Article I. On Vocation to Religion

I. Notion. Vocation, taken generally, is a certain invitation on the part of God to embrace a state of perfection. Universal and particular vocation can be distinguished. Universal vocation is the invitation to embrace the state of perfection, directed by Christ the Lord to all Christians in general. Particular vocation is that by which the religious state is counseled to a particular person, whether in an ordinary or extraordinary manner.

II. Necessity of particular vocation. In order that someone may be able to embrace the religious state, or at least that he may embrace it laudably, a particular vocation is required, intimated by God either in an ordinary or extraordinary manner. The reason is that one who embraces the aforesaid state without a particular vocation exposes himself to the danger of not fulfilling the grave obligations annexed to that state. For on the one hand, since God does not will that all, although generally called, enter into religion, He will probably not provide more abundant graces to one called only generally, without which religious obligations will in fact commonly not be fulfilled; this being posited, one who lacks a particular vocation ought at least to fear lest he be deprived of those graces, and therefore transgress the obligations.

III. Signs of particular vocation. There are three things which must concur together: 1st, absence of legitimate impediments; 2nd, capacity or fitness of the subject in relation to such an institute; 3rd, right intention (cf. can. 538).

1. Absence of legitimate impediments; concerning these there will soon be discussion where the novitiate is treated (n. 1224).

2. Fitness consists "in sufficient powers of body and soul, and this according to the diverse ends of diverse orders, namely: sufficient health; right judgment, not singular, which would disturb common life; talent at least moderately good, which is suitable or can be made suitable for exercising the functions of the order itself; a disposition suited to subjection, since the religious state is especially a state of subjection, which does not permit one to follow one's own will and one's own judgment in matters to be done."¹

3. Right intention, or the will of entering into religion with a view to the glory of God and one's own salvation, or also the salvation of souls (St. Alphonsus, Praxis Confessarii, n. 92); these indeed can exist without a natural inclination, indeed even with natural repugnance. Moreover it makes no difference whether the said intention or will has been provoked in an extraordinary or an ordinary manner. Moreover:

Note 1. Omnimodal certainty is not required for someone to be able safely to enter into religion. But those who must admit a candidate to religion should carefully see and inquire whether he is truly suitable (cf. can. 571, § 2). "It would be illicit to receive an adolescent into religion if his inconstancy were established or probably believed, or if there were anything else of this kind, which things are diligently considered in well-instituted religions" (St. Thomas, Quodlibet 3, article 11).

Note 2. With regard to the office of the confessor, St. Alphonsus observes these things: "If there is question of those who wish to enter religion, before all things the confessor should take care to weigh well into what religion they desire to enter; for if that institute is ever relaxed, it will be better for someone, ordinarily speaking, to remain in the world. For by joining himself to it, he will conduct himself as he has given himself to others.... But if the religion flourishes in observance, let the confessor test well the vocation of his penitent, inquiring whether the penitent has for it some impediment of unsuitability, infirm health, poverty of parents; and specifically let him weigh the end: whether it is right, namely of joining himself more to God, or of correcting the falls of his past life, or of avoiding the dangers of the world. But if the principal end were worldly, to live a more comfortable life, or to free himself from relatives of hard condition, or to please parents who impel him to this, let him take care not to permit him to enter religion. For in that case it is not a true vocation; without it an entrance of this kind will have an evil outcome. But if the end is good, and no impediment is present, the confessor, nor any other, as St. Thomas teaches, neither ought nor can without grave fault impede or dissuade him from the vocation; although he acts prudently sometimes if he delays its execution for him, in order to test better whether the resolution is firm and persevering, especially if he knows that the adolescent is changeable, or if that deliberation was made in the time of a mission or of spiritual exercises; because in occasions of this kind certain resolutions are conceived which afterwards, once the first fervor has passed, fail" (Praxis Confessarii, n. 92).

¹ Lehmkuhl, Theologia Moralis I, n. 658.

IV. Obligation of obeying a vocation. 1. Of itself there is no obligation of following a vocation. "To neglect a religious vocation," says St. Alphonsus, "of itself is not a sin; for divine counsels of themselves do not oblige to fault" (IV, 78).

2. Insofar as there is an obligation accidentally, the holy Doctor explains it thus:

a) "One who does not follow a recognized vocation, by reason of the danger of eternal salvation to which the called person commits himself, making a choice of state not according to the divine good pleasure, cannot be excused from some fault" (loc. cit.). Indeed, "if someone believed that by remaining in the world he would incur damnation, both because of his fragility, which he has experienced amid the occasions of the world, and because of the lack of helps which he would have in religion, he cannot be excused from grave sin, since he casts himself into grave danger of his salvation" (loc. cit.).

b) Outside the hypothesis set out, it is more disputed whether one who neglects a recognized vocation sins gravely. St. Alphonsus inclines to the affirmative opinion, because one who neglects a vocation exposes himself to a great danger of salvation. "But the reason of this danger is that he who remains in the world against the vocation of God will not have the fitting helps of grace which God prepared for him in religion; and therefore, destitute of these, he will with difficulty resist the temptations of the world, and thus by succumbing will incur damnation" (loc. cit.). Nevertheless the holy Doctor adds: "I do not wish to pronounce an absolute judgment on this point: I remit it to the wise" (loc. cit.). Others deny it, because in their opinion it is asserted gratuitously that an abundance of graces is annexed only to vocation; indeed the nature of counsel demands the contrary. While the doubt stands, since there is question of the mystery of the distribution of graces, the safer part seems to have to be followed in practice, on account of the danger of salvation.

Question. To what is one bound who has vowed religion?

Response 1. One who has vowed religion generally can enter whichever he prefers, provided regular discipline is in force there at least with regard to the more principal observances (St. Alphonsus IV, 72).

Response 2. One who has vowed a special religion is bound to enter it, unless he wishes to choose a stricter one; the latter is lawful, since it is better. If he is not admitted into the religion which he vowed, he is not bound to seek another, unless he had the intention of embracing religion in any way whatsoever (St. Alphonsus, loc. cit.).

Response 3. One who has vowed religion sins gravely if after entrance he leaves the novitiate, unless a just cause for leaving is present, for instance if he finds the religion unequal to his strength. "The reason is that a vow of religion obliges not only to taking up the religious habit, but also to serving God for the whole time of life" (St. Alphonsus, loc. cit.; cf. St. Thomas 2-2, q. 189, articles 3 and 4).

Response 4. One who has vowed religion and enters it, but is dismissed from the novitiate, is bound thus: if he is dismissed through his own fault, he is bound to correct himself and to apply moderate diligence so that he may be able to fulfill the vow. If he is dismissed without fault, and the impediment ceases, he is likewise bound to use moderate diligence so that he may be able to satisfy the vow, at least if there is hope of admission (St. Alphonsus, loc. cit.).