'Singleness'

[BarbTherese]

Can a baptised Catholic at some point in their lives come to insight the importance of their baptism and their call to holiness and decide that they do not have a call to consecrated life nor to marriage or the priesthood - and quite validly pursue their career in the world striving for holiness and as their personal call and vocation as a disciple of Jesus and follower of His Gospel and in chaste celibacy in the laity without any vows other than baptismal vows.  Of course they can.

Baptism is a Sacrament and call to holiness with vows that can never ever be dispensed for any reason ever.

Baptismal vows renewed every Easter:

V. Do you reject Satan?
V. And all his works?
V. And all his empty promises?
V. Do you believe in God, the Father Almighty, creator of heaven and earth?
V. Do you believe in Jesus Christ, his only Son, our Lord, who was born of the Virgin Mary was crucified, died, and was buried, rose from the dead, and is now seated at the right hand of the Father?
V. Do you believe in the Holy Spirit, the holy Catholic church, the communion of saints, the forgiveness of sins, the resurrection of the body, and life everlasting?

[BarbTherese]

Barbara, I think that possibly you are feeling a bit judged by that thread as you yourself are a single laywoman, but I don't think it says what you think it does. The general consensus over there was that single life becomes a vocation if it is consecrated, even if through private vows. You have made private vows. Your diocese was willing to send a priest to your home to celebrate a Mass there as part of your celebration of these vows. I don't think anyone is doubting your calling. You have led a rich interesting life, you tested your religious vocation in a monastery, you have fostered a child - with all your experiences, and your obvious commitment to finding God's will, I doubt that anyone would ever tell you that you are not following your vocation. It would be pretty arrogant and audacious of them if they did, when you have Church approval and you have obviously left no stone unturned in your search for God's will.

Baptism is a consecration and vocation and call from God - and it is a Sacrament with life vows which can never be dispensed. 

Thank you for your comments, beatitude - though not quite spot on.

In the other thread people were speaking about remaining single with no vows of any kind. I think this is a very different issue. Some people might be called to stay single for a long time - perhaps because God hasn't put the right person in their lives yet, perhaps because they are not yet ready to join religious life, perhaps for any one of a number of reasons. But ultimately we all come to a moment of choice and commitment. As humans I think we need that. It's the measure of our character and it reflects our understanding of who we are.

Undoubtedly in every journey there comes a moment of choice and commitment, a call to conversion of heart, mind and soul - of the whole of life.  Absolutely nowhere does The Church state that a person must either marry, enter consecrated life (which includes secular institutes), Holy Orders or make private vows, nor enter/join some sort of institution in The Church.  Certainly, She highly recommends and values all these and very rightly so it seems to me.  It becomes a question of discerning what might be God's Will for a person -  and this is always most securely and advisedly done with sound spiritual direction. 

Lumen Gentium Dogmatic Constitution on The Church http://www.vatican.va/archive/hist_councils/ii_vatican_council/documents/vat-ii_const_19641121_lumen-gentium_en.html " A like example, but one given in a different way, is that offered by widows and single people, who are able to make great contributions toward holiness and apostolic endeavor in the Church."......nothing about private vows nor entering some other state of life.

Personally I could not imagine my life continuing as it is without the vows I will hopefully be permitted to take as part of my secular institute. A Dominican friar once told me, "It's not you who keeps the vows, it's the vows that will keep you," and I think he was absolutely right. We all need a commitment of some kind to 'keep' us and nurture us and serve as our pathway and our compass - whether that's marriage or something else.

God bless richly your journey into the consecrated state in a secular institute and may He grant all the desires of your heart.

Sometimes I encounter people who look down on me a bit because they don't see consecrated life in the world as important in the way religious life is important, and yes, that stings. Sometimes people do it without even realising - I made a thread about my discernment with the secular institute in VS a few years back and it got a handful of responses, while threads about someone entering the convent go on for pages. That spoke for itself. And it can be tempting to try and justify yourself and the worth of what you do, but ultimately, this cross is part of the calling. We don't have to prove anything to anyone; it's enough to know that God sees us.

Spot on!  It is enough that God sees.  It is also important to uphold and proclaim always what The Church has to state and intrinsic to all vocational calls.

​

[BarbTherese]

POST-SYNODAL
APOSTOLIC EXHORTATION
CHRISTIFIDELES LAICI
OF
HIS HOLINESS
JOHN PAUL II
ON THE VOCATION AND THE MISSION
OF THE LAY FAITHFUL
IN THE CHURCH AND IN THE WORLD

http://w2.vatican.va/content/john-paul-ii/en/apost_exhortations/documents/hf_jp-ii_exh_30121988_christifideles-laici.html

10. It is no exaggeration to say that the entire existence of the lay faithful has as its purpose to lead a person to a knowledge of the radical newness of the Christian life that comes from Baptism, the sacrament of faith, so that this knowledge can help that person live the responsibilities which arise from that vocation received from God. In arriving at a basic description of the lay faithful we now more explicitly and directly consider among others the following three fundamental aspects: Baptism regenerates us in the life ot the Son of God; unites us to Christ and to his Body, the Church; and anoints us in the Holy Spirit, making us spiritual temples.

