Who may enter religion

Our Lord Jesus Christ proposed the counsels of perfection to all his followers in general: ‘‘ He who can take, let him take it’; “ If thou wilt be perfect.” When, however, we consider particular cases, we see that many are debarred as a matter of fact from embracing the religious state. Many find themselves in a fixed position in life with duties to be performed towards parents, relations, and others, which will not allow of their abandoning the world. Many more are unsuitable by character and temperament for the religious life. None of these can properly be said to have a divine call to the religious state, for when God gives a call he provides the necessary means for following it. There are others whom God calls in wonderful and different ways, making known his will to them sometimes in an extraordinary manner, more often by slowly developed inclinations and desires to forsake all and give themselves to him. The question arises whether such a divine vocation is a necessary condition for lawfully entering into religion, and whether one who felt himself called would sin if he neglected to follow the call.

Anyone who is free and who wishes to enter religion to be able to do more good, or to save his soul with greater security, is in fact called by God, for such desires are special graces given by God, and so they are signs of a divine vocation. So that all who have the aptitude, are free, and are led to religion by supernatural motives of some sort, are divinely called by God. One who entered religion from merely natural motives would probably soon find that he had made a mistake, and would return to the world. However, if such a one chose to rectify his intention and remained in religion to do good and to save his soul, he would not commit sin. He embraces a more perfect state of life, and if he does what in him lies, God will give him abundant grace to live a good religious life. Of course, sin is committed by one who enters religion from merely natural motives, and does not intend to fulfil the obligations of the state into which he has intruded himself. One who is called to religion and prefers to remain in the world acts very foolishly, throws away a great grace, and may expose his salvation to great danger. If such a one is persuaded that he cannot save his soul in the world, he commits grave sin by not taking the necessary means to secure his eternal salvation. If, however, he hopes with God’s grace (which will not be wanting to him) to lead a good life in the world, he will not commit sin by not following the divine call; for this is a counsel, not a command, and counsels do not bind under sin. Some divines disagree with the foregoing doctrine, but it is supported by the authority of St Thomas and many approved authors (cf. Can. 538).

As, therefore, the observance of the counsels is not only lawful but a more perfect state of life, anyone may enter into religion who is not prevented by some obstacle. Those who have not possession of their faculties, and children who have not arrived at the age of puberty, and are still subject to their parents, cannot enter into religion. In former times parents used occasionally to present their children to be brought up in monasteries with the intention of their becoming religious when they reached the proper age. This custom, however, has long been abandoned.

Besides safeguarding what the constitutions of each institute prescribe on the point, the Code declares that the following cannot be validly admitted to the novitiate: Those who have formally belonged to a non-Catholic sect.

Those who have not the age required for the novitiate.

Those who enter religion induced thereto by violence, grave fear, or deceit, or whom the superior receives from the same motives. A spouse while the marriage lasts.

Those who are bound or who have been bound by the bond of religious profession.

Those over whom hangs a penalty on account of committing some grave crime of which they have been or can be accused.

A Bishop, whether residential or titular, although only designated by the Roman Pontiff.

Clerics who, by an arrangement of the Holy See, are bound by an oath to work for the benefit of their diocese or mission, for the time during which the obligation of the oath lasts.

The following are admitted unlawfully but validly: Clerics in sacred orders without the local Ordinary being consulted, or against his will, because their departure would be to the great loss of souls, and this loss cannot otherwise be avoided.

Those in debt who are not solvent.

Those who are liable to render accounts or who are implicated in other secular business from which religion may have to fear lawsuits and troubles.

Children who ought to assist parents—that is, father, mother, grandfather, or grandmother—placed in grave necessity, and parents whose care is necessary for the support and education of children.

Those destined for the priesthood in religion, but who are debarred from it by irregularity or other canonical impediment (Can. 542).

I suppose that the individual Orders have some particular statutes on this matter. Since however there are four principal Rules, namely of Basil, Augustine, Benedict, and Francis, yet the individual Orders differ in their statutes, much more those alien to them, as the Carthusians and the Jesuits.

I shall say in this matter what is more or less common, and meets each case.

First, Bishops, bound by oath to the most holy Pope, cannot be received without his leave. Thus D. Thom. question 189. article 7. from the chapter Nisi cum pridem de renunc.

