Conferences on the Virtues
By Fr. Bruno Cocuzzi, ocd
Number 76
Vows
Article
1 – The Essence of a Vow
A
Vow is a promise made to God. Vows belong to the genus of promises,
therefore, and are the expression of a free and deliberate intention on the
part of the promisor, binding in conscience, to do or to give, some
lawful thing for the benefit of the promisee.
As such, it
differs from a mere proposal, or good intention, which does not create a moral
obligation to fulfill it.
A Vow, then,
can be compared to a contract. In a
contract (as you recall) the matter of the contract becomes a private law
which one of the parties imposes upon himself/herself, and whose fulfillment
the other party can exact in all justice.
The specific
difference between a Vow and every other kind of promise is that in the case of
vows, God Himself is the One to Whom the promises to give, or perform, are
addressed. The fact that a Vow is a
promise made to God makes it an Act of the Virtue of Religion.
There can be
more than one reason why a promise binding in conscience is made.
Ordinarily it
is to confer some tangible, perceptible benefit upon, to perform some kind of
service for, or merely to confer honor upon or to show reverence to, the
promise. In the case of God, Who is
Perfect within Himself, there is no benefit we can bestow upon Him, nor any
true service we can do for Him. We can
only show Him due Honor and Glory. But
that is precisely the object of all acts of Religion, namely, to give God the
Honor that is His due. And so, by its
very nature, a Vow is an act of Religion.
Someone might
object, saying that, since we do talk about serving God, there must be
something (besides giving Him Glory) that we can do for Him, that otherwise He
would be lacking.
It is true; of
course, that we can serve God in the sense that we work to bring about the
Kingdom of God on earth. We know that
God has willed that we serve Him by striving faithfully to carry out certain
commands of His. Scripture exhorts
us: Serve the Lord with gladness…
Nevertheless,
we have to keep in mind that our very Being and all its Powers are themselves
gifts that He has freely bestowed upon us, and that any good we can do is
directly attributable to His grace, without which we can accomplish no good
thing.
Our Service
of God, therefore, is really nothing more than our acceptance of His gift
to us of letting us share in the working out of His Merciful designs upon the
Human Race.
In order for a
Vow to be valid, that is, truly to exist, three things are required:
1. The
intention of obliging oneself;
2. Full
deliberation;
3. Complete
freedom.
Since all of
these qualities are internal, and thus known with certainty only to the ones
who make the vows, it is next to impossible for the Church, who accepts the Vow
in the name of God, to enforce them.
Apparently
there have been situations in which individuals have externally professed Vows
in a public ceremony, but never had the internal intention of binding
themselves.
In such cases,
the person who professes what is, in effect, a fictitious vow is guilty
of a sin of dishonoring God. And
depending upon the matter of the vow, as in the case of the Vows of Religion,
it would be a grievous sin. In light
matters it wouldn’t necessarily be a serious sin to profess a fictitious vow,
though it could become so in the event it resulted in serious harm, such as
causing scandal or inflicting an injustice on someone who relied on its
authenticity.
Full
deliberation is required because one must know perfectly well what the promise
involves. Only thus would the one
making the vow be able, realistically, to assess his/her ability to fulfill the
vow.
Perhaps the
expression full deliberation doesn’t say enough. If a person is totally mistaken as to what
the promise entails, or is unaware of difficulties and obstacles to its
fulfillment, and adequate deliberation is made on the basis of erroneous or
incomplete information, then that, too, would make the vow invalid.
Complete
freedom is also required, because this too, like full deliberation, is a
requirement for every human act.
As you recall from a conference of many years ago, it is only to human
acts that credit or blame can be attributed, that is, for which we can be held
responsible.
The incomplete
or erroneous knowledge mentioned in connection with deliberation would also
render complete freedom impossible, but freedom can be diminished or taken away
completely for other reasons, too.
Among them (again we saw this in a conference of several years ago)
would be fraud, fear, moral pressure and strong emotion.
Another
invalidating reason relied upon nowadays when granting dispensations from Vows
of Religion and Marriage Vows is immaturity. In an immature person very often all three of the
requirements for a valid vow would be wanting.
In regard to
the seeking of dispensations from vows on the grounds of one or more of the
invalidating defects (lack of proper intention, insufficient deliberation,
incomplete freedom), we must remember that only God knows the entire
truth. As Scripture says, God will
not be mocked. If we think that the
Church grants dispensations and annulments too easily, it is probably because
She knows that the persons seeking them cannot deceive Him and must ultimately
answer to Him directly.
According to my
author, it is useful and could be advisable to make vows. For those of us who are on our pilgrim way,
and thus in a state of imperfection, vows are a means of confirming
our wills in good.
On the part of
the one who makes the vow, he/she is declaring it illicit for him/her to do
anything other than the work of virtue that is the matter of the vow. This amounts to rooting one’s will
permanently and immovably in what is good.
On the part of
the good work or virtue itself, the vow makes it better and more meritorious:
1. The
good work or virtue becomes also, in virtue of the vow, an act of
Religion, which is the most noble of all the moral virtues.
2. Whoever
performs an act in fulfillment of a vow offers to God not only the good work in
itself, but also the freedom to do otherwise.
3. The
more firmly a person’s will is rooted in good, the greater the degree and
fervor of Charity possessed by that person, who is thus more pleasing to God.
In
virtue of what is said in (2) above, my author envisions an objection:
If
making a vow takes away my liberty to do otherwise [than the matter of the
vow], such that I cannot choose an alternative good thing, then making
perpetual vows of Poverty, Chastity and Obedience would result in a state of life-long
slavery. To which he responds (Quote):
Liberty
is not taken away by a moral obligation; rather, I is perfected and
delivered from the influence of passions and emotions, which would be an
obstacle to complete, unimpeded freedom of choice. Vows help the free will tend more easily and consistently toward
a higher and nobler good.
