Case 4. Religious and Seculars

Caius, a secular priest ordained under the title of the Mission for a certain English diocese, having experienced in himself not slight signs of a vocation to the religious state, and not for a brief time, consults his missionary Rector about the matter. The Rector says that he does not understand what Caius lacks for acquiring the highest perfection, since it is written in the Fourth Council of Westminster, decree XII, no. 7: “Moreover, by the Lord, who has compassion on our weaknesses, exceptional aids are granted to us in England, who fight for the kingdom of truth, for acquiring priestly perfection. To the priesthood with which missionaries are distinguished is entrusted the care of souls and therefore spiritual gifts of every kind that are attached to the pastoral state; furthermore, pastors are especially pastors of the poor, the friends of Jesus, ‘who have nothing with which to repay us,’ and they themselves also are poor, and are nourished and contented by the alms of the poor. There is added also the daily and almost perpetual denial of one’s own will in lightening the burdens of others, in comforting the sick, and in assisting the dying by day and night. Finally there remains the remarkable grace and privilege of the missionary oath, by which, on the threshold of the apostolate they have undertaken, after the likeness of the offering of Jesus made on the Cross, they freely offer themselves day by day as a living and pleasing sacrifice to God the Father.” “Behold for you,” says the Rector, “a state of perfection, and indeed one made stable by virtue of the oath of the Mission; poverty also, chastity, and obedience. What else can you have in religion that conduces to acquiring perfection?” Caius, however, still not content, secretly consults Julius, a regular, who, recognizing an excellent vocation, affirms that nothing prevents Caius from passing immediately to religion, since this privilege is granted in law to secular priests, nor does the oath of the Mission stand in the way, because, insofar as it is contrary to the evangelical counsels, it places an obstacle before the Holy Spirit, according to St. Thomas, in III, distinction 39, question 1, article 3, minor question 3, reply to 2, where the Angelic Doctor [correcting an evident omitted-letter printing error] adds these words: “By the very fact that someone swears that he will not enter religion, he is perjured.” Hence it is asked:

1. Is the state of a secular priest with the care of souls a state of perfection?

2. Is at least the religious state a higher state of perfection than the state of a secular priest with the care of souls?

3. Which state is of greater dignity?

4. What is to be said of the case?

1. This question is answered above, p. 59.

2. Is the religious state a higher state of perfection than that of a secular priest with the cure of souls?

Yes, the office of a secular priest with the cure of souls is not a state of perfection in the strict sense, for he is bound by no perpetual obligation to give himself to the duties of his office. The Church permits them to abandon their office and enter religion, which is a proof that the religious state is of greater perfection than the office of a secular priest, as St. Thomas teaches (II— II, q. 184, a. 8). This, of course, does not prevent some priests being personally more perfect than some religious, as St. Thomas also teaches (II— II, q. 184, a. 4).

3. Which state is higher in dignity?

Secular priests have precedence over Religious, and this is a mark of their greater dignity of rank in the ecclesiastical hierarchy.

4. The case. The quotation from the Fourth Council of Westminster shows the excellence of the priestly office, and the necessity of having great virtue in order to fulfil its duties worthily. But as was said above, it wants the stability required for a state in the strict sense, and it does not of itself provide the safeguards and the helps which a state of perfection should provide for the acquiring of perfection. The missionary oath does not bind a priest perpetually to devote himself to the cure of souls, nor is he under vows of poverty and obedience. His promise of canonical obedience only binds him to obey the bishop in matters belonging to clerical discipline, and not to leave the diocese without the bishop’s consent. In religious life the priest will be under the perpetual obligation of the three vows, and he will have innumerable helps and safeguards for the practice of the highest perfection. Julius was also wrong in saying that Caius might enter religion at once. He must not enter without leave of the Holy See as he is bound by the missionary oath. This oath does not bind him not to enter, but not to enter without leave of the Holy See, whose business it will be to find out whether the public good of the diocese will permit of his abandoning his office and seeking his private good in religion. So that the quotation from St. Thomas is not to the point.¹

1 Cf. Instruct. 8. C. de P. F., 27 April, 1871, De Titulo Ordinationis, n. 10.