Page:Catholic Encyclopedia, volume 15.djvu/576

 VRAU

514

VRATJ

simple vows. Besides these, five vows are reserved to the Holy See: the vow of perpetual chastity, the vow to enter the reUgious state (that is in an institu- tion with solemn vows), a vow of a pilgrimage to the tombs of the Apostles, to St. James of Compostela, or to the Holy Land. However, these vows are only reserved if they are made under grave obhgation, with fuU hberty and unconditionally, and if they include the whole object of the vow. The reservation does not extend to accidental circumstances, for instance, to enter one order in preference to another, or to make a pilgrimage in this or that manner. In urgent cases, when there would be great peril in delay, the ordinaries may, if necessary, dispense even from reserved vows.

IV. The Vow of Chastity. — The vow of chastity forbids all voluntary sexual pleasure, whether interior or exterior: thus its object is identical with the obli- gations which the virtue of chastity imposes outside the marriage state. Strictly speaking, it differs (though in ordinary language the expressions may be sjTionymous) from the vow of celibacy (or abstinence from marriage), the vow of virginity (which becomes impossible of fulfilment after complete transgression), or the vow not to use the rights of marriage. The violation of the vow of chastity is always a sin against religion; it constitutes also a sacrilege in a person who has received Holy orders, or in a religious, because each of these persons has been consecrated to God by his vow: his vow forms part of the public worship of the Church. Some authors consider that this sacrilege is committed by the violation of even a private vow of chastit}'. Although a sin against the virtue of chastity is committed, there is no violation of the vow when a person without experiencing any sexual pleasure personally becomes an accomplice (as for instance by counsel) in the sin of another person not bound by a vow. Unless the person con- cerned is able honestly to abstain from all use of the rights of marriage, every simple vow of chastity con- stitutes a prohibitive impediment to marriage; some- times, as is the case in the Society of Jesus, it becomes by privilege a diriment impediment; when joined to religious solemn profession, it has the effect even of annulling a previous marriage not consummated. Some theologians have expressed the opinion that the religious profession produced this effect by Divine law; but it is more usual at the present day, and it seems to us more correct, to see in this a point of ecclesiastical disciphne. A person who, in defiance of his solemn vow, attempts to contract marriage, incurs the excommunication reserved to the bishop by the Constitution "Apostohca; Sedis". Marriage following after the simple vow of perpetual chastity has the effect of making the perfect fulfilment of the vow impossible, as long as the married state con- tinues; therefore the observance of the vow is sus- pended, and the bishop or the regular confessor may give permission for the use of marriage. If the marriage is dissolved, the vow recovers its full force. We have already seen that the vow of the wife, taken at marriage, can be directly annulled by the husband, and that of the husband indirectly by the wife.

The Sovereign Pontiff may dispense from the vow, even the solemn vow, of chastity. History contains well-known examples of such dispensations; thus, Julius III permitted Cardinal Pole to dispense even priests who, at the time of the Anglican schism, had contracted marriage: Pius VII dispensed priests who were civilly married under the French Revolution. But such dispensations are only granted for excep- tionally grave reasons; and even when a case is one of a simple vow of perpetual chastity freely and deliberately taken, the Holy See ordinarily grants a dispensation only in view of marriage, and imposes a perpetual commutation, such as the condition of approaching the sacraments once a month.

