Chapter II. On Religion

I. Notion. A religion is: A society approved by legitimate ecclesiastical authority, in which the members, according to the proper laws of the society itself, pronounce public vows, perpetual or temporary, though to be renewed after the time has elapsed, and thus tend to evangelical perfection (can. 488, 1st).

II. Division. Religions are divided:

1. By reason of vows, into Orders and religious Congregations, or simply Congregations. An Order is a religion in which solemn vows are pronounced. A religious Congregation is a religion in which vows that are only simple, whether perpetual or temporary, are emitted (can. 488, 2nd).

2. By reason of dependence, into exempt and non-exempt. An exempt religion is a religion, whether of solemn or simple vows, withdrawn from the jurisdiction of the local Ordinary. A non-exempt religion is subject to the jurisdiction of the Ordinary (can. 488, 2nd).

3. By reason of approval, into religions of pontifical right and of diocesan right. The former are those which have obtained either approval or at least a decree of praise from the Apostolic See. The latter are those which, erected by Ordinaries, have not yet obtained this decree of praise (can. 488, 3rd).

4. By reason of members, into clerical and lay. A clerical religion is one whose members for the most part¹ are advanced to the priesthood. A lay religion is one which consists uniquely or at least chiefly of lay members (can. 488, 4th).

5. By reason of the principal work, into contemplative, active, and mixed, according as they are principally devoted to contemplation (Carthusians, Trappists, etc.), to the corporal works of mercy (Camillians, Brothers of St. John of God, etc.), or to teaching and preaching (Friars Preachers, Friars Minor, Society of Jesus, Congregation of the Most Holy Redeemer, etc.). Now "those religions hold the highest grade which are ordered to teaching and preaching" (St. Thomas 2-2, q. 188, article 6); "for just as it is greater to illuminate than only to shine, so it is greater to hand on to others the things contemplated than only to contemplate" (St. Thomas, loc. cit.). "But those which are ordered to contemplation hold the second grade; the third is of those which are occupied with external actions" (St. Thomas, loc. cit.).

"But in each of these grades preeminence can be considered according as one religion is ordered to a higher act in the same genus; just as among works of the active life it is preferable to redeem captives than to receive guests; and in works of the contemplative life, prayer is preferable to reading. Preeminence can also be considered if one of them is ordered to more of these things than another; or if it has statutes more suitable for attaining the proposed end" (St. Thomas, loc. cit.).

Note 1. Diversity of religions provides better: 1st, for the necessity and utility of the Church; 2nd, for the increase of members.²

Note 2. "To pass from one religion to another, unless on account of great utility or necessity, is not praiseworthy; both because from this those who are left behind are usually scandalized, and also because someone progresses more easily in the religion to which he is accustomed than in one to which he is not accustomed, other things being equal" (St. Thomas q. 189, article 8).

¹ It is said thus because in a religion of priests and lay members, the former are commonly more numerous. Nevertheless it suffices that the class of laymen be subordinated to the other; hence the Sacred Congregation of Religious has already recognized as clerical a religion in which laymen were more numerous (Vermeersch, Epitome, 4th ed., n. 542).

² The errors of the Synod of Pistoia concerning the multiplicity of religions were condemned by Pius VI in the Constitution Auctorem fidei, 28 August 1794.

III. Subsidiary notions. In order that the things which pertain to the law of religious may be better understood, it is pleasing to add the notions which the Code in can. 488, 5th, 6th, 7th, and 8th places first, and which regard: 1st, houses; 2nd, provinces; 3rd, members of religions; 4th, Superiors. Now:

1. A religious house is called a house of some religion in general; a regular house is a house of an Order; a formed house is called a religious house in which at least six professed religious dwell, of whom, if there is question of a clerical religion, at least four are priests (can. 488, 5th).

2. By the name of province is understood the union of several religious houses joined together among themselves under the same Superior, constituting part of the same religion (can. 488, 6th).

