Thomas Aquinas, Summa Theologiae

Objection 1: It would seem that a vow need not be always about a better good. A greater good is one that pertains to supererogation. But vows are not only about matters of supererogation, but also about matters of salvation: thus in Baptism men vow to renounce the devil and his pomps, and to keep the faith, as a gloss observes on Ps. 75:12, "Vow ye, and pay to the Lord your God"; and Jacob vowed (Gn. 28:21) that the Lord should be his God. Now this above all is necessary for salvation. Therefore vows are not only about a better good.

Objection 2: Further, Jephte is included among the saints (Heb. 11:32). Yet he killed his innocent daughter on account of his vow (Judges 11). Since, then, the slaying of an innocent person is not a better good, but is in itself unlawful, it seems that a vow may be made not only about a better good, but also about something unlawful.

Objection 3: Further, things that tend to be harmful to the person, or that are quite useless, do not come under the head of a better good. Yet sometimes vows are made about immoderate vigils or fasts which tend to injure the person: and sometimes vows are about indifferent matters and such as are useful to no purpose. Therefore a vow is not always about a better good.

On the contrary, It is written (Dt. 23:22): "If thou wilt not promise thou shalt be without sin."

I answer that, As stated above (Article 1), a vow is a promise made to God. Now a promise is about something that one does voluntarily for someone else: since it would be not a promise but a threat to say that one would do something against someone. In like manner it would be futile to promise anyone something unacceptable to him. Wherefore, as every sin is against God, and since no work is acceptable to God unless it be virtuous, it follows that nothing unlawful or indifferent, but only some act of virtue, should be the matter of a vow. But as a vow denotes a voluntary promise, while necessity excludes voluntariness, whatever is absolutely necessary, whether to be or not to be, can nowise be the matter of a vow. For it would be foolish to vow that one would die or that one would not fly.

On the other hand, if a thing be necessary. not absolutely but on the supposition of an end---for instance if salvation be unattainable without it---it may be the matter of a vow in so far as it is done voluntarily, but not in so far as there is a necessity for doing it. But that which is not necessary, neither absolutely, nor on the supposition of an end, is altogether voluntary, and therefore is most properly the matter of a vow. And this is said to be a greater good in comparison with that which is universally necessary for salvation. Therefore, properly speaking, a vow is said to be about a better good.

Reply to Objection 1: Renouncing the devil's pomps and keeping the faith of Christ are the matter of baptismal vows, in so far as these things are done voluntarily, although they are necessary for salvation. The same answer applies to Jacob's vow: although it may also be explained that Jacob vowed that he would have the Lord for his God, by giving Him a special form of worship to which he was not bound, for instance by offering tithes and so forth as mentioned further on in the same passage.

Reply to Objection 2: Certain things are good, whatever be their result; such are acts of virtue, and these can be, absolutely speaking, the matter of a vow: some are evil, whatever their result may be; as those things which are sins in themselves, and these can nowise be the matter of a vow: while some, considered in themselves, are good, and as such may be the matter of a vow, yet they may have an evil result, in which case the vow must not be kept. It was thus with the vow of Jephte, who as related in Judges 11:30,31, "made a vow to the Lord, saying: If Thou wilt deliver the children of Ammon into my hands, whosoever shall first come forth out of the doors of my house, and shall meet me when I return in peace . . . the same will I offer a holocaust to the Lord." For this could have an evil result if, as indeed happened, he were to be met by some animal which it would be unlawful to sacrifice, such as an ass or a human being. Hence Jerome says : "In vowing he was foolish, through lack of discretion, and in keeping his vow he was wicked." Yet it is premised (Judges 11:29) that "the Spirit of the Lord came upon him," because his faith and devotion, which moved him to make that vow, were from the Holy Ghost; and for this reason he is reckoned among the saints, as also by reason of the victory which he obtained, and because it is probable that he repented of his sinful deed, which nevertheless foreshadowed something good.

Reply to Objection 3: The mortification of one's own body, for instance by vigils and fasting, is not acceptable to God except in so far as it is an act of virtue; and this depends on its being done with due discretion, namely, that concupiscence be curbed without overburdening nature. on this condition such things may be the matter of a vow. Hence the Apostle after saying (Rm. 12:1), "Present your bodies a living sacrifice, holy, pleasing to God," adds, "your reasonable service." Since, however, man is easily mistaken in judging of matters concerning himself, such vows as these are more fittingly kept or disregarded according to the judgment of a superior, yet so that, should a man find that without doubt he is seriously burdened by keeping such a vow, and should he be unable to appeal to his superior, he ought not to keep it. As to vows about vain and useless things they should be ridiculed rather than kept.

Articulus 2

Argumentum 1

Ad secundum sic proceditur. Videtur quod votum non semper debeat fieri de meliori bono. Dicitur enim melius bonum quod ad supererogationem pertinet.

Sed votum non solum fit de his quae sunt supererogationis, sed etiam de his quae pertinent ad salutem. Nam et in baptismo vovent homines abrenuntiare diabolo et pompis eius, et fidem servare, ut dicit Glossa, super illud psalm., vovete et reddite domino deo vestro.

Iacob etiam vovit quod esset ei dominus in deum, ut habetur Gen. XXVIII, hoc autem est maxime de necessitate salutis.

