Vocation To The Single Life

[jmjtina]

[quote name='cappie' date='06 January 2010 - 11:55 PM' timestamp='1262843759' post='2031585']
I find no mention of an unconsecrated single “vocation” in Church teaching anywhere. As far as the Church is concerned, it doesn’t exist. Here is the problem: [i]“vocation,” in the sense the Church understands it[/i], means “to give oneself completely.” The Vatican II document Gaudium et Spes says that man finds himself only through a sincere gift of himself. John Paul II, in Mulieris Dignitatem, speaks of the “spousal disposition of women.” We – women and men -- were made to give ourselves, in love, to others. That’s where we find happiness.

Don’t singles give? Of course, often more than most. But vocation doesn’t mean “being a generous person.” It means giving our lives completely to another – either to a spouse in marriage or to God in consecrated virginity. And singleness doesn’t do that. In fact, the single state is defined by the lack of that gift.

But God writes straight with crooked lines. He meets us where we are. When we turn our lives over to Him, he creates something beautiful – beyond our wildest expectations. That beautiful life will be different for every unique person God touches. But a few threads run consistently.
Singleness gives an opportunity to turn to God in a profoundly personal way. With no other partner, God becomes partner. And when we turn to Him with that request, He answers. Singles are more aware that real fulfillment comes from giving. The absence of built-in gift in lives motivates single people to move outside of themselves and to reach out in love to those around us.
[/quote]


Love you Father! and Norseman, great link to Mary Beth Bonacci.

[tinytherese]

Hmm, what can be said of someone who was married in the Church, got a divorce but was refused an annulment?

Another thought I had is that single doesn't just mean that one has never been married. What about those who have suffered the loss of a spouse in death? Certainly they would not be required to remarry. Some only find one right person for them.

[MissyP89]

I am still confused. Is the Church forcing us to either marry or become sisters/priests? That doesn't make sense. What if we don't find the right person?

[Lil Red]

[quote name='MissyP89' date='10 January 2010 - 05:24 PM' timestamp='1263169443' post='2034197']
I am still confused. Is the Church forcing us to either marry or become sisters/priests? That doesn't make sense. What if we don't find the right person?
[/quote]
+JMJ+
yup, the Church goes around enforcing people to conform to religious dictates and if you don't, you're arrested and thrown into prison.






oh wait.

[Aloysius]

Barb,

I would indeed like to see a quote from LG that mentions unconsecrated single life as a vocation; Cappie's post says there is no such thing in the Church's perspective and I'm inclined to agree with him there.

a vocation to celibacy is only a vocation when vows are taken... remember, monks and nuns are still considered "laity" unless they are ordained.

In the Church's eyes, one who was refused an annulment is still married. They would live out a single state in life if there were serious reasons for them to remain separated from their spouse, especially in cases of abuse or what have you, or if their spouse simply refused to have them anymore.

The Church isn't forcing ppl to either marry or become priests/nuns; it is simply saying that a vocation is when one marries, becomes a priest, or takes vows. when one doesn't do any of those things, one is not yet living their vocation. It's not crazy to suppose that some people die without living out a vocation... some people might die as a child or die before they met the right person, or someone might not find the right person until they're 80 years old, or might never find someone at all (I think someone on this thread mentioned this: the dating pool has indeed been poisoned in modern times)... the point is, i would say, that one who lives a single (vocationless) life must not close themselves off to being called to a vocation. you can't say "no, I've already discerned that I was called to the single life". being an unconsecrated single person, one who has not taken formal vows of celibacy, means being eligible for marriage, religious life, or for males the priesthood.

see, when one has a vocation, one basically shuts off all other possibilities (except in the dual vocation of an Eastern married man who becomes a priest)... one cannot call singlehood a vocation because one cannot shut off the possibilities unless one takes formal vows to do so. without taking formal vows recognized by the Church, you are supposed to be open to God's call, which is why you're not (yet, or maybe ever) living a "vocation" in the proper sense of the word.

a widow or widower has lived out a vocation which has been completed, and is now eligible to live out another vocation if God calls him... I think at least in medieval practice widows might end up in convents, not sure about modern practice. but without vows to do so, I don't think a widow/widower should say "God has called me to live celibacy for the rest of my life"

Edited January 11, 2010 by Aloysius

[BarbTherese]

[quote name='tinytherese' date='11 January 2010 - 09:26 AM' timestamp='1263164168' post='2034155']
Hmm, what can be said of someone who was married in the Church, got a divorce but was refused an annulment?

