Homily: Marriage Is Good, But Celibacy Is Better

[AccountDeleted]

Barb - Yes, I could ask a moderator, but after dUSt's thread about restrictions in VS being a possibility, I thought this might be an opportunity to show our good will in trying to restore a sense of community and charity to Vocation Station.

 

It is not my intention to force this on anyone, so I offered this option as possible voluntary action on the behalf of all of us here at VS. Of course, if no one else wants to do it, then, by all means, continue to post. It was a hope for unity here.

Edited August 22, 2013 by nunsense

[BarbTherese]

Posted Today, 01:09 AM

From dUSt

http://www.phatmass.com/phorum/topic/130869-i-will-be-restricting-access-to-vocation-station/page-1

CRAZY DOPE POST, YO!

It has been brought to my attention that certain members make Vocation Station a rather hostile place to be. This is unacceptable. This board is not the Debate Table. This board is suppose to be a holy place people come to discern and discuss vocations.

 

Therefore, I will be speaking to my mods and various members to get a good sense of who needs their Vocation Station access revoked. They will be welcome to debate and participate on other parts of the phorum, just not here.

 

God bless you guys!

 

[BarbTherese]

Interesting example, BarbaraTherese.  Just a question.  Are you assuming that both A and B have been offered the grace of consecrated life? 

 

 

 

My post was about motivation and Graces granted after the decision on vocation has been made and effected.  Very broadly speaking there can be said to be three consecutive general signs of vocation:

 

Attraction to the life

Ability to lead the life, including right motivation and qualities

Acceptance into the life

 

In my post, Subject B, I will imagine: Certainly had the qualities necessary for religious life and since she desired to be about God's Will, she would have had the right initial motivation.  Her attraction, however, was more to marriage than religious life and her spiritual director felt that she probably was called to marriage. She married and had children and lived a holy life.

 

I guess it would all break down as to how one can be aware that one has been offered the Grace of consecrated life?  For a CV, it would be, I am thinking, when she is attracted to a CV vocation, followed by an application that is subsequently accepted by her bishop - finally The Grace is  granted at her consecration.  The Grace of a CV vocation would be in 'four subsequent movements'.

 

For religious life, the final movement is final profession and there would be some sort of final act in the various forms of consecrated life I should imagine.

 

All due respect BoC, but I really don't want to get into a debate on this issue - if you had debating in mind.  Certainly, if you start a thread in the Debate Forum, I am very happy to move over there.  :)  I have answered your question, I think.

 

See this thread by dUSt http://www.phatmass.com/phorum/topic/130869-i-will-be-restricting-access-to-vocation-station/page-1

[abrideofChrist]

Barb, I saw that thread, and I also saw the original post of this thread.  I was wondering about your example because it caught my attention and made me think about the question of vocation in light of what the saints say about carefully discerning a vocation because it is more difficult to become holy in a vocation one was not originally given an invitation to.  In your subject A, for example, she reminded me of a priest who may not have had a divine vocation to the priesthood but felt compelled to become one because he felt it was the better thing to do (I am thinking of a real life example of a priest who told me that was the only reason he became a priest).  If A lacked a divine vocation to consecrated life, then even those she chooses it and lives it, her life will be a lot harder to be faithful because God didn't design her to be in the consecrated state.

[BarbTherese]

Barb, I saw that thread, and I also saw the original post of this thread.  I was wondering about your example because it caught my attention and made me think about the question of vocation in light of what the saints say about carefully discerning a vocation because it is more difficult to become holy in a vocation one was not originally given an invitation to.  In your subject A, for example, she reminded me of a priest who may not have had a divine vocation to the priesthood but felt compelled to become one because he felt it was the better thing to do (I am thinking of a real life example of a priest who told me that was the only reason he became a priest).  If A lacked a divine vocation to consecrated life, then even those she chooses it and lives it, her life will be a lot harder to be faithful because God didn't design her to be in the consecrated state.

 

Thank you for the very patient reply, BoC.  But I think we are likely to move into debating an issue -  and debate does really does belong in a debate forum - hence, I wont comment further.  Your post is certainly not debating, I think my response just might be. :locked:   I don't know for sure - never do until the post is written.  I have a tendancy to think 'on my feet' (i.e. at the keyboard typing) :)

 

It is very kind of dUSt to warn of a looming-over-us-administrative-decision.  I don't want to be 'swept out with the "new broom" ' if I can at all help it.

 

 

May The Lord bless with His Peace...........Barb :)

[abrideofChrist]

I understand your caution, Barbara, so I won't address the rest of this post to you but instead to anyone who is interested. 

