Vocation To The Single Life

[BarbTherese]

I am very conscious that I do have a call and vocation from The Lord to this way of life and under private vows - not meaning any disrespect please, but I do not need nor seek affirmation of this and this is not directed at anyone (poster) at all personally. It is my personal way and call. It may not be the most common, it may be rare - I would not know and have no way of knowing whatsoever. I am a very simple and ordinary lay person and this too is intrinsic to my call. It is certainly a way of life that I freely chose under the private vows with spiritual direction (priestly) that I had reason to hold to be wise and sound. This was not one consulation, but a process of discerning - including, truth be known, from a Jesuit theologian as part of that discerning process. I personally need nor seek no other guidance at this point. I most certainly would not consider any vocation at all to be "just another vocation" as Aloysius stated - although he may not have meant it quite the way it sounded ........ or possibly how I 'heard' it.
Also without God's Grace one will not persevere and after all these years I am certainly conscious of The Lord and His Grace in my life.
And again, no person should choose to make a private vow or vows to God without spiritual direction. It is a serious matter to make a vow to God, while it is not within juridical form in The Church, private vows are recognized as a potential option.
[quote]I think this sounds a little different than a person who is simply living in a single state and makes private vows[/quote] Speaking quite personally, it is quite a bit more complex for me than simply that - although I recognize you may not have had my case in mind. I just wanted to point this out. While I can add that it is an option with nothing to prevent a person from doing so. To my mind, however, perhaps unwise. To me it is all a question of having made private vows, how one is living and that this is the essence of the matter.
All is indeed Grace and God provides The Grace for His Works - and to Him be all praise and thanksgiving. I amjust one who stumbles along His Way.
Speaking for myself generally and not directed to any one poster. I have not refused any call from God 'because I already had a call to the single or celibate state'. Rather I am conscious of my call as being to the single or celibate state. Does this then preclude God calling me elsewhere? As I said before, no it does not. Does this mean that I have missed my vocation - no it does not even if I die as I am now called.

Barb

Edited January 11, 2010 by BarbaraTherese

[AccountDeleted]

[quote name='BarbaraTherese' date='11 January 2010 - 11:55 PM' timestamp='1263214509' post='2034608']
I am very conscious that I do have a call and vocation from The Lord to this way of life and under private vows - not meaning any disrespect please, but I do not need nor seek affirmation of this and this is not directed at anyone (poster) at all personally. It is my personal way and call. It may not be the most common, it may be rare - I would not know and have no way of knowing whatsoever. I am a very simple and ordinary lay person and this too is intrinsic to my call. It is certainly a way of life that I freely chose under the private vows with spiritual direction (priestly) that I had reason to hold to be wise and sound. This was not one consulation, but a process of discerning - including, truth be known, from a Jesuit theologian as part of that discerning process. I personally need nor seek no other guidance at this point. I most certainly would not consider any vocation at all to be "just another vocation" as Aloysius stated - although he may not have meant it quite the way it sounded ........ or possibly how I 'heard' it.
Also without God's Grace one will not persevere and after all these years I am certainly conscious of The Lord and His Grace in my life.
And again, no person should choose to make a private vow or vows to God without spiritual direction. It is a serious matter to make a vow to God, while it is not within juridical form in The Church, private vows are recognized as a potential option.
Speaking quite personally, it is quite a bit more complex for me than simply that - although I recognize you may not have had my case in mind. I just wanted to point this out.

Barb
[/quote]

Barb - sometimes you just take things way too personally, what I post isn't always about your situation. I don't want to feel that I have to walk on eggshells with what I say, so I am just going to tell you that when I post, it is about a general state of the single life as a vocation or not, and not about your state in particular so please don't get defensive every time I make a comment, ok? I was actually making more of a comment on Opus Dei because it was brought up as an example, and that is what I expected people to focus on. If we can try to leave your own personal situation out of it and make the discussion more general in nature, no one will get hurt feelings or feel that they are being questioned for their choices or have to be defensive.

The fact is that I am fascinated by Opus Dei and nearly had an Opus Dei priest as my SD, but fell into the Latin Mass instead.... funny how things work out.

pax xti.

[organwerke]

[quote name='nunsense' date='11 January 2010 - 02:45 PM' timestamp='1263213951' post='2034606']
I think this sounds a little different than a person who is simply living in a single state and makes private vows but I would be interested to hear more views on this. Thank you for for a thoughtful post.
[/quote]

I don't know about private vows, but yes, it is certainly different than a person who is simply living in a single state.
In fact, a single Opus Dei member "belongs" to the Prelature with many consequences involved (economical, about work, obedience etc.)
But, honestly, I don't know if with this statement you mean that, since it is different than living in a single state and makes private vows, this is a vocation, while the second not.
Certainly this vocation I mentioned implies a stricter "union" to an institution, in the sense that members have "rules" they have to follow.
But I think we should also say what we mean with the word "vocation".
Because, for example, I heard once from a priest that while the Church could live also without religious persons (even if it would be of course a terrible loss), she couldn't live without priests and lay people.
In this case, we could consider as a divine call and vocation only priesthood ,and the marriage, since these are the only two states of life who are recognized through a sacrament. (And, among these, the pristhood could be only considered as a divine call to the single life).