Secondly, nor spouses with marriage consummated chapter Quidam, and the chapter Placet de convers. coniugat. Yet by mutual consent chapter Cum sis, chapter Uxoratus, chapter Ad Apost. de convers. coniugat. they can enter; but the woman, if she is young, or such that incontinence on her part might be feared if she remain in the world, is bound to enter a monastery, the husband entering too. Otherwise it is enough if she vow continence into the hands of the Bishop.

The judgment must be made from the person's state, health, and past life, as Poncius says de matrim. lib. IX. cap. 12. Whether there is danger, the Bishop will judge chapter si vir, et uxor, 27. quaest. 2. chapter Quia Agatho, chapter scripsisti nobis, 27. quaest. 2. as S. Bonaventure observes on chapter 2. of the Rule, where S. Father Francis provided for this.

S. Doctor notes that the age due for this, so that the wife may remain in the world without suspicion, with the husband entering Religion, is to be measured more by stability of virtue than by the course of years; for it is said Sap. 4. The senses of a man are grey hairs, and a spotless life is the age of old age. Poncius consents in the place cited, as does Bassaeus V. Religio 2. num. 2. Therefore he does not determine that she be fifty years old, as Sanchez would have it de matrim. lib. VII. disp. 32. num. 15. Gutierrez de matrim. cap. 95. Bonacina quaest. 3. puncto 3. num. 12. Filliucius tract. 10. part. 2. num. 133. Nor does he decree that she be sixty, with Faustus in theol. relig. lib. V. quaest 55. Azor tract. 1. lib. XII. cap. 1. quaestio 6.

Yet in a ratified marriage, one can enter religion against the spouse's will, chapter verum, chapter ex publico, de convers. coniug. Or if the man has consummated within a two-month period, Diana de sacr. resol. 242. part. 3. Or if one commits adultery chapter Agathosa 27. quaest. 2. chapter Portio de divort. but not if he has forgiven it. Or if the spouse falls into heresy dist. 32. quaest. 1. cap. 1.

Thirdly, one who has deflowered a virgin under promise of marriage. See Diana part. 3. de sacrament. Resol. 203.

Fourthly, a slave against his master's will chapter si quis 17. quaest. 2.

Fifthly, one who is a debtor; thus D. Thom. 2. 2. q. ult. art. 6. I say a debtor by contract or by wrong, as I said de Rest. Yet the profession will be valid, though illicit from the Clementine S. In suprema, where the Bull of Sixtus V is moderated.

Sixthly, those bound to render accounts from Sixtus V. Cum de omnibus.

Seventhly, sons whose parents lie in grave poverty: or conversely.

Eighthly, minors without the leave of parents or guardians, D. Thom. 1. 2. quaest. 88. art. 9. et q. 101. art. 4. et quaest. ult. art. 5.

Ninthly, an illegitimate one whose father, still living, has professed in that religion. But by their own statutes some orders exclude homicides, the infamous, and those born of Jews, Saracens, or heretics.

Eleventhly, those disfigured in body; for these are barred from the altar, c. De corp. vitiato, and chapter 2. de cler. aegrot.

Twelfthly, the infamous. Add from the Constitution of Sixtus V. criminals. These are they who have perpetrated shameful deeds, and these are notorious. Likewise exclude those gravely suspected.

Twelfthly, Bigami cannot be Clerics.

The Prelate is indeed bound to be informed; and if through his fault a criminal, or one bound by accounts, etc., is received, he incurs the penalties of deprivation of voice, of incapacity for all offices, honors, etc. See Tamburinus tract. 3. de iure Abbat. disp. 6. quaest. 4. Portel. dub. Reg. v. Novitii informat. Rodriquez tract. 3. gg. regul. quaest. 10. Miranda tract. 1. quaest. 17. 18. 19. Peyrinus tract. 2. de Praelat. quaest. 3. cap. 1. §. 1. Vecch. in prax. disp. 6. dub. 7. Bassaeus V. Religio 2. who warns, that the one received is bound to disclose his grave impediment.

Therefore those are to be received who are fit to serve Religion. Wherefore those who receive the unfit or the worthless are guilty of deadly fault.

