Vocation Search

[Anastasia13]

Because for a long time I have observed single Catholics talking about, and working hard to figure out this very notion of whether or not they are “called” to marriage, or is it some other calling.   I believe this is the wrong approach.  The better approach is to assume marriage is your vocation unless there is a calling from the Lord to give up that fundamental right to marriage and serve him exclusively as a consecrated person. 

Believe me, I am not questioning there being a call to marriage, per se.  I am married and know I am in the vocation God has chosen for me.  Therefore, I am “called” to the vocation of marriage.  However, what seems unclear is the reality of a single person having to discern a “call” to marriage. 

I want to propose that there is no actual “call” at all. I lean toward marriage being a default assumption.  Let me explain.

Every person who is born has the natural capability and inclination toward having children. Marriage is, therefore, established in the natural order because of the supreme natural tendency of mankind to propagate its own kind.  That is why I believe every person born should assume they are meant to be, by default assumption, married until proven otherwise.

http://www.catholicnewsagency.com/column.php?n=19

 

Yay or nay?

Edited July 28, 2014 by Light and Truth

[Credo in Deum]

This is the attitude I've run into when talking to a lot of traditional priests. I think the fear is that some people actually put themselves in situations were they think "I don't need to date, because I feel called to religious life", or "I don't need to worry about advancing in my current career because I know I'm called to religious life." This is a bad way to view things because it doesn't take into account the real possibility that you are not called. This has been the reason for why many candidates that are rejected wonder aimlessly or become bitter when they're rejected because now their single with no career, no idea of where they would want to work, and no experience in dating or socializing with others. I've personally seen this and have spoken to a couple of people who are now in this situation and it's a very big source of suffering for them.

When I told my priest I felt called, he told me to continue life as normal. He said take that promotion, put money in the bank, and still go out on that date. Continue to live like this since it shows that you understand, and are ready for, whatever God wills for you.

[superblue]

So exactly when is one to figure out that he is not called to marriage ?

 

At some point a calling has to become a choice,   I don't disagree with what you are saying, but for the Church to say, well we really only want people who have dated  (which is a entirely different matter, one could easily ask what is meant by that, do they mean courting, then dating, and between the two of that with the desire in mind that it will lead to marriage, or do they mean causally dating someone of interest, and in either circumstance are the inferring having had premarital sex ? ) have had a solid work history and currently are in a good career, and can socialize with anyone in any circumstance or is an extrovert in general.  It seems off kilter.

 

I can understand how the Church doesn't want to reject a seminarian half way through the process to leave him dangling in the wind,  and he has no career to fall back on but sheesh, if that is case, just say it.  I get offended when there is this tone of, we don't discriminate , or, we have a  priest shortage, when in reality part of the problem might honestly be the way candidates and seminarians are being judged, especially when we see how many pedophiles had some how entered the priesthood to begin with that probably shouldn't have ever gotten in.  An the reasons to why they got in are beyond numerous. So exactly back in the day, how did those men get through the gates, and now all of a sudden the criteria is more stringent probably because of not wanting to mess up again. 

 

Also think about this, what if a Catholic man, who is single, been Catholic all his life, but for what ever reason has been homeless and out of work for at least 5 yrs, and he thinks he is called to the priesthood, not out of desperation but after reflecting on his life, and wondering why he didn't listen to that question sooner in his life when things were better, and now he steps forward after realizing maybe that is where  God is calling him....   Vs  another candidate, is single, has been well employed, is social , out going, has dated, etc, oh and is younger too.   Who do you think is going to get chosen by a bishop.  Or if that is not a good analogy what about age restrictions, well the higher end of it, why not include men from 18-60, or even older, 70-80, heck why not a man who is 90 and has 9 good years left in his life, and he wants to serve as a priest.but it is what it is, there are acceptions to every rule, but somethings wont be budged on, for what ever reason, we wont see men with disabilities  going into the seminary, we wont see men who are too this or that, everyone wants that middle ground. So what is worse, turning away a candidate that doesn't fit the picture that a review board and bishop are looking for, or letting someone in who does fit that picture, but in the end becomes some whack a doo.

 

 

If anything I would suggest a probation period, on getting into the seminary, which means vocation directors working harder with candidates, and helping the candidate understand the review process ,  in the time before the review board and applicaton packet being filled out, working with candidates, assigning them tasks to test them in general, having plenty of  peer meetings , retreats, meetings with the bishop, to get to know the bishop an vise verse.  If all a vocation director does is take a candidate on one or two retreats, and hands him an application packet and says good luck, I find that to be a disservice to everyone. But to not accept one based on their economic status in life, or physical / mental disability with out fully getting to know that person, I find just as much of a disservice to all.