Another thought I had is that single doesn't just mean that one has never been married. What about those who have suffered the loss of a spouse in death? Certainly they would not be required to remarry. Some only find one right person for them.
[/quote]


Hi TinyTherese..........I quoted in a previous post which you may not have noticed:

[quote]CHRISTIFIDELES LAICI (ON THE VOCATION AND THE MISSION
OF THE LAY FAITHFUL)
http://www.vatican.v...s-laici_en.html :
"The Various Vocations in the Lay State
…………………Along the same line the Second Vatican Council states: "This lay spirituality should take its particular character from the circumstances of one's state in life [quote](married and familylife, [b]celibacy[/b], widowhood), [/quote]from one's state of health and from one's professional and social activity. All should not cease to develop earnestly the qualities and talents bestowed on them in accord with these conditions of life and should make use of the gifts which they have received from the Holy Spirit"(208"[/quote]

The Church calls the single life "the celibate state", which of course it is. This means, I think, that disagreements really break down to terms used. I certainly have never read in Church documents, I don't think, about "the single state", but I have read "the celibate state" and of course both terms say the same thing. This means that if a married person is divorced and then the marriage not annulled - annullment refused (circumstances or objective situation) that one is called to the celibate state or the single life in the absence of any other call - say for example a Third Order or some other official structure in The Church where the lack of annullment would not be problematic.

As for those who are widowed, I believe that there is a movement in The Church and a fairly strong one to have a special consecrated state for widows.

[quote]Hi MissyP89 : I am still confused. Is the Church forcing us to either marry or become sisters/priests? That doesn't make sense.[/quote] A vocation is never a command from God, nor in our day one from The Church either. A vocation is an invitation to live out one's Baptism in a certain manner as we are discussing things here. I hope from my comments above that you can see that The Church does indeed recognize a call or vocation to the celibate state (single life). This state has two expressions. The first is when one is living celibate while trying to discern if God is calling to some other state of life - it is a time of discerning while yet embracing celibacy and The Gospel as one discerns. The second expression of the celibate state is when it is embraced as a call and vocation of itself by some sort of commitment to it (private vows for example - although this is not absolutely necessary) and to an embracing of The Gospel and most often some apostolate or as it is known today "ministry". As a point of interest, one can if one wishes have private vows accepted at Mass. While this is a public Mass, the vows are still termed as "private vows". Most often private vows can be dispensed by a priest if one wishes dispensation from them. Under private vows to the evangelical counsels (or the vows of religious) there is no change whatsoever of status and one remains laity, nor does The Church officially recognize a person in private vows in any way whatsoever. The rights and duties, obligations, of the laity in Church Law applies. It is not at all necessary to have private vows accepted during Mass - they can remain completely private.


I read the article by Mary Beth Bonnaci, which a previous poster referred to http://www.4marks.com/articles/details.html?article_id=437 (some of her conclusions I could not completely agree with in places) and she states: [i][b]"But vocation doesn’t mean “being a generous person.” It means giving our lives completely to another – either to a spouse in marriage or to God in consecrated virginity. And singleness doesn’t do that. In fact, the single state is defined by the lack of that gift. We are unattached, un-given. " [/b][/i] This is not so, one can give oneself to Christ and His Gospel and perhaps some certain apostolate or 'ministry' in the single or celibate state and embrace this state as a lay person outside of any consecrated state. Baptism itself unites us to Christ and His Death and is a call to follow His Gospel.
The other point from her article is that she mentions Pope John Paul II, in "Mulieris Dignitatem" (Dignity and Vocation of Women) - while I must confess I have not given this document a really careful read, I did notice that The Holy Father mentioned Joan of Arc as a person of admiration for women generally, who was neither married nor consecrated in any way - rather she was a lay person and contradicted her times totally by being military and wearing male clothing:
[quote](27) In every age and in every country we find many "perfect" women (cf. Prov. 31:10) who, despite persecution, difficulties and discrimination, have shared in the Church's mission. It suffices to mention: Monica, the mother of Augustine, Macrina, Olga of Kiev, Matilda of Tuscany, Hedwig of Silesia, Jadwiga of Cracow, Elizabeth of Thuringia, Birgitta of Sweden, [quote]Joan of Arc[/quote], Rose of Lima, Elizabeth Ann Seton and Mary Ward.[/quote]

I am not familiar with all the saints mentioned above.

One is always most wise to seek spiritual direction on the matter of vocation and a possible call from God. Most wise! To be recommended highly.

Barb

Edited January 11, 2010 by BarbaraTherese

[AccountDeleted]

[quote name='Aloysius' date='11 January 2010 - 11:58 AM' timestamp='1263171488' post='2034209']
Barb,

I would indeed like to see a quote from LG that mentions unconsecrated single life as a vocation; Cappie's post says there is no such thing in the Church's perspective and I'm inclined to agree with him there.

a vocation to celibacy is only a vocation when vows are taken... remember, monks and nuns are still considered "laity" unless they are ordained.

