|
Objection 1: It would seem that an oath is more binding than a vow.
A vow is a simple promise: whereas an oath includes, besides a
promise, an appeal to God as witness. Therefore an oath is more
binding than a vow.
Objection 2: Further, the weaker is wont to be confirmed by the
stronger. Now a vow is sometimes confirmed by an oath. Therefore an
oath is stronger than a vow.
Objection 3: Further, the obligation of a vow arises from the
deliberation of the mind, a stated above (Question 88, Article
1); while the obligation of an oath results from the truth of God
Whose testimony is invoked. Since therefore God's truth is
something greater than human deliberation, it seems that the obligation
of an oath is greater than that of a vow.
On the contrary, A vow binds one to God while an oath sometimes
binds one to man. Now one is more bound to God than to man.
Therefore a vow is more binding than an oath.
I answer that, The obligation both of vow and of an oath arises from
something Divine; but in different ways. For the obligation of a vow
arises from the fidelity we owe God, which binds us to fulfil our
promises to Him. On the other hand, the obligation of an oath arises
from the reverence we owe Him which binds us to make true what we
promise in His name. Now every act of infidelity includes an
irreverence, but not conversely, because the infidelity of a subject
to his lord would seem to be the greatest irreverence. Hence a vow by
its very nature is more binding than an oath.
Reply to Objection 1: A vow is not any kind of promise, but a
promise made to God; and to be unfaithful to God is most grievous.
Reply to Objection 2: An oath is added to a vow not because it is
more stable, but because greater stability results from "two immutable
things" [Heb. 6:18].
Reply to Objection 3: Deliberation of the mind gives a vow its
stability, on the part of the person who takes the vow: but it has a
greater cause of stability on the part of God, to Whom the vow is
offered.
|
|