[organwerke]

PS: of course he said the Church couldn't live without priests because she can't exist without the persons who celebrate the Mass and the Sacraments.

[AccountDeleted]

[quote name='organwerke' date='12 January 2010 - 12:15 AM' timestamp='1263215706' post='2034615']
I don't know about private vows, but yes, it is certainly different than a person who is simply living in a single state.
In fact, a single Opus Dei member "belongs" to the Prelature with many consequences involved (economical, about work, obedience etc.)
But, honestly, I don't know if with this statement you mean that, since it is different than living in a single state and makes private vows, this is a vocation, while the second not.
Certainly this vocation I mentioned implies a stricter "union" to an institution, in the sense that members have "rules" they have to follow.
But I think we should also say what we mean with the word "vocation".
Because, for example, I heard once from a priest that while the Church could live also without religious persons (even if it would be of course a terrible loss), she couldn't live without priests and lay people.
In this case, we could consider as a divine call and vocation only priesthood ,and the marriage, since these are the only two states of life who are recognized through a sacrament. (And, among these, the pristhood could be only considered as a divine call to the single life).
[/quote]

Actually you are spot on with that last point. When I found out that religious life was "only" a sacramental whereas marriage was a sacrament, I was shocked, but then it was explained to me that the Church could survive without religious but not without married people to have children, or not without priests, and then I understood. Religious life is a grace and a gift, but it is not a vital necessity to the Church (although I am not saying that it isn't extremely and highly valued by the Church - of course it is).

So perhaps in this case, only the priesthood and marriage are true vocations, but the Church has also set up what she calls "consecrated states of life" and there are four of these according to the canon lawyer I linked to earlier. That is why I think this whole topic is so hard to discuss is some ways, because it is so open to interpretation first, as to just what is a "vocation" in the eyes of the Church, because after all, it is only through the eyes of the Church that a vocation actually can exist, no matter how each of us perceives the reality individually. So I think we are still working that definition out, with varying points of view on just how the Church defines "vocation".

You are making me think a lot - thank you, I love thinking!

[organwerke]

[quote name='nunsense' date='11 January 2010 - 03:21 PM' timestamp='1263216117' post='2034618']
Actually you are spot on with that last point. When I found out that religious life was "only" a sacramental whereas marriage was a sacrament, I was shocked, but then it was explained to me that the Church could survive without religious but not without married people to have children, or not without priests, and then I understood. Religious life is a grace and a gift, but it is not a vital necessity to the Church (although I am not saying that it isn't extremely and highly valued by the Church - of course it is).

So perhaps in this case, only the priesthood and marriage are true vocations, but the Church has also set up what she calls "consecrated states of life" and there are four of these according to the canon lawyer I linked to earlier. That is why I think this whole topic is so hard to discuss is some ways, because it is so open to interpretation first, as to just what is a "vocation" in the eyes of the Church, because after all, it is only through the eyes of the Church that a vocation actually can exist, no matter how each of us perceives the reality individually. So I think we are still working that definition out, with varying points of view on just how the Church defines "vocation".

You are making me think a lot - thank you, I love thinking!
[/quote]

Dear nunsense, I am happy if I am make you thinking!
But, honestly, I think you are doing the things more complicated than they really are!
I too think that religious life is higly valued by the Church, and I think that religious persons are a enourmous gift for the Church.
And the Church recognized it through the centuries because she understood that this was a great service to the people of God.
The first centuries there were only monks, then saint Francis and saint Dominic founded a new form of religious life, that was thought for the needs of the people of THAT time.
And the Church recognized it.
For example, I know that many people nowadays have many oppositions toward the Opus Dei because they can't understand how can a celibacy vocation exists out of a religious order.
But Opus Dei also was founded as an answer to a specific need of modern people.
So, a vocation that didn't exist...now exists!!!
But this is a specific, particular vocation, because it is also an ORGANIZED one (I mean that Opus Dei members belong to a institution as members of religious Orders).
But this doesn't mean that ONLY people who live in an institution have a vocation to the single life.
So, I don't undesrtand why you think that this is a difficult thread, and that it is difficult to answer to the question "Does a vocation to the single life exist"?
I can understand this difficulty only if we think that a vocation is a God's order, but I think that we are free to choose the state of life that best fits to us, so honestly I have no difficults in thinking that yes, a vocation to single life exists, but, I repeat, I think we can speak of it only if the person freely chooses to live so (and of course if the person lives in the grace of God).

