NINTH ARTICLE [II-II, Q. 88, Art. 9]

Whether Children Can Bind Themselves by Vow to Enter Religion?

Objection 1: It would seem that children cannot bind themselves by

vow to enter religion. Since a vow requires deliberation of the mind,

it is fitting that those alone should vow who have the use of reason.

But this is lacking in children just as in imbeciles and madmen.

Therefore just as imbeciles and madmen cannot bind themselves to

anything by vow, so neither, seemingly, can children bind themselves

by vow to enter religion.

Obj. 2: Further, that which can be validly done by one cannot be

annulled by another. Now a vow to enter religion made by a boy or

girl before the age of puberty can be revoked by the parents or

guardian (20, qu. ii, cap. Puella). Therefore it seems that a boy or

girl cannot validly make a vow before the age of fourteen.

Obj. 3: Further, according to the rule of Blessed Benedict [*Ch. 58]

and a statute of Innocent IV, a year's probation is granted to those

who enter religion, so that probation may precede the obligation of

the vow. Therefore it seems unlawful, before the year of probation,

for children to be bound by vow to enter religion.

_On the contrary,_ That which is not done aright is invalid without

being annulled by anyone. But the vow pronounced by a maiden, even

before attaining the age of puberty, is valid, unless it be annulled

by her parents within a year (20, qu. ii, cap. Puella). Therefore

even before attaining to puberty children can lawfully and validly be

bound by a vow to enter religion.

_I answer that,_ As may be gathered from what has been said above (A.

7), vows are of two kinds, simple and solemn. And since, as stated in

the same article, the solemnization of a vow consists in a spiritual

blessing and consecration bestowed through the ministry of the

Church, it follows that it comes under the Church's dispensation. Now

a simple vow takes its efficacy from the deliberation of the mind,

whereby one intends to put oneself under an obligation. That such an

obligation be of no force may happen in two ways. First, through

defect of reason, as in madmen and imbeciles, who cannot bind

themselves by vow so long as they remain in a state of madness or

imbecility. Secondly, through the maker of a vow being subject to

another's power, as stated above (A. 8). Now these two circumstances

concur in children before the age of puberty, because in most

instances they are lacking in reason, and besides are naturally under

the care of their parents, or guardians in place of their parents:

wherefore in both events their vows are without force. It happens,

however, through a natural disposition which is not subject to human

laws, that the use of reason is accelerated in some, albeit few, who

on this account are said to be capable of guile: and yet they are

not, for this reason, exempt in any way from the care of their

parents; for this care is subject to human law, which takes into

account that which is of most frequent occurrence.

Accordingly we must say that boys or girls who have not reached the

years of puberty and have not attained the use of reason can nowise

bind themselves to anything by vow. If, however, they attain the use

of reason, before reaching the years of puberty, they can for their

own part, bind themselves by vow; but their vows can be annulled by

their parents, under whose care they are still subject.

Yet no matter how much they be capable of guile before the years of

puberty, they cannot be bound by a solemn religious vow, on account

of the Church's decree [*Sext. Decret. cap. Is qui, de Reg. et

transeunt. ad Relig.] which considers the majority of cases. But

after the years of puberty have been reached, they can bind

themselves by religious vows, simple or solemn, without the consent

of their parents.

Reply Obj. 1: This argument avails in the case of children who have

not yet reached the use of reason: for their vows then are invalid,

as stated above.

Reply Obj. 2: The vows of persons subject to another's power contain

an implied condition, namely, that they be not annulled by the

superior. This condition renders them licit and valid if it be

fulfilled, as stated above.

Reply Obj. 3: This argument avails in the case of solemn vows which

are taken in profession.

_______________________

Summa Theologica, Part II-II (Secunda Secundae) Translated by Fathers of the English Dominican Province · 第 584 / 1128 题