States of Christian Life and Vocation, According to the Doctors and Theologians of the Church/Part 1/Section 2/ARTICLE I. The State of Tendency to Perfection, or the Religious State/CHAPTER XI.

by Jean-Baptiste Berthier

CHAPTER XI. IS THE CONSENT OF THEIR SUPERIORS NECESSARY FOR THOSE WHO ENTER RELIGION.

WITH regard to this question, let us begin by stating here what St. Thomas says: "Inferiors can be relieved in two ways from their obedience to superiors. In the first place, if a magistrate gives a command, and the supreme ruler of the state an opposite one, it is beyond doubt, says St. Augustine, that the order of the magistrate is to be laid aside, and the will of the sovereign to be done. Therefore, when God and a worldly ruler give us contradictory orders, God, and not the ruler, is to be obeyed. In the next place, a subject is not bound to yield obedience to a superior who commands what he has no right to command. Man is entirely dependent on God, and is bound to obey him in all things, but subjects are not wholly dependent on superiors: they owe submission only within certain limits. Thus, for instance, they are under no obligation to obey superiors in the choice of a state of life."^[1]

Here is the teaching of St. Thomas, and, according to St. Liguori, it is commonly received among theologians.^[2] It is a doctrine as logical as it is liberal. In order to draw inferences from it, we shall enter into some details. Before doing so, however, we proclaim loudly that it is no wish of ours to lessen the respect and veneration that are due to superiors. We are conscious that they hold, in regard to us, the place of God. Yet obedience has limits set to it by the hand of heaven. We must accept the divine law such as it is. We must discard neither the rights which it secures to us, nor the duties that it lays upon us.

Can a parish priest enter religion without the leave of his bishop? St. Liguori puts this question, and his answer is : " We must hold by all means that he can." In support of this answer the saint quotes canon law, St. Thomas, and the great Benedict XIV, who delivers this as certain. The illustrious pontiff, however, says that, before leaving, the pastor should, not so much indeed from duty or courtesy, as from natural law, make known his purpose to his bishop, in order that his flock may not be left without a shepherd. After that, even though the bishop should disapprove the priest's intention, the latter may still withal become a religious.^[3] But how does the case stand with respect to clerics and other beneficiaries, who have no care of souls?

" Here is my answer," continues St. Liguori. " Though bound by their state and by courtesy to inform the bishop of their purpose to enter religion, they commit no sin if, from reverential fear, or from an apprehension of being thwarted in their desires, they neglect to warn their ordinary, as Benedict XIV declares. It is certain that bishops cannot prevent their seminarians from entering religion. An archdeacon having entered the Society of Jesus, his Eminence, Cardinal Quirinus, complained that he had done so without his leave, and had a book printed to induce the Sovereign Pontiff of the time to declare that a cleric cannot enter religion against the will of his bishop. But the Holy Father answered, as St. Gregory had previously done in a like case, that, far from preventing ecclesiastics from such an undertaking, they are to be strengthened and urged to carry it out. Yet Benedict XIV says that if a cleric, by entering religion, were to cause great harm to the church to which he is attached, his bishop would have power to recall him."^[4] If it is certain, as St. Liguori clearly proves, that bishops have no right to hinder clerics from embracing a religious life, what right can a family or a parish have to hinder, under futile pretexts, a person, whom grace solicits, from giving himself or her self to God?

The holy doctor puts also this question : " Do children sin who enter religion in spite of their parents ? " To some minds his answer may sound somewhat harsh ; however, its practical bearing is so great, that we would blame ourselves if we witheld it from the reader. We are so accustomed, nowadays, to listen to absurd bursts upon the interests of time and the rights of man, that we can afford to pardon a saint and doctor of the Church for speaking to us forcibly on the interests of the soul and the rights of God. Besides, we are aware that the Church found nothing to censure in the teaching of St. Liguori. Therefore, we shall neither add to nor take from this teaching ; and we doubt not that Christian souls will gather it up with all the respect due to the threefold authority of holiness, learning, and experience.

" The father of Protestantism, Luther, pretended that children sinned by entering religion against the consent of their parents ; but this doctrine was condemned by the Council of Toledo. That council says that girls of full twelve years, and boys of fourteen, have a perfect right to embrace the religious state without the leave of their parents. The same is taught by Saints Ambrose, Jerome, Bernard, Thomas, and Chrysostom. Theologians, also, commonly teach that a child is not bound to give up his purpose of entering religion to prevent scandal on the part of his parents ; that is, to prevent them from blaspheming, from giving way to anger, or speaking against the faith. ^[5]

St. Alphonsus did not speak this way only when he delivered his views as a theologian. He also wrote as follows to a young man : " Under pretext of calming your father and mother, evil counsellors will say to you that it is a matter of conscience for you to expose your parents to lose their souls. Make no account of such scruples: if your parents wish to lose their souls, it is their concern. Tell them that you cannot, for the sake of soothing them, put your own soul in danger, by giving up your evident vocation. "^[6]

Grave authors tell us that, when parents refuse consent, their child should wait a while until his parents come to learn their duty. They say, furthermore, that, if he is sure to obtain their consent easily, it is but proper that he should not leave his home without receiving the blessing of his father and mother. This latter circumstance, however, holds only where the child has no reason to apprehend that his parents will throw unreasonable obstacles in the way of his vocation. Generally speaking, therefore, children are to be excused in practice, who leave their families for such a purpose as this without the consent of their parents.