Edited January 11, 2010 by organwerke

[Aloysius]

[quote]a vocation can evolve during the life (for example a person who thought to get marry and then feel called to religious life; or[b] a person who thought to remain single and then gets married[/b]).[/quote]

this is exactly the type of thing that makes me say only marriage, priesthood, religious life, or consecrated virginity are vocations... because they're (theoretically) irrevocable states in life. the bolded part is what tells me "staying single" without some type of vows (and I still say that private vows should not be suggested as a regular course of action, any more than being a hermit, which Barb earlier compared to private vows, should be suggested as a regular course of action; they're irregular options for some people IMO, and it would do harm to the vocational process of discernment to present them as "just another vocation" alongside the others) isn't a vocation as I understand vocations.

a religious person can't quit and get married (without being released from his vows by competent authorities), a married person can't stop being married because they now want to discern a religious vocation, et cetera. but a single person CAN get married or become a religious. because a single person is perfectly eligible to be called to the natural vocation written on their body, their singleness is not a vocation.

aside from all the terminology of "a vocation" or "not a vocation" what I object to is people who are single deciding that they are to remain single for the rest of their life. I think single people should not write such things in stone if they are not making social commitments through the Church that make them be set in stone. that's why I don't think singlehood is a vocation in and of itself, because single people IMO ought to remain open to the other possible vocations. in other words, singlehood should not be exclusionary, while the other vocations SHOULD be exclusionary. deciding to be married should be exclusionary of all other states in life (unless your spouse dies), deciding to be a priest should be exclusionary of all other states in life, deciding to be a religious should be exclusionary of all other states in life; deciding to be single should be a temporary decision which is open to any other state in life.

[AccountDeleted]

[quote name='Aloysius' date='12 January 2010 - 12:41 AM' timestamp='1263217282' post='2034629']
this is exactly the type of thing that makes me say only marriage, priesthood, religious life, or consecrated virginity are vocations... because they're (theoretically) irrevocable states in life. the bolded part is what tells me "staying single" without some type of vows (and I still say that private vows should not be suggested as a regular course of action, any more than being a hermit, which Barb earlier compared to private vows, should be suggested as a regular course of action; they're irregular options for some people IMO, and it would do harm to the vocational process of discernment to present them as "just another vocation" alongside the others) isn't a vocation as I understand vocations.

a religious person can't quit and get married (without being released from his vows by competent authorities), a married person can't stop being married because they now want to discern a religious vocation, et cetera. but a single person CAN get married or become a religious. because a single person is perfectly eligible to be called to the natural vocation written on their body, their singleness is not a vocation.

aside from all the terminology of "a vocation" or "not a vocation" what I object to is people who are single deciding that they are to remain single for the rest of their life. I think single people should not write such things in stone if they are not making social commitments through the Church that make them be set in stone. that's why I don't think singlehood is a vocation in and of itself, because single people IMO ought to remain open to the other possible vocations. in other words, singlehood should not be exclusionary, while the other vocations SHOULD be exclusionary. deciding to be married should be exclusionary of all other states in life (unless your spouse dies), deciding to be a priest should be exclusionary of all other states in life, deciding to be a religious should be exclusionary of all other states in life; deciding to be single should be a temporary decision which is open to any other state in life.
[/quote]


Ok, now see here Aloysius is why I like what you write so much, because when I try to say the very same things, they don't come out right, and people end up getting offended. But this is exactly how I feel too, but just don't know how to express it. Thank you.

[BarbTherese]

[quote name='nunsense' date='11 January 2010 - 11:36 PM' timestamp='1263215200' post='2034610']
Barb - sometimes you just take things way too personally, what I post isn't always about your situation. I don't want to feel that I have to walk on eggshells with what I say, so I am just going to tell you that when I post, it is about a general state of the single life as a vocation or not, and not about your state in particular so please don't get defensive every time I make a comment, ok? I was actually making more of a comment on Opus Dei because it was brought up as an example, and that is what I expected people to focus on. If we can try to leave your own personal situation out of it and make the discussion more general in nature, no one will get hurt feelings or feel that they are being questioned for their choices or have to be defensive.

The fact is that I am fascinated by Opus Dei and nearly had an Opus Dei priest as my SD, but fell into the Latin Mass instead.... funny how things work out.

pax xti.
[/quote]

Thank you for the above, but for my part please do not insist on what I should be posting and how I should be posting it. If you feel that a post of mine is not what you want/anticipated, simply ignore it, with respect. I did try to stress that my comments were not addressed to any one poster personally. You keep defining my personal disposition - my preference - not that this carries weight - is to address what I have to say and leave my personal disposition as you see it out of it please. If you are "walking on eggshells" that is your choice.
I did pass comment on what you had to say pointing out that it was from my personal perspective which is also a general comment on the single or celibate state as a potential vocation for reasons that I think are obvious.
I am not offended or upset, in fact I am sitting here laughing at these exchanges of ours.