 

If a bishop Is not willing to get to know a person before rejecting him, then just skip the review altogether, and place up a flier of exactly what you are looking for , employers do it all the time.

 

There are better ways of selecting candidates than what the process is currently.

[superblue]

PS

 

 

 

What do you tell the people that don't want to ever get married, that are Catholic, or are Catholic, and have never been married and are past the age to enter into the seminary.

[Credo in Deum]

So exactly when is one to figure out that he is not called to marriage ?

Probably when he/she realizes he/she is called to religious life. 

 

 

At some point a calling has to become a choice,   I don't disagree with what you are saying, but for the Church to say, well we really only want people who have dated  (which is a entirely different matter, one could easily ask what is meant by that, do they mean courting, then dating, and between the two of that with the desire in mind that it will lead to marriage, or do they mean causally dating someone of interest, and in either circumstance are the inferring having had premarital sex ? ) have had a solid work history and currently are in a good career, and can socialize with anyone in any circumstance or is an extrovert in general.  It seems off kilter.

 

True. At some point it is a choice and one which comes with sacrifices.  I do not see the Church saying they only want people who have dated.  It looks like from what I can tell they want the people who have given all options equal possibility.   There are times you will have someone who closes themselves off from the possibility receiving that person that God willed for them to be with, because they think they're meant to be a religious.   I think the Church wants to see candidates come to the conclusion of religious life after giving marriage an equal chance as being a possibility.   What would you say to a vocations director who asks: how do you know you're not called to marriage?  Well I never felt called.  Yes, but did you try to be open to the calling by being open to dating?  Well no.  Then how do you know?  

 

 

I can understand how the Church doesn't want to reject a seminarian half way through the process to leave him dangling in the wind,  and he has no career to fall back on but sheesh, if that is case, just say it.  I get offended when there is this tone of, we don't discriminate , or, we have a  priest shortage, when in reality part of the problem might honestly be the way candidates and seminarians are being judged, especially when we see how many pedophiles had some how entered the priesthood to begin with that probably shouldn't have ever gotten in.  An the reasons to why they got in are beyond numerous. So exactly back in the day, how did those men get through the gates, and now all of a sudden the criteria is more stringent probably because of not wanting to mess up again.

 

I do not see how setting up criteria is a form of discrimination.   Companies setup things they would like to see in potential employees and this is what they look for when the grant interviews and do hirings.  Sure some may get in as the exception to the rule, but most if not all of the candidates will be judged based on whether or not they met the criteria,  and why shouldn't they be judged this way?  The company has a specific goal, and one that cannot be reached if the hired people willy nilly who did not meet the criteria needed.   The job of religious works in the same way.  In fact it is even more serious especially for communities since one bad apple can ruin the entire community.   One bad priest can cause a serious amount of damage.  

 

I don't expect to know how the priest pedophile issue got in to the Church.  Anything I say would be speculation on that.  What I do know if is they're now being strict in areas they weren't to avoid this problem in the future, then thank God for that.   

 

 

Also think about this, what if a Catholic man, who is single, been Catholic all his life, but for what ever reason has been homeless and out of work for at least 5 yrs, and he thinks he is called to the priesthood, not out of desperation but after reflecting on his life, and wondering why he didn't listen to that question sooner in his life when things were better, and now he steps forward after realizing maybe that is where  God is calling him....   Vs  another candidate, is single, has been well employed, is social , out going, has dated, etc, oh and is younger too.   Who do you think is going to get chosen by a bishop.  Or if that is not a good analogy

 

I do not see how your analogy presents an accurate depiction of the issue.  Obviously the recently homeless Catholic male's situation would not be the norm among the applicants applying for the seminary, but this doesn't mean it's going to automatically disqualify him.  Plus getting into the seminary does not mean you're called to the priesthood.   It's a step in your discernment.  You're still discerning your calling until the Bishop lays his hands on you and ordains you as a priest.  That's when you stop discerning your calling.  

 

 

what about age restrictions, well the higher end of it, why not include men from 18-60, or even older, 70-80, heck why not a man who is 90 and has 9 good years left in his life, and he wants to serve as a priest.but it is what it is, there are acceptions to every rule, but somethings wont be budged on, for what ever reason, we wont see men with disabilities  going into the seminary, we wont see men who are too this or that, everyone wants that middle ground. So what is worse, turning away a candidate that doesn't fit the picture that a review board and bishop are looking for, or letting someone in who does fit that picture, but in the end becomes some whack a doo.

 

From what I am aware of the main reason places have age restrictions is because the older one gets the more set in their ways they become and formation becomes very difficult if not impossible.   As for your 70-80-90 example, common be realistic please.   How would they even know the person has 9 good years?  Plus even priests have a mandatory retirement age of 70-75.