Precisely with this in mind the Synod Fathers said: "The secular character of the lay faithful is not therefore to be defined only in a sociological sense, but most especially in a theological sense. The term secular must be understood in light of the act of God the creator and redeemer, who has handed over the world to women and men, so that they may participate in the work of creation, free creation from the influence of sin and sanctify themselves in marriage or the celibate life, in a family, in a profession and in the various activities of society"(39).

 

..........again, nothing about vows in the lay celibate life as a necessity.

[BarbTherese]

http://www.usccb.org/about/justice-peace-and-human-development/upload/baptism-handout.pdf

Baptism - United States Conferenece of Catholic Bishops

In Baptism, we receive a "vocation to holiness," which is "intimately connected" to our membership in the "Communion of Saints," which strives to make present the "Kingdom of God in history." Participation in the Communion of Saints requires a commitment to communion with Christ and "a life of charity" in "this world and in the next" (Christifideles Laici, nos. 17, 19).

Baptism invites us to a vocation of holiness and the practice of charity.

[truthfinder]

There is a difference between the universal call to holiness (the general vocation), and the particular/unique vocation that is always under-girded by vows (of some sort) beyond the baptismal vows. 

[BarbTherese]

the particular/unique vocation that is always under-girded by vows (of some sort) beyond the baptismal vows. 

An opinion if not what The Church states anywhere. The Dogmatic Constitution on The Church (Lumen Gentium) has a very lengthy and informative Chapter V on "The Universal Call to Holiness".  There is also Chapter IV "The Laity".

The evangelical counsels for instance are recommended to all states of life and in accord with their own state in life -  and many do live them out in the laity (both married and single) without any sort of vows or promises, nor is this necessary. Some in the laity may consciously strive to live a secular life marked by the evangelical counsels without making any sort of vows - I also know others who are obviously living such a life without being aware they are living a way of life marked by the evangelical counsels.  Some do make private vows perhaps to live a life marked by the counsels more radically than their state of life would normally require.

The Spirit moves as He Will and nowhere does The Church state that a personal and unique call from God must be undergirded by vows of some kind beyond the baptismal.  Not that I am aware of anyway.

Edited May 1, 2015 by BarbaraTherese

[Norseman82]

Barb,

No offense, but you are giving a lot of "document dumps" that have nothing to do with the question at hand.  The issue is this:  which "states of life" - married, ordained/religious, consecrated, or single - are official vocations?  Instead of confusing people with irrelevant "document dumps", could we please focus on this particular question?

[BarbTherese]

Thank you for the comments, N82 - and not offended at all :)

The original question in this thread was whether one needs to make private vows, or some sort of vow or vows, to remain in the single state as a vocation.   The question of the single state being a potential vocation was not really my issue, while having problems with assertions that it is not.

This was the response into Catholic Q and A which caused me concern (triggering my opening of this thread) which stated that the single life (chaste celibacy in the laity) was a vocation providing one made a vow or vows committing oneself to it.  :http://www.phatmass.com/phorum/topic/137310-vocation-to-singlehood/?do=findComment&comment=2723766   I quoted the various documents out of Rome to support my own response that one does not need to make any sort of vow or vows to remain in the single state and as one's vocation and call.  I was never so much interested in what personal opinions (theological debate) might be, as to what The Church had to state.

Since my last post, I have read that there is considerable theological per se debate over the question of the single state as a potential vocation with nothing settled  - hence I have since concluded that nothing would be settled in this thread either.  Apparently, however, Rome is considering the question and something providing clarity will be forthcoming in the foreseeable, perhaps making it possible for those who do feel called to the single state as vocation to make some sort of valid commitment.  Be this as it may, I still feel that vow or vows are not necessary, although if The Church should state that they are, then I would change my thoughts.

 

 

Edited May 3, 2015 by BarbaraTherese

[Norseman82]

Thank you for the comments, N82 - and not offended at all

The original question in this thread was whether one needs to make private vows, or some sort of vow or vows, to remain in the single state as a vocation.   The question of the single state being a potential vocation was not really my issue, while having problems with assertions that it is not.

This was the response into Catholic Q and A which caused me concern (triggering my opening of this thread) which stated that the single life (chaste celibacy in the laity) was a vocation providing one made a vow or vows committing oneself to it.  :http://www.phatmass.com/phorum/topic/137310-vocation-to-singlehood/?do=findComment&comment=2723766   I quoted the various documents out of Rome to support my own response that one does not need to make any sort of vow or vows to remain in the single state and as one's vocation and call.  I was never so much interested in what personal opinions (theological debate) might be, as to what The Church had to state.