Caia, a nun who recently professed simple vows, discloses to Titius, her confessor, that before entering Religion she had contracted with Paul a debt of twenty pounds that was not yet paid, of which she had made no mention to the superiors. Furthermore, she says that she brought fifty pounds with her into religion and gave it to the Order to compensate for the board and clothing furnished to her during the novitiate. Titius indeed knows that debt is an impediment to religion and that justice must be observed; nevertheless, he does not know what is to be done in the case. Hence it is asked:

1. Who may enter religion?

2. How do substantial and secondary impediments to entrance into religion differ?

3. Is a religious Order bound to pay the personal debts of its members?

4. What is to be said of the case?

1. Who may enter Religion?

All those who have the aptitude for the duties of religious life and who ar£ not prevented by any special obstacle may enter religion. The chief obstacles are: the necessity of supporting parents, consummated marriage, and debts. Bishops can not become Religious without the leave of the Holy See. The different Religious Orders have special impediments in addition to these.¹

1 Manual of Moral Theology, vol. i, p. 643.

2. How do substantial impediments differ from secondary?

The former make religious profession invalid if they are not removed beforehand, the latter only render it unlawful. Debts constitute a secondary impediment.

3. Is a Religious Order bound to pay the personal debts of its members?

Certainly not. Personal obligations of this sort only affect him who contracted them.

4. The case. Caia did wrong to enter Religion without paying her debts. She has given all the money she had to pay for her own support during the novitiate to her superiors, who know nothing about the debt. She has no money left to pay the debt now. If she obtains any afterwards by inheritance or otherwise she will be obliged to pay the debt with the customary interest. In the meantime it will be sufficient if she repents of her fault, and resolves to fulfil her obligations when she can do so.

Patrick, a secular priest and a missionary in England but born in Scotland, seeks the counsel of Caius, a regular, in these circumstances. A few years ago Patrick entered a certain diocesan seminary in England and, after taking the oath of the Mission, was at length ordained under the title of the Mission. Afterwards, serving a certain Mission for two years, he brought forth much fruit in the vineyard of the Lord. Nevertheless, having experienced the dangers of such a life and having been captivated by love of religious perfection [a conjectural restoration of one corrupt printed word], he asks the Bishop for permission to return to his native country with the intention of entering a certain monastery there. The Bishop refuses; indeed, he asserts that Patrick is already in a state of perfection and that there is no reason for desiring religious life. So that he may forget it more easily, the Bishop orders him to go to another, very poor Mission, where neither labor nor poverty will be lacking. Patrick therefore asks Caius:

1. What obligations to serve the Mission rest upon him?

2. Is it true that the state of a secular priest is a state of perfection?

3. Can he enter religion, and under what conditions?

4. Is he bound to obey the Bishop with regard to the other Mission?

1. Under what obligations does Patrick lie of serving the Mission?

Patrick is bound to serve the diocese for which he was ordained by the very fact of his ordination and by his promise of canonical obedience to the Bishop. He is also bound by the terms of the missionary oath which he has taken.¹

1 Trent, xxiii, c. 16 De Ref.; Manual of Moral Theology, vol. i, p. 634.

2. Is it true that the state of a secular priest is a state of perfection?

A certain stability of life is necessary to constitute a state of life in the strict sense, and that it may be a state of acquiring perfection it should impose the obligation and offer special means to attain perfection. The secular priesthood is not a state of acquiring perfection, as there is not the requisite stability, nor does it offer special means of acquiring perfection. On account of the want of stability it can not strictly be called a state in which perfection is exercised like the state of bishops, but in the opinion of Suarez it may be called an imperfect and inchoate state of exercising perfection on account of the priest's duty of working for the sanctification of others.²

2 Suarez, De Relig., tract, vii, lib. i, cc. 14, 15, 17.

3. Can Patrick enter Religion and under what conditions?

If Patrick can get the leave of the Holy See he may enter Religion, but that leave is required by the terms of the missionary oath. He should therefore be advised to make up his mind whether as far as can be known he has a true vocation, and then if he wishes to follow it he must ask leave from the Holy See, which will doubtless first consult the Bishop and then grant leave or not as it judges to be for the best.

4. Is he bound to obey the Bishop and accept the poor Mission assigned to him?

It may reasonably be doubted whether Patrick is so obliged if he does not wish to leave his present post. To transfer him to a poorer and harder Mission has the appearance not of promotion but of degradation, and Patrick has done nothing to deserve that. When the First Council of Baltimore laid it down that priests were obliged to obey the bishop when he bade them accept any mission within the diocese, the S. Cong, de Prop. Fide substituted for it this clause: “ We admonish priests that mindful of the promise made at their ordination they should not refuse to accept any mission assigned to them by the bishop ” (Collectio Lacensis recent. Concil., Ill, p. 22). Which is much less peremptory.