|
Objection 1: It would seem that parish priests cannot lawfully enter
religion. For Gregory says (Past. iii, 4) that "he who
undertakes the cure of souls, receives an awful warning in the words:
'My son, if thou be surety for thy friend, thou hast engaged fast
thy hand to a stranger'" (Prov. 6:1); and he goes on to say,
"because to be surety for a friend is to take charge of the soul of
another on the surety of one's own behavior." Now he who is under an
obligation to a man for a debt, cannot enter religion, unless he pay
what he owes, if he can. Since then a priest is able to fulfil the
cure of souls, to which obligation he has pledged his soul, it would
seem unlawful for him to lay aside the cure of souls in order to enter
religion.
Objection 2: Further, what is lawful to one is likewise lawful to
all. But if all priests having cure of souls were to enter religion,
the people would be left without a pastor's care, which would be
unfitting. Therefore it seems that parish priests cannot lawfully
enter religion.
Objection 3: Further, chief among the acts to which religious
orders are directed are those whereby a man gives to others the fruit of
his contemplation. Now such acts are competent to parish priests and
archdeacons, whom it becomes by virtue of their office to preach and
hear confessions. Therefore it would seem unlawful for a parish priest
or archdeacon to pass over to religion.
On the contrary, It is said in the Decretals (XIX, qu. ii,
cap. Duce sunt leges.): "If a man, while governing the people in
his church under the bishop and leading a secular life, is inspired by
the Holy Ghost to desire to work out his salvation in a monastery or
under some canonical rule, even though his bishop withstand him, we
authorize him to go freely."
I answer that, As stated above (Article 3, ad 3; Question
88, Article 12, ad 1), the obligation of a perpetual vow
stands before every other obligation. Now it belongs properly to
bishops and religious to be bound by perpetual vow to devote themselves
to the divine service [Question 184, Article 5], while parish
priests and archdeacons are not, as bishops are, bound by a perpetual
and solemn vow to retain the cure of souls. Wherefore bishops "cannot
lay aside their bishopric for any pretext whatever, without the
authority of the Roman Pontiff" (Extra, De Regular. et
Transeunt. ad Relig., cap. Licet.): whereas archdeacons and
parish priests are free to renounce in the hands of the bishop the cure
entrusted to them, without the Pope's special permission, who alone
can dispense from perpetual vows. Therefore it is evident that
archdeacons and parish priests may lawfully enter religion.
Reply to Objection 1: Parish priests and archdeacons have bound
themselves to the care of their subjects, as long as they retain their
archdeaconry or parish, but they did not bind themselves to retain
their archdeaconry or parish for ever.
Reply to Objection 2: As Jerome says (Contra Vigil.):
"Although they," namely religious, "are sorely smitten by thy
poisonous tongue, about whom you argue, saying; 'If all shut
themselves up and live in solitude, who will go to church? who will
convert worldlings? who will be able to urge sinners to virtue?' If
this holds true, if all are fools with thee, who can be wise? Nor
will virginity be commendable, for if all be virgins, and none marry,
the human race will perish. Virtue is rare, and is not desired by
many." It is therefore evident that this is a foolish alarm; thus
might a man fear to draw water lest the river run dry.
|
|