In the Church's eyes, one who was refused an annulment is still married. They would live out a single state in life if there were serious reasons for them to remain separated from their spouse, especially in cases of abuse or what have you, or if their spouse simply refused to have them anymore.

The Church isn't forcing ppl to either marry or become priests/nuns; it is simply saying that a vocation is when one marries, becomes a priest, or takes vows. when one doesn't do any of those things, one is not yet living their vocation. It's not crazy to suppose that some people die without living out a vocation... some people might die as a child or die before they met the right person, or someone might not find the right person until they're 80 years old, or might never find someone at all (I think someone on this thread mentioned this: the dating pool has indeed been poisoned in modern times)... the point is, i would say, that one who lives a single (vocationless) life must not close themselves off to being called to a vocation. you can't say "no, I've already discerned that I was called to the single life". being an unconsecrated single person, one who has not taken formal vows of celibacy, means being eligible for marriage, religious life, or for males the priesthood.

see, when one has a vocation, one basically shuts off all other possibilities (except in the dual vocation of an Eastern married man who becomes a priest)... one cannot call singlehood a vocation because one cannot shut off the possibilities unless one takes formal vows to do so. without taking formal vows recognized by the Church, you are supposed to be open to God's call, which is why you're not (yet, or maybe ever) living a "vocation" in the proper sense of the word.

a widow or widower has lived out a vocation which has been completed, and is now eligible to live out another vocation if God calls him... I think at least in medieval practice widows might end up in convents, not sure about modern practice. but without vows to do so, I don't think a widow/widower should say "God has called me to live celibacy for the rest of my life"
[/quote]

Aloysius - Between you and Cappie in this thread, you have answered a lot of questions for me personally and I thank you for this. My spiritual director asked me to wait for six months before discerning religious life again (after coming out of a convent four months ago), and I have been wondering about this "call to single life" vocation that I have heard others mention and wondered if that was what God was asking of me, rather than trying again with a religious community (I am not called to marriage).

Then I read a book about a young man who was trying to discern if he had a vocation to the priesthood. He was given some advice by a Marian priest and told some of the ways that one might recognize a vocation. "Part of it is desire, part of it is excitement for service... and part of its is an inability to respond to some kind of prompting in any other way than going with what your heart tells you."

In my heart I didn't feel that the single life alone was enough of an offering to God, no matter how many good works I do, so I was curious as to where this thread would lead. Thank you for your clear insight into this topic.

[Aloysius]

barb, I suppose it is mostly just terminology at the heart of the disagreement, but I'd still suggest it important not to call the celibate state a "vocation"... it is a state in life, a transitory state in life wherein one is eligible for another vocation.

the difference in the terms is a difference in mindset. I think a single person can decide not to actively seek out romance or to not accept a romantic advance for many many reasons, but none of those reasons should be "I have been called to the single vocation" unless they plan to take vows. a single lay person is in a position to hear God's call to a vocation, they're not already settled into one.

and since this may be where the OP is coming from, those who experience SSA of course, often feel themselves called to this "single vocation"; feeling unwelcome in seminaries or religious orders and unable to marry due to sexual attraction issues. I would still say that such a person should not write their whole future in stone believing themselves to be in a "single vocation"; not saying they should be actively trying to change their orientation or whatever, but they should always remain open to the possibility of a future vocation. there is nothing more deadly to the spiritual life of a Catholic struggling with SSA than to stare at a future of loneliness that one is believed to be stuck in due to their rejection of their same sex attraction. ssa gets you stuck in a celibate transitory state in life; and it's possible to be in that transitory state all the way till death, but it's an error to write that in stone IMO.

unconsecrated celibacy is a transitory state in life, not a vocation.

Edited January 11, 2010 by Aloysius

[AccountDeleted]

[quote name='Aloysius' date='11 January 2010 - 12:16 PM' timestamp='1263172580' post='2034217']
barb, I suppose it is mostly just terminology at the heart of the disagreement, but I'd still suggest it important not to call the celibate state a "vocation"... it is a state in life, a transitory state in life wherein one is eligible for another vocation.

the difference in the terms is a difference in mindset. I think a single person can decide not to actively seek out romance or to not accept a romantic advance for many many reasons, but none of those reasons should be "I have been called to the single vocation" unless they plan to take vows. a single lay person is in a position to hear God's call to a vocation, they're not already settled into one.