If
this were not the case, we would have to say that the capacity to choose
evil would be essential to the perfection of freedom of choice. Instead, the capacity to choose evil is an imperfection,
since it is not found in God Himself nor in the Blessed in Heaven, who
nevertheless enjoy a most perfect, a beatifying freedom.
This
is the meaning of the teaching of St. Thomas:
Just as being unable to sin does not diminish freedom, neither
does the necessity experienced by a will firmly rooted in good diminish
its liberty, as is evident in regard to God and the Blessed. The necessity imposed by a vow is similar to
the confirmation in good of the citizens of Heaven. As St. Augustine says: “Happy the necessity that compels us toward
grater good”.
It
must be remembered, too, that the moral obligation imposed by the vow is itself
freely chosen. In the matter of
contracts between private parties, we would never say that the promise to give
or to perform a service takes away the promisor’s liberty. So neither can we say that the promise
freely made to live under vows takes away the votary’s liberty.
The
truth of the matter is, that the freedom with which the vow is taken then
informs or clothes each and every act that is a fulfillment of the vow or
constitutes fidelity to the vow.
Therefore, such acts are most fully human and meritorious. Let is be understood that Religious, in
virtue of their vows, are the most faithful and free of all people. (End of Quote)
Article
2 – The Matter of Vows
By the term,
the matter of a vow, we mean whatever it is that is promised to
God. The thing promised can be an
action or an omission, such as, making a pilgrimage, fasting, abstinence, and
the like. Then it is called a personal
vow.
Or it can be
the giving of money or other tangible good, as in almsgiving, and then
it is called a real vow.
Obviously then,
vows can be mixed as well, though the textbook does not give an example
thereof.
Certain
conditions must be verified in regard to the matter of the vow, also, in order
that the vow be valid. What is promised
must be:
1. morally
good
2. better
than its alternatives, and
3. within
the realm of possibility
It would be
useless and foolish to promise someone something that is not acceptable
to him (since to become binding, a promise has to be accepted by the promise).
In the case of
vows (promises made to God), only those deeds that are virtuous in and of
themselves are acceptable to Him.
1. Therefore,
to promise God something evil would not only be invalid, but would also be a
grievous sin.
To
promise Him something good in itself but illicit because of circumstances would
also be invalid as well as sinful. For
example, to go overseas on pilgrimage is ordinarily valid matter for a
vow. But if a father who is needed at
home by his wife and children were to vow to go overseas on pilgrimage, such a
vow would be invalid.
Then
there are actions that are indifferent in themselves, and take on the quality
of being morally good or morally evil from the intention of the person
performing them. To take part in a
public demonstration is, in itself, something indifferent. But to do so for the purpose of protesting
against the evil of abortion would transform that action into something good,
and thus valid matter for a vow.
2. As
we said above, only those deeds that are virtuous (good in themselves) are
proper matter for a vow.
Certain
good things are so unique that the only alternative would be something evil. For example, one may vow never to tell a
lie. This is valid matter, even though
the only alternative would be to tell a lie, which is a sin. Nevertheless, because the vow has the effect
of rooting one’s will in good, unique matter of this sort is acceptable to
God. Such is the case, also, with a vow
of chastity (which differs from a vow of celibacy.).
In
the case of an entire category to alternative good things, virtuous deeds,
among which one is free to choose, only that one is valid matter for a vow,
which is better than all the rest.
After all, God deserves the very best we can give Him.
One
example of this I think of is from the Old Testament. Only those animals were acceptable to God as sacrificial
offerings that were without blemish of any kind. It would have been invalid (and grievously offensive to God) for
someone in those days to vow to offer a defective animal in sacrifice, when
several unblemished ones were available to choose from.
3. Since
we can only promise to give or to do something that lies within our power
to give or do, a vow to do the impossible would be invalid.
It
would be invalid, obviously, for us to vow to give as alms money that belongs
to someone else, since we have no dominion (rights of ownership) over it.
Similarly,
a mother or father could not vow that a son or daughter will become a
Religious, since a religious vocation is a uniquely personal thing between God
and the human soul. However, a mother
or father can validly vow to perform certain ascetical practices, give
alms, and offer special prayers in the hope of winning a religious
vocation for a child. For a parent to
vow the same thing in thanksgiving for a religious vocation granted to a
son or daughter would also be valid.
Things
that are physically or morally impossible clearly cannot be the matter of a
vow. I could not vow, for example, to
be on pilgrimage in Rome and in Lisieux on the very same day (physical
impossibility).
One
could, however, vow to avoid all fully deliberate venial sins and
imperfections. Our Holy Mother St.
Teresa did something akin to this. She
made a vow always to do what she understood to be most pleasing
to God.
How serious a
sin is it to promise invalid matter to God? Common sense tells us that:
1. To
promise an act that is grievously sinful is a serious sin.
2. To promise what is less than
grievously sinful is, in the abstract, still a grievous sin. But in the concrete, in virtue or
circumstances (ignorance, inadvertence, etc.), it could be only venially
sinful.
3. To
promise what is the lesser of two goods or something merely indifferent would
be venially sinful.
4. Since
no one could possibly take seriously a promise to do something physically or
morally impossible, a vow to do so would be no sin at all. However, a person who did so might easily be
guilty of a sin or irreverence toward God, or of giving scandal to the weak.
* * * * * * * * *
MISSION STATEMENT: This web site was created for the purpose of completing the work of Fr. Bruno Cocuzzi, O.C.D These conferences may be reproduced for private use only. Publication of this material is forbidden without permission of the Father Provincial for the Discalced Carmelites, Holy Hill, 1525 Carmel Rd., Hubertus, WI 53033-9770.