 

 

If anything I would suggest a probation period, on getting into the seminary, which means vocation directors working harder with candidates, and helping the candidate understand the review process ,  in the time before the review board and applicaton packet being filled out, working with candidates, assigning them tasks to test them in general, having plenty of  peer meetings , retreats, meetings with the bishop, to get to know the bishop an vise verse.  If all a vocation director does is take a candidate on one or two retreats, and hands him an application packet and says good luck, I find that to be a disservice to everyone. But to not accept one based on their economic status in life, or physical / mental disability with out fully getting to know that person, I find just as much of a disservice to all.

 

While I do like your suggestions, I do not believe your last sentence is accurate since I do not believe they are doing people a disservice by turning away certain individuals deemed unfit for the job.  Priests, diocesan priests, are not required to take a vow of poverty.  A candidate who has shown financial responsibility in their life is a good thing especially since their vocation may very well have them running a Church.   Those who cannot run their own life or have shown that they cannot run it without extreme difficulty are usually not the best candidates to give a parish to.  Secondly the Church has every right to exclude people who are not physically or mentally capable for the job of being a priest and even a religious.  Putting someone who is mentally or physically disabled into a priestly role or even in a religious community can be putting a heavy cross on not only the person but the community/parish they enter.   I think such people need to be realistic with themselves.    

Edited July 28, 2014 by Credo in Deum

[Norseman82]

 

http://www.catholicnewsagency.com/column.php?n=19

 

Yay or nay?

 

 

I've been saying the exact same thing for years.  Remember, CCC 1603 states that the vocation to mariage is written into our very nature, so all we have to do is put 2 and 2 together.....

[superblue]

Probably when he/she realizes he/she is called to religious life. 

 

 

 

lol which is with in an of itself the enigma considering one does not know which until either one becomes married, or ordained , it just seems to me in the end it is taking a risk, and making a choice and trusting God enough to see us through either way.

 

as for the rest, I did read through it ty for commenting , I was kind of rattling off a bit to fast and didn't feel like editing my own post.

 

If the catholic homeless man, of age, has the same chance of a catholic man who is bound to a wheel chair, or a man with depression or anxiety ( which from what I have been gathering, a lot of people in the world are dealing with depression / anxiety at some level ) if these people are getting a fair shake versus the fresh candidate right out of highschool, then fine,

 

what I was getting at with the employment recruiting, was that if in deed a bishop and review board are only looking for certain men, with a certain stability in life, then how about stop complaining about a shortage of priests and start posting on websites and brochures exactly the type of young men an men, that a bishop and diocese is looking for, instead of pretending that everyone is treated equally which isn't true.  People have the right to pick and choose who they want to employ and the same for the church, but don't mislead people into thinking they have a chance when they don't.

 

I would prefer a flat out check list  to see if I qualify for what a bishop is looking for, rather than a vague super cheerful come follow me presentation on why one should consider a religious vocation.

[superblue]

 

PS

 

 

 

What do you tell the people that don't want to ever get married, that are Catholic, or are Catholic, and have never been married and are past the age to enter into the seminary.

 

 

 

 

and a bump

[Benedictus]

I sort of agree with this, but feel it overstates a little. To me it's obvious most people are called to marriage. That is already the default position as the vocations aren't equally spread. But there is a risk that this normality drowns out the calling a person could have to a single life or religious state (priest, religious etc). Going against the grain can be difficult so, in many ways, I think it's right that there is some sort of pause and consideration before major decisions are made. I would say this about choosing a job, degree major or whatever. So life state options need time as well. The important thing is that they are reviewed and that this doesn't drag on aimlessly without a decision. I have heard of people in the past saying that they feel called to religious life, but they make little steps to test it out for whatever reason. But at the same time they don't date or make secular plans in case this is all pie in the sky. I guess there are people who say they want marriage and do the same thing, but the key thing is neither atttiude is healthy.
In my case I dated, had relationships, went to college and I am now working professionally. But I'm now discerning religious life and those past experiences make my decion more informed, and easier. At the same time different people are at different stages and may not need all these experiences to 'know' what to do. But I guess the 'doing' bit is the most important aspect.

[LouisvilleFan]

 

PS

 

 

 

What do you tell the people that don't want to ever get married, that are Catholic, or are Catholic, and have never been married and are past the age to enter into the seminary.

 

 

There are plenty of vocations out there, and just because marriage is the "default" vocation doesn't mean everyone who isn't specifically called into priesthood or religious life will be married. In a certain sense, God can call people to the single life. It's more like a minor vocation because it doesn't entail taking vows or forsaking other possibilities, but it can be a calling nonetheless.