertheless enters the clerical state, he acts rashly, yet he does not seem to sin gravely. For he would sin insofar as he either would not wish or would not be able to fulfill the offices of the state; but since good will is supposed in him, he will not be deprived by God of necessary graces for this reason alone, that he lacks vocation. Yet this is certain: a priest destitute of vocation experiences greater difficulties in fulfilling his offices and is therefore in greater danger of losing eternal salvation.
1 Ballerini-Palmieri IV, n. 224 ss.; Genicot II, n. 24 ss.; Aem. Berardi, De clerico ad ordines sacros initiando (Faenza: Novelli, 1888); Vermeersch, De vocatione religiosa et sacerdotali (Bruges: Beyaert, 1903).
2 Heb. 5:4. In this place there is discussion of external vocation. Therefore the Roman Catechism (part 2, c. 7, q. 3): "But they are said to be called by God who are called by the legitimate ministers of the Church."
3 1 Tim. 5:22.
4 Ibid. 3:10; cf. Council of Trent, sess. 23, c. 5, De reform.
752. On proving clerics to be promoted to sacred orders. 1. From many laws of the Church, a grave obligation is incumbent on the bishop of carefully proving clerics to be initiated in sacred orders and of keeping away the unworthy, who are imbued with depraved morals. Although the habit of any grave sin renders one to be ordained unworthy, nevertheless this holds most of all concerning the vice of luxury, wherefore the laws of the Church explicitly require that those to be ordained be of proved chastity.
a. And let these (deacons) first be proved, and so let them minister.1
b. Let no one be permitted to approach sacred order unless he is either a virgin or is of proved chastity.2
c. Let subdeacons and deacons be ordained who have good testimony and have been proved in minor orders ... who hope, God being the author, that they can contain themselves.3
As regards the force of these laws, some affirm that they oblige only the bishop, that he keep from sacred orders those who are not immune from external sins (concerning which, namely, it can be established in the external forum of the Church);4 but others contend that they affect not only the bishop but also the one to be ordained and his confessor, so that by force of these laws the one to be ordained is prohibited under grave obligation from approaching orders unless he has already amended himself from the habit of sinning, especially against chastity; and that the confessor is bound under grave obligation to deny absolution to a cleric with a bad habit wishing to approach sacred orders, even if otherwise disposed, because this very will itself is gravely sinful, unless he is endowed by God with so great a compunction as to furnish security concerning change of life.5
Concerning a habituated cleric. He is not immune from grave sin who, laboring under a bad habit of sinning, receives sacred order, unless he has a founded hope that, once ordained, he will preserve chastity.
a. It is difficult to demonstrate that the aforesaid laws of the Church refer directly and immediately not only to the bishop and to external proof, but also to the one to be ordained and to his internal state;6 nevertheless from them the mind and intention of the Church is clear, which in those to be promoted to sacred orders desires and requires immunity from a bad habit even internal.
b. From the nature of the matter a cleric cannot approach sacred orders with a safe conscience unless he holds a founded hope that he will live at least habitually chastely, as he is about to promise to God in ordination; but he who is entangled in a bad habit cannot have this hope (except in the case of extraordinary help). He can indeed, with the help of grace, overcome any temptations whatever; but considering the character of the human heart and the ordinary operation of divine grace, he will not overcome them, but exposes himself to manifest danger of sinning against the vow and of accumulating very many sacrileges.
How long a cleric must be free from a bad habit, so that safely, that is, with founded hope of preserving chastity in the future, he can approach sacred order, cannot be determined by a general rule, since it depends on diverse circumstances, namely on the intensity of the bad habit, on the greater or lesser diligence of employing means of amendment, on the danger of giving scandal to the faithful by external sins, etc. But this counsel must altogether be given, that at least for several (six) months he have amended the custom of sinning before he approaches sacred order.
1 1 Tim. 3:10.
3 Council of Trent, sess. 23, c. 13, De reform.
4 Ballerini-Palmieri; Berardi.
5 St. Alphonsus defends this opinion in the dissertation De clerico habituato in vitio turpi cupienti statim initiari in sacris, l. 6, n. 63-77.
6 Cf. Benedict XIV, De synodo, l. 11, c. 2, n. 18.