But, should children at least consult their parents on the choice of a state of life, with a view to receive good advice from them?

When it is question of entering the marriage state, many theologians are of opinion that children are bound to take their parents advice, for the reason that, in such a matter, parents have more experience than children.^[7] " However this may be, Father Pinamonti justly observes that, when there is question of choosing the religious state, it is neither necessary nor proper that children should take on that subject the advice of their parents ; not only because the latter have no experience in the case, but, furthermore, because, led astray by their own personal interests, they become enemies, according to the expression of St. Thomas. And, in truth, it too frequently happens that parents prefer to see their children go to ruin with themselves to seeing them save their souls without them, as St. Bernard says in speaking on this subject : " O hard-hearted father !" exclaims the saint, " barbarous mother! cruel parents! unfeeling souls ! you are not parents, you are murderers ; for you grieve to see your son saved, and you rejoice at the sight of his eternal perdition." ^[8]

The holy doctor cites other testimonies in support of his thesis, and then continues thus : " Hence St. Thomas recommends those who are called to the religious state to avoid taking counsel of their parents about their vocation. From all this reasoning we must conclude, not only that children do not sin who follow the religious life without taking the advice of their parents, but that, ordinarily, it would be a grave mistake to inform them of their project, by reason of the danger to which they would expose themselves of being debarred from putting it into execution. And this line of action receives confirmation from the example of so many saints, who gave up the world without the knowledge, and in spite, of their parents. God approved and favored their glorious flight, even by miracles. This is also the opinion of the learned Ebbel, who says : "When a child finds himself called by God to the religious state, and perceives that his parents are ill-disposed toward him, and, on account of their excessive carnal love for him, would throw obstacles in his way, he is under no obligation to consult them, for it will be wiser and more prudent for him to keep his intention to himself. "^[9] All that we have just said is taken, word for word, from St. Liguori s large work on moral theology. He adds what follows, in his short treatise on "The choice of a state of life," or on vocation: "The saints, directly [as soon as] they were called to leave the world, left it altogether, without informing their parents. This was the conduct of St. Thomas of Aquin, St. Francis Xavier, St. Philip Neri, and St. Louis Bertrand. St. Stanislaus also made his escape without his father's permission. His brother instantly followed in pursuit, driving his carriage at full speed. As he was on the point of overtaking the holy fugitive, his horses stopped : no amount of beating could make them move on. At last Paul Kostka turned them about, and then they set off in a gallop to the town from which they had started.

" We have, besides, the example of the blessed Oringa of Valdarno, in Tuscany. Though betrothed to a young man, she secretly left her home to consecrate herself to God. Arriving at the banks of the Arno, which barred her way, she said a short prayer, and immediately saw the river part its waters, which rose on both sides like walls of crystal, and opened a dry passage to her.

" Even when parents are gifted with piety, self-interest and passion so far lead them astray, that, under one pretext or another, they make no scruple to thwart by every means the vocation of their children.

" We read, in the Life of Father Paul Segneri the Younger, that his mother, although a woman far advanced in prayer, left no stone unturned to hinder the vocation of her son, who was called to the religious life. How many other parents, that were very devout people, underwent an extraordinary change in cases of this nature, and seemed possessed by an evil spirit ! So true is it that, in no circumstance, does the devil employ more formidable arms than when there is question of barring the path of persons called to the religious life.

" This doctrine will not be deemed severe by those who know that the religious vocation is one of the highest favors that God can bestow on a child or on his family. To refuse parents, therefore, the right of intercepting it, is to bind them to receive what will be their happiness and the happiness of their children. Persons intending to follow the religious life can certainly abide by the decisions that have just been quoted from St. Liguori ; for the doctrine of this holy and illustrious bishop may be followed with a safe conscience, as it is easy to infer from numerous declarations of the Holy See. However, the civil law often obliges religious orders not to receive, without the previous consent of their parents, candidates that have not attained their twenty-first year, and who, if admitted before that age, might, at the request of their parents, be forced to leave the order into which they had entered. But as soon as they have reached their twenty-first year, young people may be received into religious communities or congregations against the will of their parents. The gentle St. Francis of Sales, whom even worldlings love and admire, wrote, as follows, to a young person whose parents kept her in the world against her will: " If, in regard to your vocation, you trust in those whom God has appointed your guides in domestic and temporal matters, you deceive yourself, since they have no authority to deal with such a question. Were the voice of parents of flesh and blood to be listened to in such matters, there would be few to embrace the perfection of the Christian life."^[10]

In these days, when every one is crying out for liberty of conscience, that often is used only in behalf of evil, let us grant it to those who wish to make the holiest and best possible use of it.

Footnotes

1. Div. Th., 2, 2, q. 104, a. 5.
2. Theol. Moral., lib. 4, n. 68.
3. lbid., n. 74.
4. Theol. Mor., lib. 4, n. 75.
5. St. Lig., Theol. Mor., lib. 4, n. 68.
6. "Spiritual Letters," let. I3th.
7. Calech. Condi. Trid. de matrim., n. 3.
8. Theol. Moralis; lib. 4, n. 68; Bernard, epist. ill. Ed. Migne.
9. TheoL Mor., lib. 4, n. 68.
10. Gautrelet, Traite de etat religieiix, t. I, p. 55.