3. Under the name of religious come those who have pronounced vows in some religion; under the name of religious of simple vows, those who are in a religious Congregation; of regulars, those who are in an Order; of sisters, religious women of simple vows; of nuns, religious women of solemn vows, or, unless something else is clear from the nature of the thing or from the context of the discussion, religious women whose vows from the institute are solemn but for some places by prescription of the Apostolic See are simple (can. 488, 7th). To nuns pertain Carmelite religious women, Poor Clares, religious women of the Most Holy Redeemer (Redemptoristines), etc.

4. Under the name of major Superiors come: the Abbot Primate, the Abbot Superior of a monastic Congregation, the Abbot of a monastery sui iuris, even if belonging to a monastic Congregation, the supreme Moderator of a religion, the provincial Superior, their vicars, and others having power after the manner of provincials (can. 488, 8th); likewise probably the superior and superiorissa of a house which is sui iuris (cf. can. 504).

IV. Solemnity of vows. 1. A solemn vow is had only when the Church recognizes it as such (can. 1308, § 2).

2. A solemn vow renders acts contrary to the vow, if they are capable of being invalidated, illicit and invalid; a simple vow renders them illicit only, but not invalid, unless something else has been expressly provided (can. 579). Thus, for example, the solemn vow of poverty renders religious incapable of having ownership of goods, whether direct or beneficial, namely independently of Superiors; the solemn vow of chastity renders a marriage to be contracted invalid (can. 1073), and besides dissolves a ratified non-consummated marriage (can. 1119).

3. A solemn vow does not differ from a simple one in such a way that, if it has been violated, the circumstance of solemnity must of itself be expressed in confession. Accidentally, on account of the incapacity annexed, a new sin can arise. Besides, merit of itself is equal; but accidentally, on account of the incapacitating force, greater merit can be had in solemn profession, just as, conversely, in simple profession, for example on account of the greater liberality by which someone hands himself over to an Institute which is not so strictly obliged toward him as he is toward the Institute, or because of greater dependence in common life, and so forth; moreover the merit of a vow of perseverance can be added.

4. A solemn vow as such, or the solemnity of a vow, is an institute of merely ecclesiastical law; this seems altogether to have to be admitted, considering the sole chapter De voto, III, 15, in the Sext; Gregory XIII, Constitution Quanto fructuosius;¹ Constitution Ascendente Domino.² Cf. also can. 636.

5. It is disputed in what precisely the nature of solemnity consists.

According to some, it is placed in ceremonies and external rites. But solemn vows can be emitted without ceremonies and rites, as formerly in tacit profession.

According to others, in certain juridic effects. But the aforesaid effects can be removed from solemn vows, as was done for the Regulars of Belgium and Holland.

According to others, in a more perfect handing over of oneself, at least of the body, together with its acceptance made by the Church in the name of God; or, as others refine this opinion, in the conjunction of vows with a more perfect handing over of oneself, together with acceptance by the Church, both perpetual on either side and indissoluble by the ordinary way.³ I said at least of the body, because in the vow of chastity annexed to sacred order, only a more perfect handing over of the body has place. But the solemnity of a vow is an institute of merely ecclesiastical law, as we said under IV; and with that doctrine the opinion just set out is joined with difficulty.

According to others, in a more perfect and of itself immutable handing over, together with a force incapacitating the person for certain moral effects. But to this opinion the same objections are opposed as to the immediately preceding opinion.

According to others, in a special authenticity of vows, or in a certain special extrinsic juridic quality annexed by the Church to certain vows, to which by the ordinary way there has been added the force of invalidating acts contrary to the vows, if they are capable of being invalidated. But this special authenticity or special quality should not be taken for publicity only, but for greater notability or inviolability. This opinion, since serious difficulties do not seem to stand in its way, is preferred.

¹ February 1583.

² 25 May 1584.

³ According to the supporters of this opinion, a person bound by solemn vows is like a thing consecrated to God; but a person bound by simple vows is like a blessed thing.