|
Objection 1: It would seem that children ought not to be received in
religion. Because it is said (Extra, De Regular. et Transeunt.
ad Relig., cap. Nullus): "No one should be tonsured unless he
be of legal age and willing." But children, seemingly, are not of
legal age; nor have they a will of their own, not having perfect use
of reason. Therefore it seems that they ought not to be received in
religion.
Objection 2: Further, the state of religion would seem to be a
state of repentance; wherefore religion is derived [Question 81,
Article 1] from "religare" [to bind] or from "re-eligere" [to
choose again], as Augustine says (De Civ. Dei x, 3 [De Vera
Relig. lv]). But repentance does not become children. Therefore
it seems that they should not enter religion.
Objection 3: Further, the obligation of a vow is like that of an
oath. But children under the age of fourteen ought not to be bound by
oath (Decret. XXII, qu. v, cap. Pueri and cap.
Honestum.). Therefore it would seem that neither should they be
bound by vow.
Objection 4: Further, it is seemingly unlawful to bind a person to
an obligation that can be justly canceled. Now if any persons of
unripe age bind themselves to religion, they can be withdrawn by their
parents or guardians. For it is written in the Decretals (XX,
qu. ii, can. Puella) that "if a maid under twelve years of age
shall take the sacred veil of her own accord, her parents or
guardians, if they choose, can at once declare the deed null and
void." It is therefore unlawful for children, especially of unripe
age, to be admitted or bound to religion.
On the contrary, our Lord said (Mt. 19:14): "Suffer the
little children, and forbid them not to come to Me." Expounding
these words Origen says (Tract. vii in Matth.) that "the
disciples of Jesus before they have been taught the conditions of
righteousness [Mt. 19:16-30], rebuke those who offer
children and babes to Christ: but our Lord urges His disciples to
stoop to the service of children. We must therefore take note of
this, lest deeming ourselves to excel in wisdom we despise the
Church's little ones, as though we were great, and forbid the
children to come to Jesus."
I answer that, As stated above (Article 2, ad 1), the
religious vow is twofold. One is the simple vow consisting in a mere
promise made to God, and proceeding from the interior deliberation of
the mind. Such a vow derives its efficacy from the divine law.
Nevertheless it may encounter a twofold obstacle. First, through
lack of deliberation, as in the case of the insane, whose vows are not
binding [Extra, De Regular. et Transeunt. ad Relig., cap.
Sicut tenor]. The same applies to children who have not reached the
required use of reason, so as to be capable of guile, which use boys
attain, as a rule, at about the age of fourteen, and girls at the age
of twelve, this being what is called "the age of puberty," although
in some it comes earlier and in others it is delayed, according to the
various dispositions of nature. Secondly, the efficacy of a simple
vow encounters an obstacle, if the person who makes a vow to God is
not his own master; for instance, if a slave, though having the use
of reason, vows to enter religion, or even is ordained, without the
knowledge of his master: for his master can annul this, as stated in
the Decretals (Dist. LIV, cap. Si servus). And since boys
and girls under the age of puberty are naturally in their father's
power as regards the disposal of their manner of life, their father may
either cancel or approve their vow, if it please him to do so, as it
is expressly said with regard to a woman (Num. 30:4).
Accordingly if before reaching the age of puberty a child makes a
simple vow, not yet having full use of reason, he is not bound in
virtue of the vow; but if he has the use of reason before reaching the
age of puberty, he is bound, so far as he is concerned, by his vow;
yet this obligation may be removed by his father's authority, under
whose control he still remains, because the ordinance of the law
whereby one man is subject to another considers what happens in the
majority of cases. If, however, the
child has passed the age of puberty, his vow cannot be annulled by the
authority of his parents; though if he has not the full use of reason,
he would not be bound in the sight of God.
The other is the solemn vow which makes a man a monk or a religious.
Such a vow is subject to the ordinance of the Church, on account of
the solemnity attached to it. And since the Church considers what
happens in the majority of cases, a profession made before the age of
puberty, however much the person who makes profession may have the use
of reason, or be capable of guile, does not take effect so as to make
him a religious (Extra, De Regular., etc. cap. Significatum
est.).
Nevertheless, although they cannot be professed before the age of
puberty, they can, with the consent of their parents, be received
into religion to be educated there: thus it is related of John the
Baptist (Lk. 1:80) that "the child grew and was strengthened
in spirit, and was in the deserts." Hence, as Gregory states
(Dial. ii, 3), "the Roman nobles began to give their sons to
the blessed Benedict to be nurtured for Almighty God"; and this is
most fitting, according to Lam. 3:27, "It is good for a man
when he has borne the yoke from his youth." It is for this reason
that by common custom children are made to apply themselves to those
duties or arts with which they are to pass their lives.
Reply to Objection 1: The legal age for receiving the tonsure and
taking the solemn vow of religion is the age of puberty, when a man is
able to make use of his own will; but before the age of puberty it is
possible to have reached the lawful age to receive the tonsure and be
educated in a religious house.
Reply to Objection 2: The religious state is chiefly directed to
the attachment of perfection, as stated above (Question 186,
Article 1, ad 4); and accordingly it is becoming to children, who
are easily drawn to it. But as a consequence it is called a state of
repentance, inasmuch as occasions of sin are removed by religious
observances, as stated above (Question 186, Article 1, ad
4).
Reply to Objection 3: Even as children are not bound to take oaths
(as the canon states), so are they not bound to take vows. If,
however, they bind themselves by vow or oath to do something, they are
bound in God's sight, if they have the use of reason, but they are
not bound in the sight of the Church before reaching the age of
fourteen.
Reply to Objection 4: A woman who has not reached the age of
puberty is not rebuked (Num. 30:4) for taking a vow without her
parents' consent: but the vow can be made void by her parents. Hence
it is evident that she does not sin in vowing. But we are given to
understand that she binds herself by vow, so far as she may, without
prejudice to her parents' authority.
|
|