Barb

[BarbTherese]

Quoting Aloysuis
[quote] any more than being a hermit, which Barb earlier compared to private vows[/quote]

I did not compare the eremetical life to private vows, rather the Catholic Catechism, as I quoted previously (and again below), states clearly that one can embrace the eremetical life under private vows and this to my information is commonly understood. I do not consider my lifestyle at all to be even close to that of a hermit, while it may have some features of this vocation.
[quote]The eremitic life
http://www.scborromeo.org/ccc/p123a9p4.htm#926
920 Without always professing the three evangelical counsels publicly, hermits "devote their life to the praise of God and salvation of the world through a stricter separation from the world, the silence of solitude and assiduous prayer and penance."460

921 They manifest to everyone the interior aspect of the mystery of the Church, that is, personal intimacy with Christ. Hidden from the eyes of men, the life of the hermit is a silent preaching of the Lord, to whom he has surrendered his life simply because he is everything to him. Here is a particular call to find in the desert, in the thick of spiritual battle, the glory of the Crucified One. [/quote]



Barb

Edited January 11, 2010 by BarbaraTherese

[AccountDeleted]

[quote name='BarbaraTherese' date='12 January 2010 - 01:08 AM' timestamp='1263218903' post='2034649']
Thank you for the above, but for my part please do not insist on what I should be posting and how I should be posting it. If you feel that a post of mine is not what you want/anticipated, simply ignore it, with respect. I did try to stress that my comments were not addressed to any one poster personally. You keep defining my personal disposition - my preference - not that this carries weight - is to address what I have to say and leave my personal disposition as you see it out of it please. If you are "walking on eggshells" that is your choice.
I did pass comment on what you had to say pointing out that it was from my personal perspective which is also a general comment on the single or celibate state as a potential vocation for reasons that I think are obvious.
I am not offended or upset, in fact I am sitting here laughing at these exchanges of ours.

Barb
[/quote]

You may be laughing, but it is not a very charitable laughter since your online "tone" is very passive-aggressive, and I am not sure why, since you said that it was ok for us to disagree. I see nowhere in my post to you that I "insist on what I should be posting and how I should be posting it." so I can only suggest that you take your own advice to ignore any post of mine that you do not like. I can't always say what I meant the way I mean it, and I think that Aloysius had stated my point of view very well, and probably in a manner that is less offensive to you. I certainly hope so.

[BarbTherese]

Quoting Organwerke:
[quote]I simply think that we can speak of a vocation to the single life when persons FREELY choose to live a single life as their personal way toward holiness. [/quote]

I wonder if there are differing opinions over what "vocation" actually means ? Is there a quite strict definition and boundaries (what it is and what it is not) in Church Law or legalities somewhere?

Barb

[Jaime]

[quote name='BarbaraTherese' date='11 January 2010 - 09:41 AM' timestamp='1263220888' post='2034675']
Quoting Organwerke:


I wonder if there are differing opinions over what "vocation" actually means ? Is there a quite strict definition and boundaries (what it is and what it is not) in Church Law or legalities somewhere?

Barb
[/quote]

You can read about the vocation of priests in Church writings. You can read about the vocation of married people . You will not find any statements made by the Church about the vocation of single people.

[BarbTherese]

[quote name='nunsense' date='12 January 2010 - 12:49 AM' timestamp='1263219544' post='2034655']
You may be laughing, but it is not a very charitable laughter since your online "tone" is very passive-aggressive, and I am not sure why, since you said that it was ok for us to disagree. I see nowhere in my post to you that I "insist on what I should be posting and how I should be posting it." so I can only suggest that you take your own advice to ignore any post of mine that you do not like. I can't always say what I meant the way I mean it, and I think that Aloysius had stated my point of view very well, and probably in a manner that is less offensive to you. I certainly hope so.
[/quote]

Your judgement, Nunsense. And you are absolutely entitled to your point of view. My laughter was not based in lack of Charity - but laughing because we seem to just keep on 'clashing'. I am sorry and apologize that my posts have struck you as they have and sorry yours have struck me as they have. A happy settlement - and over and done with and moving on?

Barb

[BarbTherese]

[quote name='hot stuff' date='12 January 2010 - 01:14 AM' timestamp='1263221088' post='2034678']
You can read about the vocation of priests in Church writings. You can read about the vocation of married people . You will not find any statements made by the Church about the vocation of single people.
[/quote]

[quote]You will not find any statements made by the Church about the vocation of single people[/quote] ??? - although I think I understand what you mean since single and celibate people fall into the classification of "Laity" and if you go back over my previous posts, you will find them.

Barb