Since my last post, I have read that there is considerable theological per se debate over the question of the single state as a potential vocation with nothing settled  - hence I have since concluded that nothing would be settled in this thread either.  Apparently, however, Rome is considering the question and something providing clarity will be forthcoming in the foreseeable, perhaps making it possible for those who do feel called to the single state as vocation to make some sort of valid commitment.  Be this as it may, I still feel that vow or vows are not necessary, although if The Church should state that they are, then I would change my thoughts.

 

 

​OK, but whether it's called "vows" or "some sort of valid committment", aren't we referring to the same thing - something that "locks us in" permanently, such as the vows married people make or the vows/promises made by ordained/religious/consecrated people? 

[BarbTherese]

Hi again Norseman - I feel that I can state that there is nothing that officially "locks us in" permanently to the lay state of life outside Baptismal vows or a private vow or vow that does lock one in, but then there is nothing to my knowledge that The Church states that a "vocation" per se must be defined by vows outside of the Baptismal vows which will lock the person into a specific state of life.  To my mind Holy Orders, the consecrated state and marriage exist in Canon Law in their own right because they do demand duties outside of the ordinary lay state (chaste celibacy).  They are special states of life in The Church drawn from but outside of the chaste celibate state in the laity. In fact, personally I cannot see how The Church can submit a Document(s) addressing specifically the laity as a specific and clearly defined vocation and then at some future date state that the lay state is not a vocation per se. ("Vocation and Mission of The Laity" 1988) - to mention only one Document.

I could quote more. But in deference to you, I will not

  I have taken a quite active interest in the lay vocation and related Church documents since the lay state is my own vocation.  But then again, I am certainly not any sort of theologian.

I think probably the theological debate is or will be centred on what constitutes a vocation per se.  I can certainly quote a rather lengthy document by a theologian which does specify the criteria for vocation per se and that the lay state meets this criteria.  The author is Fr John A Hardon SJ (decd)who was  a renowned theologian in The Church of the 20/21st century and was a major contributor to our Catholic Catechism post VII. I know that you don't particular like quotations although I have no idea what "dumped" means.  I always prefer to check out my thoughts with what The Church might have to state and I will quote with links for the benefit of others if they wish.  If they don't wish then they can simply ignore the quotes.

As I have stated, I am personally resigned that this thread (from what I have read since starting it) will probably resolve nothing in light of the continuing theological debates on the question or questions.  If theologians in The Church do not agree, I doubt we will, although not an impossibility just an unlikely.

[BarbTherese]

The moment a person is baptised they are locked into the lay state of life (celibate chastity) and as their vocation with its attendant duties and for life - unless God should call them out of that state into some other special state of life in The Church, which will have its own attendant duties and indeed, life vows.

Where private vows are concerned in the lay state, very often it is a vow or vow locking the person into something that is more demanding than their celibate chaste state in the laity would demand.

Edited May 4, 2015 by BarbaraTherese

[bardegaulois]

Forgive me if I'm a little confused here. I think that you're drawing too close a correspondence between baptism and the lay state, not even to mention celibacy being drawn into the equation. Nowhere in any magisterial documents nor in any theological writings have I seen the two correlated in that way. If baptism makes one lay, then are priests or religious, who are no longer lay, no longer baptized? Of course not. Can we say that the universal call to holiness underpins the lay vocation and state of life, whether that is expressed through marriage or celibacy? Absolutely. However, we can also say that it underpins every other particular vocation in the Church.

I think Truthfinder got it spot-on in drawing a good distinction between our general vocation received through the waters of baptism and the particular vocation to which the individual soul must respond. When you inquire about singleness or lay celibacy, you're talking about something quite particular, not something general. Perhaps when you can clarify what its particularities are, not falling back about generalities that are simply true of all states of life, then the question as to whether it is a vocation (that it is a state of life is beyond doubt) will be much more pointed and will show a good angle to approach the question.

[BarbTherese]

 If baptism makes one lay, then are priests or religious, who are no longer lay, no longer baptized? Of course not.

 When you inquire about singleness or lay celibacy, you're talking about something quite particular, not something general.

Gosh, nowhere have I stated for sure or even hinted that priests or religious are no longer baptized!!!!!   What I have stated is that some (not all) are called to quite special states of life and vocations in The Church: i.e. Holy Orders, Matrimony or Consecrated Life.

Baptism underpins all the states of life and vocations in The Church. 

 Those baptised are called specifically to chaste celibacy in the laity unless God calls them to one of the other states in life i.e. Holy Orders, Marriage or Consecrated life (incorporates religious life, consecrated virginity, hermits under Canon 603 and secular institutes).