 

One of the consequences of the clerical state and the consecrated states being objectively superior in themselves but not necessarily subjectively better for people in their own callings is that choosing them without a divine calling can make it harder for someone to be saved.  Likewise, for a person to whom God has extended the invitation to those states who chooses marriage may find it much more difficult to be saved.  Perhaps one reason why the Church emphasizes the difference is to help highlight the seriousness of the discernment that is necessary for a prudent decision.  If I choose a vocation which requires a special grace, I need to ensure I have that grace.  If I choose a vocation that doesn't require that grace, but in doing that I reject that special grace that is more helpful for me personally to get to Heaven, I may find it very difficult to be holy in my life choice.

[BarbTherese]

God would not withhold any of His Graces from a person because they made a wrong decision in good faith.  If I chose religious life and entered and was professed, but God had never called me in the first place, of course He would look upon me lovingly and bestow all the Graces necessary in my journey, withholding nothing whatsoever.  Would my path be harder?  No, it wouldn't be, to my mind, for the sole purpose and only reason (that is) that I had made a wrong decision initially in good faith.  The Good Lord is not petty - He just is not like that.

If I was psychologically unsuited to the life from the start, then it becomes a psychological problem needing to be dealt with at that level.  The failure, then, would be a leadership failure somehow, not my personal failure if I did not recognise the problem in the first place. It was a failure of leadership to recognise the problem on application and along the discernment way within religious life.

 

We need to adjust our thinking in line with Lumen Gentium, (Dogmatic Constitution of The Church)  http://www.vatican.v...gentium_en.html and bring The Cross and suffering to the heart and centre of our lives, our selfhood.  We are discussing Lumen Gentium Transmundane : 

 

 "On earth, still as pilgrims in a strange land, tracing in trial and in oppression the paths He trod, we are made one with His sufferings like the body is one with the Head, suffering with Him, that with Him we may be glorified.(64)" 

 

 

Suffering is intrinsic to our journey and is a cause for embrace, rather than rejection.  It is not an easy matter to embrace, but necessary.  The Cross and suffering can be transformed into holiness and redemptive.  Suffering is a cause for Peace and for Joy - an honour, not rejection and sorrow.  Not easy again, I know.  We will never ever be asked to undergo more than we are capable of enduring.  Grace is always with us.

 

Edited August 22, 2013 by BarbaraTherese

[BarbTherese]

Discernment is a very serious matter and I think it is treated very seriously in these forums.  But the discernment journey is not infallible in outcome - mistakes can be made.

I think it is very important to establish just how one recognises the Grace of a consecrated life vocation in the first place.  And I covered this in Post #138 http://www.phatmass.com/phorum/topic/130790-homily-marriage-is-good-but-celibacy-is-better/page-10#entry2617610 .  Be things as they may in recognising the Grace, it can be thought that indeed the person has The Grace, but it proves not to be so and the person leaves the consecrated state.  A major part of discernment and the journey of discerning to final vows or whatever, is also the formation of leadership in recognising an actual vocation.

 

Without defining how to recognise the Grace of consecrated life vocation, or any vocation, how do we know that we are all talking about the same dynamic i.e. Grace of consecrated life in this instance.

Edited August 22, 2013 by BarbaraTherese

[abrideofChrist]

Barbara, I was thinking about writings such as this one:  http://www.saintsbooks.net/books/St.%20Alphonsus%20Maria%20de%20Liguori%20-%20Vocation%20to%20the%20Religious%20State.pdf.  It is very traditional and I think merits some reflection.  I am not sure I agree with all of it, but it is intriguing.

[BarbTherese]

Thank you for sharing, BoC!   I only skimmed over it and settled on a few things that gave me pause over words and phrases used. 

 

I certainly think, since the subject is raised, that it is important to define how one can recognise the Grace of a vocation to the consecrated state, for one.  I covered my concepts (drawn from a reliable site) in Post #138. 

[dUSt]

Moved to Debate Table.

[MarysLittleFlower]

Mary's Little Flower wrote in reply:  God's Beloved, take a look at what the Council of Trent said in the link in the original post.... it's definitively stated that celibate state is objective a higher state, and there's even an anathema attached to rejecting this. VII, a Pope, or any future Council can't change doctrine... because official doctrine doesn't change. When there's an anathema to something, that is a really serious pronouncement of what Church teaching is. What I'm trying to say is that Church teachings can't change. So what was said in Trent, continues to be true. Remember that VII didn't define dogma (in my understanding, it was more pastoral)... yet Trent did. :)

 

 

The state of celibacy is theologically above the non celibate Sacrament of Marriage, simply because the celibate state ideally embraces no intermediary but goes directly to The Lord and His Kingdom.  Marriage goes through the partner, i.e. the wife or the husband to determine God's Will for each other and for the marriage.  Hence the celibate state remains theologically above the Sacrament of Marriage and for obvious reasons.