and since this may be where the OP is coming from, those who experience SSA of course, often feel themselves called to this "single vocation"; feeling unwelcome in seminaries or religious orders and unable to marry due to sexual attraction issues. I would still say that such a person should not write their whole future in stone believing themselves to be in a "single vocation"; not saying they should be actively trying to change their orientation or whatever, but they should always remain open to the possibility of a future vocation. there is nothing more deadly to the spiritual life of a Catholic struggling with SSA than to stare at a future of loneliness that one is believed to be stuck in due to their rejection of their same sex attraction. ssa gets you stuck in a celibate transitory state in life; and it's possible to be in that transitory state all the way till death, but it's an error to write that in stone IMO.

unconsecrated celibacy is a transitory state in life, not a vocation.
[/quote]

Aloysius - Are you or cappie able to comment about "private vows" at all as these seem to be very confusing things to me. I have read the definitions of "vows" on various Catholic online encyclopedias but it still isn't clear to me the actual status (if any) of private vows or how the Church sees them.

I know that there are many forms of religious consecration and enrolment in various devotions, but as for a person making private evangelical vows - is this also similar to a private devotion? Thanks.

[BarbTherese]

[quote name='Aloysius' date='11 January 2010 - 11:28 AM' timestamp='1263171488' post='2034209']
Barb,

I would indeed like to see a quote from LG that mentions unconsecrated single life as a vocation; Cappie's post says there is no such thing in the Church's perspective and I'm inclined to agree with him there.

a vocation to celibacy is only a vocation when vows are taken... remember, monks and nuns are still considered "laity" unless they are ordained.

In the Church's eyes, one who was refused an annulment is still married. They would live out a single state in life if there were serious reasons for them to remain separated from their spouse, especially in cases of abuse or what have you, or if their spouse simply refused to have them anymore.

The Church isn't forcing ppl to either marry or become priests/nuns; it is simply saying that a vocation is when one marries, becomes a priest, or takes vows. when one doesn't do any of those things, one is not yet living their vocation. It's not crazy to suppose that some people die without living out a vocation... some people might die as a child or die before they met the right person, or someone might not find the right person until they're 80 years old, or might never find someone at all (I think someone on this thread mentioned this: the dating pool has indeed been poisoned in modern times)... the point is, i would say, that one who lives a single (vocationless) life must not close themselves off to being called to a vocation. you can't say "no, I've already discerned that I was called to the single life". being an unconsecrated single person, one who has not taken formal vows of celibacy, means being eligible for marriage, religious life, or for males the priesthood.

see, when one has a vocation, one basically shuts off all other possibilities (except in the dual vocation of an Eastern married man who becomes a priest)... one cannot call singlehood a vocation because one cannot shut off the possibilities unless one takes formal vows to do so. without taking formal vows recognized by the Church, you are supposed to be open to God's call, which is why you're not (yet, or maybe ever) living a "vocation" in the proper sense of the word.

a widow or widower has lived out a vocation which has been completed, and is now eligible to live out another vocation if God calls him... I think at least in medieval practice widows might end up in convents, not sure about modern practice. but without vows to do so, I don't think a widow/widower should say "God has called me to live celibacy for the rest of my life"
[/quote]

I think if we insight what "vocation" means in The Church (and do not incorrectly limit the definition) and Her understanding of it, things may clarify http://ccc.scborromeo.org.master.com/texis/master/search/?sufs=0&q=vocation&xsubmit=Search&s=SS
Probably pre V2 there was a limited understanding of "vocation" which meant back then a call to the priesthood or religious life only. Certainly since V2 our understanding of vocation, including to embrace Baptism, has expanded.

I did do a reply to your Post above, but then lost it. I am going to have to go now (12.21pm Mon 11.1.10 here) and cannot come back I dont think until tomorrow and will try to address your post point by point then. I am afraid I am in a different time zone to most (Australia) and I may not have time to address all posts - will try though!

http://www.catholicreference.net/index.cfm?id=37136
VOCATION
A call from God to a distinctive state of life, in which the person can reach holiness. The Second Vatican Council made it plain that there is a "Universal call [vocatio] to holiness in the Church" (Lumen Gentium, 39). (Etym. Latin vocatio, a calling, summoning; from vocare, to call.)

A final point I have made in previous posts, The Church uses the terms "celibate" or "celibate state" rather than "single life" - but they all mean the same since the single life does ask embracing celibacy which is a mandate and precept of The Gospel outside of marriage.


