Institutes of the Christian Religion (Vol. 2 of 2)
III. The second consideration which we have mentioned,
calls us to measure our strength, to contemplate our calling,
and not to neglect the liberty which God has conferred on us.
For he who vows what is not in his power, or is repugnant to
his calling, is chargeable with rashness; and he who despises
the favour of God, by which he is constituted lord of all things,
is guilty of ingratitude. By this remark, I do not intend that
we have any thing in our power, so as to enable us to promise
it to God in a reliance on our own strength. For, with the
strictest regard to truth, it was decreed in the council of
Arausium, that nothing is rightly vowed to God but what we
have received from his hand, seeing that all the things which are
presented to him are merely gifts which he has imparted. But
as some things are given to us by the goodness of God, and
other things are denied to us by his justice, let every man
follow the admonition of Paul, and consider the measure of
grace which he has received.[1073]
My only meaning here,
therefore, is, that vows ought to be regulated by that measure
which the Lord prescribes to us, by what he has given us; lest,
by attempting more than he permits, we precipitate ourselves
into danger, by arrogating too much to ourselves. Luke gives
us an example in those assassins who vowed “that they would
neither eat nor drink till they had killed Paul:”[1074]
even though
the design itself had not been criminal, yet it would have betrayed
intolerable rashness, to make a man’s life and death
subject to their power. So Jephthah suffered the punishment
of his folly, when, in the fervour of precipitation, he made an
inconsiderate vow.[1075]
In vows of this class, distinguished
by mad presumption, that of celibacy holds the preëminence.
Priests, monks, and nuns, forgetting their infirmity, think themselves
capable of celibacy. But by what revelation have they
been taught that they shall preserve their chastity all their lifetime,
to the end of which their vow reaches? They hear the
declaration of God concerning the universal condition of man;
“It is not good for man to be alone.”[1076]
They understand,
and I wish they did not feel, that sin remaining in us is attended
with the most powerful stimulants. With what confidence
can they dare to reject that general calling for their whole
life-time, whereas the gift of continence is frequently bestowed
for a certain time, as opportunity requires? In such obstinacy
let them not expect God to assist them, but rather let them
remember what is written: “Thou shalt not tempt the Lord
thy God.”[1077]
Now, it is tempting God, to strive against the
nature which he has implanted in us, and to despise the gifts
which he presents, as though they were not at all suitable for
us. And they not only do this, but even marriage itself,
which God has deemed it no degradation of his majesty to
institute, which he has pronounced to be “honourable in all,”
which our Lord Jesus Christ sanctified with his presence,
which he deigned to dignify with his first miracle, they are
not ashamed to stigmatize as pollution, for the mere purpose
of extolling celibacy, however it may be spent, with the most
extravagant encomiums. As though they did not exhibit a
striking proof in their own lives, that celibacy is one thing, and
that virginity is another; and yet they have the consummate
impudence to call such a life angelic. This is certainly doing
a great injury to the angels of God, to whom they compare
persons guilty of fornication, adultery, and other crimes far more
atrocious and impure. And there is not the least need of arguments,
when they are clearly convicted by the fact itself. For
it is very evident what dreadful punishments the Lord generally
inflicts on such arrogance, self-confidence, and contempt of
his gifts. Modesty forbids me to animadvert on those things
which are more secret, of which too much is already known.
That we are not at liberty to vow any thing which may hinder
us from serving God in our vocation, is beyond all controversy;
as if a father of a family should vow that he will desert his
wife and children, to undertake some other charge; or as if a
person qualified to fill the office of magistrate, on being chosen
to it, should vow that he would remain in a private station.
But the observation we have made, that our liberty ought not
to be despised, has some difficulty, which requires a further
explication. Now, the meaning may be briefly explained in
the following manner: As God has constituted us lords of all
things, and has placed them in subjection to us, in order that
we might use them all for our accommodation, we have no
reason to hope that we should perform a service acceptable to
God, by making ourselves slaves to external things, which
ought to be subservient to our assistance. I say this, because
some persons consider themselves entitled to the praise of
humility, if they entangle themselves with many observances,
from which the Lord, for the best of reasons, intended we should
be exempt. Therefore, if we would escape this danger, let us
always remember, that we are never to depart from that economy
which the Lord has instituted in the Christian Church.
IV. I proceed now to the third consideration which I mentioned;
that it is of great importance with what intention a
vow is made, if we wish it to be approved by God. For as
the Lord regards the heart, and not the external appearance, it
happens that the same action, performed with different designs,
is sometimes acceptable to him, and sometimes highly displeasing.
If any one vow abstinence from wine, as if there were
any holiness in such abstinence, he is chargeable with superstition;
if this be done for any other end which is not improper,
no one can disapprove of it. Now, as far as I am able to judge,
there are four ends to which our vows may be rightly directed.
For the sake of further elucidation, I refer two of them to the
time past, and the other two to the future. To the time past
belong those vows by which we either testify our gratitude to
God for benefits received, or, in order to deprecate his wrath, inflict
punishment on ourselves for sins that we have committed.
The former may be called vows of thanksgiving; the latter,
vows of penitence. Of the former we have an example in
Jacob, who vowed to give to God the tenth of all he should
acquire, if the Lord would bring him again from his exile to
his father’s house in peace.[1078]
We have other examples of
the same kind in the ancient peace-offerings, which used to be
vowed by pious kings and generals, entering on just wars, to
be offered in case they should obtain the victory; or by persons
labouring under more than common difficulty, in case the
Lord would deliver them. Thus we are to understand all
those places in the Psalms which speak of vows.[1079]
Vows
of this kind may also be now used among us, whenever God
delivers us from any great calamity, from a severe disease, or
from any other danger. For on such occasions, it is not inconsistent
with the duty of a pious man to consecrate to God
some oblation that he has vowed, merely as a solemn token of
grateful acknowledgment, that he may not appear unthankful
for his goodness. The nature of the second species of vows
will sufficiently appear from only one familiar example. If a
person has fallen into any crime through the vice of intemperance,
nothing prevents him from correcting that vice by
a temporary renunciation of all delicacies, and enforcing this
abstinence by a vow, to lay himself under the stronger obligation.
Yet I impose no perpetual law on those who have
been guilty of such an offence; I only point out what they are
at liberty to do, if they think that such a vow would be useful
to them. I consider a vow of this kind, therefore, as lawful,
but, at the same time, as left to the free choice of every
individual.