 

Pre V2 only priesthood and/or religious life were culturally considered "vocations" per se.  Marriage as a valid and important vocation came post V2 when it was underscored by The Church as a valid and important potential call and vocation from God, along with the lay state in life per se.  Marriage as vocation has now taken root in our cultural thinking.  The lay state in life is still struggling somewhat to do so.  It takes time and effort.  

 

 I think some might have problems getting their heads around "theologically objectively superior", missing the point that nothing can be theologically objectively superior to God's Will. Hence God may call a young woman to consecrated virginity, but this does not lessen a vocation and call to The Sacrament of Marriage.  If He calls a young woman to Marriage then it is a superior call simply because it is God's Will for that person's life.  A vocation can only ever be an invitation, not a Divine Command and God's Invitations are a function of His Divine Will.  He invites to vocation, He does not command.

 

Some seem to want to stop at the objective theological determination of the various states (i.e. superior or inferior) and not take into account that nothing is superior to God's Will -  on the objective theological level as it has been discussed in this forum.

 

All from this really rickety armchair :)........or as I understand things.

Barbara, I have tried in almost every post to talk about how IF God wills a person to choose marriage, that would be their path to holiness. I'm trying to just say what my understanding of the Church teaching is. Religious life is theologically a higher state of life than marriage - which is doctrine, I am not free to debate this - and that's what I meant by "objective". Subjective in my mind means - regarding an individual person's calling, in which case they should follow their calling, and do God's will. But for those who are called to religious life, I do believe that God prepares graces for them there, so they'd have the grace to live it out well.

 

Subject A:  Wants to do her very best for God and desires the most superior vocation possible and hence she chooses consecrated life in the celibate chaste state - is accepted and lives out a very holy life.

Subject B:  Wants to do what God might be asking of her and decides on marriage.  She does marry and has a good marriage with children and lives out a very holy life.  She did however have the necessary qualities for the consecrated state also.

 

Both have done well and God has blessed them richly in their journey with many Graces.  Subject A chose what she wanted, while Subject B was invested or wanted what God was asking of her and spiritual direction and her own reflections indicated marriage and children. 

 

Both did choose well, though B possibly more perfect in motivation than A. Subject B wanted God's Will to be done in her.  Subject A wanted the most superior for herself and in order to serve God's Glory as best she could.

 

Sometimes in life we can do very well for The Lord and His Glory, but hindsight reveals that our motivation was not the best.  But at the time we acted according to our lights then.

 

The above, I hope, illustrates both the theological objective and subjective considerations.

 

Barbara, do you mean about motivation? I agree that this is something important and something I definitely need to keep in mind for discernment, that my motivation in the end is to put God's will above my own, whether or not His will coincides with my will. I'm often not good at doing this though.

 

based on what I've heard, it's really hard to live out the consecrated life without the grace given for it.

 

Why would the first person necessarily be wanting to do THEIR will? I mean, what if they chose to give their all to God simply because they felt an attraction to this which came from God, and discerned it as His will? :) I don't think that people choose religious life simply because it's superior, unless by superior they mean - wanting to give their all to God, with love, - and if God gives them an attraction to it. That's sort of what I'm saying :)

 

it seems that God prepares graces for people in specific vocations... like how He said to St Faustina, that He prepared graces for her in her particular convent... so I think it's a good idea to follow where God leads :)

 

Are you talking about motivation? In that case I agree with you that our motivation should be following God's will. What I'm trying to say is that someone could agree with the Church's teaching on religious life being a higher state, but choose it because they feel it's God's will for them, and choose it because for them, "higher state" means following the attraction to give all of themselves to God only (and through this to help the Church and other souls), not to a spouse as well.

 

God bless!

Edited August 22, 2013 by MarysLittleFlower

[KnightofChrist]

Pope John Paul II , Vita Consecrata, no. 32: “As a way of showing forth the Church's holiness, it is to be recognized that the consecrated life, which mirrors Christ's own way of life, has an objective superiority. Precisely for this reason, it is an especially rich manifestation of Gospel values and a more complete expression of the Church's purpose, which is the sanctification of humanity. The consecrated life proclaims and in a certain way anticipates the future age, when the fullness of the Kingdom of Heaven, already present in its first fruits and in mystery,[62] will be achieved and when the children of the resurrection will take neither wife nor husband, but will be like the angels of God (cf. Mt. 22:30)”

Pope Pius XII, Sacra Virginitas, no. 32: “This doctrine of the excellence of virginity and of celibacy and of their superiority over the married state was, as we have already said, revealed by our Divine Redeemer and by the Apostle of the Gentiles; so too, it was solemnly defined as a dogma of divine faith by the holy council of Trent, and explained in the same way by all the holy Fathers and Doctors of the Church."