Ergo votum non solum fit de meliori bono.

Argumentum 2

Praeterea, iephte in catalogo sanctorum ponitur, ut patet Heb. XI.

Sed ipse filiam innocentem occidit propter votum, ut habetur iudic. XI.

Cum igitur occisio innocentis non sit melius bonum, sed sit secundum se illicitum, videtur quod votum fieri possit non solum de meliori bono, sed etiam de illicitis.

Argumentum 3

Praeterea, ea quae redundant in detrimentum personae, vel quae ad nihil sunt utilia, non habent rationem melioris boni. Sed quandoque fiunt aliqua vota de immoderatis vigiliis et ieiuniis, quae vergunt in periculum personae. Quandoque etiam fiunt aliqua vota de aliquibus indifferentibus et ad nihil valentibus. Ergo non semper votum est melioris boni.

Sed Contra

Sed contra est quod dicitur Deut. XXIII, si nolueris polliceri, absque peccato eris.

Corpus

Respondeo dicendum quod, sicut dictum est, votum est promissio deo facta. Promissio autem est alicuius quod quis pro aliquo voluntarie facit. Non enim esset promissio, sed comminatio, si quis diceret se contra aliquem facturum.

Similiter vana esset promissio si aliquis alicui promitteret id quod ei non esset acceptum. Et ideo, cum omne peccatum sit contra deum; nec aliquod opus sit deo acceptum nisi sit virtuosum, consequens est quod de nullo illicito, nec de aliquo indifferenti debeat fieri votum, sed solum de aliquo actu virtutis. Sed quia votum promissionem voluntariam importat, necessitas autem voluntatem excludit, id quod est absolute necessarium esse vel non esse nullo modo cadit sub voto, stultum enim esset si quis voveret se esse moriturum, vel se non esse volaturum.

Illud vero quod non habet absolutam necessitatem, sed necessitatem finis, puta quia sine eo non potest esse salus, cadit quidem sub voto inquantum voluntarie fit, non autem inquantum est necessitatis. Illud autem quod neque cadit sub necessitate absoluta neque sub necessitate finis, omnino est voluntarium. Et ideo hoc propriissime cadit sub voto.

Hoc autem dicitur esse maius bonum in comparatione ad bonum quod communiter est de necessitate salutis.

Et ideo, proprie loquendo, votum dicitur esse de bono meliori.

Ad 1

Ad primum ergo dicendum quod hoc modo sub voto baptizatorum cadit abrenuntiare pompis diaboli et fidem christi servare, quia voluntarie fit, licet sit de necessitate salutis.

Et similiter potest dici de voto Iacob. Quamvis etiam possit intelligi quod Iacob vovit se habere dominum in deum per specialem cultum, ad quem non tenebatur, sicut per decimarum oblationem, et alia huiusmodi quae ibi subduntur.

Ad 2

Ad secundum dicendum quod quaedam sunt quae in omnem eventum sunt bona, sicut opera virtutis et alia quae absolute possunt cadere sub voto. Quaedam vero in omnem eventum sunt mala, sicut ea quae secundum se sunt peccata. Et haec nullo modo possunt sub voto cadere. Quaedam vero sunt quidem in se considerata bona, et secundum hoc possunt cadere sub voto, possunt tamen habere malum eventum, in quo non sunt observanda.

Et sic accidit in voto iephte, qui ut dicitur iudic. XI, votum vovit domino, dicens, si tradideris filios Ammon in manus meas, quicumque primus egressus fuerit de foribus domus meae mihique occurrerit revertenti in pace, eum offeram holocaustum domino.

Hoc enim poterat malum eventum habere, si occurreret ei aliquod animal non immolativum, sicut asinus vel homo, quod et accidit.

Unde, ut Hieronymus dicit, in vovendo fuit stultus, quia discretionem non adhibuit, et in reddendo impius. Praemittitur tamen ibidem quod factus est super eum spiritus domini, quia fides et devotio ipsius, ex qua motus est ad vovendum, fuit a spiritu sancto. Propter quod ponitur in catalogo sanctorum, et propter victoriam quam obtinuit; et quia probabile est eum poenituisse de facto iniquo, quod tamen aliquod bonum figurabat.

Ad 3

Ad tertium dicendum quod maceratio proprii corporis, puta per vigilias et ieiunia, non est deo accepta nisi inquantum est opus virtutis, quod quidem est inquantum cum debita discretione fit, ut scilicet concupiscentia refrenetur et natura non nimis gravetur. Et sub tali tenore possunt huiusmodi sub voto cadere.

Propter quod et apostolus, Rom. XII, postquam dixerat, exhibeatis corpora vestra hostiam viventem, sanctam, deo placentem, addidit, rationabile obsequium vestrum.

Sed quia in his quae ad seipsum pertinent de facili fallitur homo in iudicando, talia vota congruentius secundum arbitrium superioris sunt vel servanda vel praetermittenda. Ita tamen quod si ex observatione talis voti magnum et manifestum gravamen sentiret, et non esset facultas ad superiorem recurrendi, non debet homo tale votum servare. Vota vero quae sunt de rebus vanis et inutilibus sunt magis deridenda quam servanda.