Barb

[BarbTherese]

Anyone wanting to understand vows in The Church may find what they are looking for on this link:
http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/15511a.htm
[b]"According to the manner of their utterances, there are vows interior and exterior; vows express, and vows tacit or implied (as for instance, that of the subdeacon at his ordination); vows secret, and vows made in public. [u]According to their juridical form, they may be private or made with the Church's recognition[/u]; "[/b]
Making private vows could be loosely termed a private devotion for sure, however since it is a vow it does bring with it the obligation to keep the vow, observe it. However one would be most unwise indeed - absolutely - to make a vow or vows to God even privately without sound spiritual direction. It needs to be discussed with spiritual direction, so that one really understands what one is doing and why and the implications.

I am afraid that I dont think I am going to have the time to give to this thread at least not address all points raised. Just now I dont know the time I will have really and it looks as if this thread may be quite vigorous.
One thing is for sure there either is or there is not a vocation to the celibate or single state.

Barb

Edited January 11, 2010 by BarbaraTherese

[AccountDeleted]

I have just found a very good article about this at...
http://doihaveavocation.com/blog/archives/77

I need to read through a lot more to see if she answers some of my other questions. I am just putting a couple of quotes here but the whole article is good to read.

About the administrator of this site...

[i]Our Administrator, Therese Ivers, is a canon lawyer. Currently she serves as the Vocations Promoter in the Diocese of Sioux Falls, SD and a Judge within the Diocesan Tribunal. [/i]

"Before considering the question of the so-called “single state”, it would be good to review our primary vocation in life. As the baptized, we are called to holiness in life. We are adopted sons and daughters of God through Jesus Christ.
...

long description of the consecrated states here
...

"When looking at it from the Church’s legal point of view, it is safe to say that the Church does not recognize a “single state”. Loosely speaking, a vocation can refer to many things. Our primary and most important vocation is holiness. Our secondary vocation is the state in life to which God calls us. And in the Church there are three states as noted before. An even more broad understanding of the word vocation can include other traditional vocations or jobs, but these, strictly speaking, concern what a person does rather than who a person is and his relationship with others."

She also has a lot of Q&A about various things, including private vows.


edited for typos - sigh.

Edited January 11, 2010 by nunsense

[AccountDeleted]

[quote name='BarbaraTherese' date='11 January 2010 - 01:10 PM' timestamp='1263175854' post='2034272']


I am afraid that I dont think I am going to have the time to give to this thread at least not address all points raised. Just now I dont know the time I will have really and it looks as if this thread may be quite vigorous.

Barb
[/quote]

Barb - don't worry about feeling pressured to continue this thread (or any thread for that matter) since there are plenty on here who are very qualified to answer these questions, besides you may not always have time for it. I don't think anyone expects you personally to post your opinion to each and every question yourself, especially those that are addressed to other people and I just get the impression that you often seem to feel that you "have" to reply, and I don't want you to feel pressured this way.

I also particularly wanted to hear aloysius and cappie's take on this, since what they have written so far seems to reflect much of what I am feeling or understanding right now about this topic and they are making my thoughts clearer. Thank you for your help though. I am very good at finding links for myself since I do a lot of online research, but it is always good to hear your opinion when you do have time.

[BarbTherese]

Hi Nunsense and thank you! I am interested in the subject and Aloysuis addressed a post to me and I thought that there may be other posts addressed to me as a result of the couple I posted this morning. The subject does interest me, but I just may not have time to address posts actually directed to me.

I don't feel I "have" to reply (possibly only if I started a thread I feel some obligation towards it), sometimes I would like to and other times a post may be directed to me and these I would like to respond to if at all possible. And I feel those that may have directed something to me deserve a reason why I do not respond if I do not.

Links are posted only as a courtesy and most often if I am quoting something - and are not and in no way at all as any sort of reasoned reflection or conclusion arrived at about any reader of one of my posts.

Barb

Edited January 11, 2010 by BarbaraTherese

[AccountDeleted]

[quote name='BarbaraTherese' date='11 January 2010 - 01:37 PM' timestamp='1263177432' post='2034296']
Hi Nunsense and thank you! I am interested in the subject and Aloysuis addressed a post to me and I thought that there may be other posts addressed to me as a result of the couple I posted this morning. The subject does interest me, but I just may not have time to address posts actually directed to me.

Barb
[/quote]

That's why I didn't want you to feel that you had to answer the one that I addressed to aloysius and cappie about private vows. That frees you up to answer the other ones to you since your time is limited.

I also want to hear their opinions specifically because, since you are a woman in private vows yourself who feels that the single life [u]is [/u]a vocation, your opinion is naturally going to be more personally oriented than theirs, and I was hoping for something a bit more objective and looked at from the perspective of the Church.

Thank you though, I do appreciate your point of view and the time you take to post here.

Edited January 11, 2010 by nunsense