Council of Trent, pg. 225: "If anyone saith that the marriage state is to be preferred before the state of virginity, let him be anathema." [...] "writing to the Corinthians, [Paul] says: I would that all men were even as myself; that is, that all embrace the virtue of continence...A life of continence is to be desired by all.”

Catechism of the Catholic Church, p. 916: "The state of the consecrated life is thus one way of experiencing a "more intimate" consecration, rooted in Baptism and dedicated totally to God. In the consecrated life, Christ's faithful, moved by the Holy Spirit, propose to follow Christ more nearly, to give themselves to God who is loved above all and, pursuing the perfection of charity in the service of the Kingdom, to signify and proclaim in the Church the glory of the world to come."

I Corinthians Chp. VII: "It is a good thing for a man not to touch a woman. [v.1] Indeed, I wish that everyone were like I am [celibate]. [v.7] I should like you to be free from anxieties. An unmarried man is anxious about the things of the Lord; how he may please the Lord. But a married man is anxious about the things of the world; how he may please his wife, and he is divided. [v.32] Are you free of a wife? Then do not look for a wife. If you marry, however, you do not sin, nor does an unmarried woman sin if she marries; but such people will experience affliction in their earthly life, and I would like to spare you that." [v.28] (see also Mark 12:18-27, Mtt 19:10-12, 2 Timothy Ch. 2:3)

 

--

 

Pope John Paul II, Theology of the Body: "The 'superiority' of continence to marriage never means, in the authentic tradition of the Church, a disparagement of marriage or a belittling of its essential value. It does not even imply sliding, even merely implicitly, toward Manichean positions, or a support for ways of evaluating or acting based on a Manichean understanding of the body and of sex, of marriage and procreation. The evangelical and genuinely Christian superiority of virginity, of continence, is thus dictated by the motive of the kingdom of heaven. In the words of Christ reported by Matthew 19:11—12, we find a solid basis for admitting only such superiority, while we do not find any basis whatsoever for the disparagement of marriage that could be present in the recognition of that superiority."

 

Source: http://www.religious-vocation.com/

[MarysLittleFlower]

Yes I think it's hard to argue with all those quotes... I think that what is bothering people in this thread sometimes, is that people fear that someone would use these statements to look down upon married people, or to be proud of a calling to religious life? I think that it's not necessarily the case, I mean there's nothing "prideful" about the Church teaching, the pride is in us instead, and we can get rid of this pride with God's grace and help :) in addition, realizing this about religious life can also have a humbling effect as well. If I'm discerning religious life, or any vocation, it's important to pray for humility. But the Church teaching is not lessened in its truth, by this.

[BarbTherese]

I did do a long reply to your post, MLF.  I did not copy it and when I posted, "Bad Gateway" came up and I lost the post entirely.  It is very frustrating as "Bad Gateway" happens rather regularly!  I will return later when I get over that frustration and post again.

 

 

I do not dispute and have never ever disputed that the celibate chaste state in life for the sake of The Kingdom is higher theologically than marriage on an objective theological scale.  The highest point on that scale is always "God's Will"  Discerning what exactly is God's Will for a life can be the difficult point - not always however.   If I choose marriage and this is God's Will for me, speaking objectively theologically, marriage remains inferior to the celibate chaste state for the sake of The Kingdom.  Yet, in following God's Will for my life (that vocation to which He has invited), I have chosen the very best but not on that objective theological scale where the chaste celibate state for the sake of The Kingdom remains the highest call, yet subservient to God's Will for a life.

 

As this thread developed, I can't recall any contributor who disputed that the celibate state for the sake of The Kingdom was not higher than the non celibate state.

 

MLF, if you are attracted to the chaste celibate consecrated state, then follow it through.  Seek spiritual direction if possible.  Also speak with the vocations director in the religious order which attracts you.  I applied to Carmel at 16yrs and was accepted for when I turned 21yrs since Carmel did not accept applicants under 21 years.  Hence, even if there is a reason you cannot enter now, the vocations director can certainly point you in the right direction.

If you would like to consider consecrated virginity, seek out the vocations director in your diocese.