V. Historical Views. — Historically there are fre- quent instances of special vows in the Old Testament, generally under the form of offerings conditionally made to God — offerings of things, of animals, even of persons, which might, however, be redeemed; offerings of worship, of abstinence, of personal sacrifices. See for example the vow of Jacob (Gen., xxviii, 20- 22), of Jephte (Judges, xi, 30, 31), of Anna the mother of Samuel (I Kings, i, 11), in which we find an example of Nazaritism, and the imprecatory vow of Saul (I Kings, xiv, 24). In Deuteronomy, xxiii, 21-23, it is laid down that there is no sin in not making a promise to God, but that there is sin in delaying to pay the vow. The New Testament contains no express commendation of vows; but two instances of special vows are specially recorded in the Acts of the Apostles (xviii, 18, and xxi, 23). In both these passages, the vows are of the same nature as those of the Nazarenes. These particular vows were not unknown to the Fathers of the Church, especially to St. Ambrose, "De officiisministrorum". III, xii (P. L., XVI, 168); St. Jerome, Ep. cxxx (P. L., XXII, 11 IS) and St. Augustine, Sermon cxlviii (P. L., XXXVIII, 799). But the Church especially recognized the promise to devote one's Ufe to the service of God ; baptism itself is accompanied by promises which were formerly considered as genuine vows, and which contain in reality a consecration of oneself to Jesus Christ by the renunciation of the devil and paganism. At a very early period continence was professed by virgins and widows; and though this profession appears rather under the form of the choice of a state of Mfe than a formal promise, in the fifth century it was considered strictly irrevocable.

St. Thomas, Sum-ma theologica, II-II, Q. Ixxxviii, Q. clxxxiv, a* 4; Idem. In IV sent, d. xsxvi, Q. 1; Idem. Quodlibei, iji, a. 18, viiit a. 10; Idem, Opusc. xviii (al. xxii), c. xxiv; Suabez, De religionet tr. VI, VII, vi, \ii, 1. II. v-xiv; tr. X, 1. IV, c. iv; Vasquez, In I- II, Q. xcvi. a. 4, disp. clxv; Sanchez. In decalogiim, I. IV: ]. V; c.i, nn. 1-13; Idem, De matrimonio, 1. VII, disp. xxv, xxvi; Pelli- ZARlUB, Manuale reffiilarium, tr. IV, i. v; St. Alphonsus, Theol. mor., ]. IV, tr. ii. c. ii ; De Buck, De soUemnitale votorum, prcecipue paupertatis religiose^, epistula; Nilles, De juridica votonim soUem- nitale in Kath. Zeitschrift, X (Innsbruck): Koch, Lehrbuch der ■moral theologie, 66 101, 102; Lehmkuhl, Theol. mor., I, nn. 575- 633, 647-650 (2nd ed.) ; Schonen, Das wesen der Gelubde-solemnitat in Theol. Quartalschrift (Tubingen, 1874-5); Vermeersch, Quastiones morales selecUe, I, Q. i, c. iv (Bruges, 1912) ; Idem, De SoUemnitale votorumin De Religiosis inslilutis el personis. It (4th ed.), Supplementum II (Bruges, 1910); Wernz, Jus decreta- Hum, III; Idem, Jus administralionis eccl. cathol., n. 572, III, n. 654; Idem, Jus rrmirimoniale, n. 396, nota 8; Wandincer in Kraus, Realencycl. der chrill. AUerthUmer (Freiburg im Breisgau, 1882), a. V. Gelabde; Buhl (Protestant) in Allen Test. RealencyeL fur protestantische Theol. und Kirche (3d. ed., Leipzig, 1S99), a. v.

A. Vermeersch.

Vrau, Philibert, "the holy man of Lille", organ- izer of numerous Catholic activities; b. at Lille, 19 Nov., 1829; d. there, 16 May, 1905. His father was a manufacturer of sewing thread; his mother, Sophie Aubineau, was a Parisian of refinement and intelli- gence. He attended the municipal college of Lille. His teacher, a pupil of Victor Cousin, inspired him with such enthusiam for philosophical problems that after receiving his degree he devoted what leisure he had to them with a few young men he grouped around him. Influenced by unsound pliilosophy, he gave up the practice of his rehgion for four years, yet dur- ing this time he was active in a piu'ely philanthropic society for the aged poor. After his conversion in 1854 he turned this into a religious society.^ His mother's prayers for him had been constant. Whole- souled always, he now desired to enter the religious Ufe, but his parents' need of their only son restrained him. The failure of a banking sclieme, through imprudent partners, phmged tliem heavily in debt; and as Philibert had now to retrieve the losses of the firm, none but the lay apostolate was open to him. After his conversion his ambition w:i.s to make Lille a truly Catholic city; in this ;uiii be was seconded by his bfother-in-law, Dr. Camille Feron-Vrau (1831-