In the laity, there are two groups.  The celibate laity and the married laity.  The celibate laity are called to chaste celibacy, while the married are called to married chastity.   Both groups are lay states but only one group is called personally and in a particular and personal manner (as you have stated above) to remain in the laity and chaste celibacy - and I have read that this latter call is probably not a common one.  It is the obligation of all the baptised to seek God's Will and particularly for their state in life or the life road they are to take striving for holiness.  Certainly, discernment is a very serious matter and not to be taken lightly - with prayer and sound spiritual advice.  In my case it was not taken lightly but prayerfully and affirmed by very sound spiritual direction all along the way and still ongoing (I am now over 30 years with private vows in the laity).   My vocation affirmed now by two Archbishops.  I do not at all think I am alone in a vocation to celibate chastity in the laity - nor do I think that I had to make private vows in order to do so.......it is simply the way I was called over 30years ago now.

If I were to summarise : it is the laity that are called to be as their duty specifically in the world for the world immersed in temporal affairs and secular life and striving always in all things temporal and secular to "seek the Kingdom of God......according to the Plan of God" in the strictly temporal and secular.  Holy Orders does not have this duty, neither does consecrated life - not as a defined duty of their state in life. Both these latter states probably do venture into the temporal and secular even often but not as a defined duty of their state to do so as with the laity.

I am unsure about the consecrated secular institutes and what the criteria of their vocations might be.

-----------"30. Having set forth the functions of the hierarchy, the Sacred Council gladly turns its attention. to the state of those faithful called the laity. Everything that has been said above concerning the People of God is intended for the laity, religious and clergy alike. But there are certain things which pertain in a special way to the laity, both men and women, by reason of their condition and mission. Due to the special circumstances of our time the foundations of this doctrine must be more thoroughly examined. For their pastors know how much the laity contribute to the welfare of the entire Church. ".

LUMEN GENTIUM "Dogmatic Constitution on The Church" ......"........ the laity, by their very vocation, seek the kingdom of God by engaging in temporal affairs and by ordering them according to the plan of God. They live in the world, that is, in each and in all of the secular professions and occupations. They live in the ordinary circumstances of family and social life, from which the very web of their existence is woven. They are called there by God that by exercising their proper function and led by the spirit of the Gospel they may work for the sanctification of the world from within as a leaven. In this way they may make Christ known to others, especially by the testimony of a life resplendent in faith, hope and charity. Therefore, since they are tightly bound up in all types of temporal affairs it is their special task to order and to throw light upon these affairs in such a way that they may come into being and then continually increase according to Christ to the praise of the Creator and the Redeemer.

Edited May 4, 2015 by BarbaraTherese

[BarbTherese]

Forgive me if I'm a little confused here. I think that you're drawing too close a correspondence between baptism and the lay state, not even to mention celibacy being drawn into the equation. Nowhere in any magisterial documents nor in any theological writings have I seen the two correlated in that way. If baptism makes one lay, then are priests or religious, who are no longer lay, no longer baptized? Of course not. Can we say that the universal call to holiness underpins the lay vocation and state of life, whether that is expressed through marriage or celibacy? Absolutely. However, we can also say that it underpins every other particular vocation in the Church.

 

​Very obviously when one is baptised one is then in the lay state and called to celibate chastity by virtue of one's Baptism into the laity which has its own Church-defined duties.  It might be that one is called to another special state of life and vocation in The Church and Baptism underpins all of of them : Holy Orders, Matrimony or Consecrated Life.  I cannot see the problem with correlating matters as I have.  I can't see anything contradictory nor invalid.

[BarbTherese]

Catholic Culture Dictionary

The state of being unmarried and, in Church usage, of one who has never been married. Catholicism distinguishes between lay and ecclesiastical celibacy, and in both cases a person freely chooses for religious reasons to remain celibate.

Lay celibacy was practiced already in the early Church. The men were called "the continent" (continentes) and women "virgins" (virgines). They were also known as ascetics who were encouraged to follow this form of life by St. Paul. According to the Apostle, "An unmarried man can devote himself to the Lord's affairs, all he need worry about is pleasing the Lord . . . In the same way an unmarried woman, like a young girl, can devote herself to the Lord's affairs; all she need worry about is being holy in body and spirit" (I Corinthians 7:32, 34). Throughout history the Church has fostered a celibate life in the lay state. Towering among the means of sanctity available to the laity, declared the Second Vatican Council, "is that precious gift of divine grace given to some by the Father to devote themselves to God alone more easily with an undivided heart in virginity or celibacy. This perfect continence for love of the kingdom of heaven has always been held in high esteem by the Church as a sign and stimulus of love, and as a singular source of spiritual fertility in the world" (Constitution on the Church, 42)."