perpetual and temporary vows question

[Alberto Guimaraes]

Peace and Good!

When I joined the Secular Franciscan Order I did some purposes, better than «private vows»:

To pray the Liturgy of the Hours.

To wear the holy penance habit, or garments, or robe.

To live barefoot whenever possible, and when it be not possible, opt for simple and humble sandals, except when the weather or the socio-familiar occasions don't allow it.

Blessings from Jesus, Mary and Francis!

Br. Alberto Guimaraes OFS

Braga ─ Portugal

[JHFamily]

I have actually read about this kind of situation just recently.  When someone would take a public vow (temporary or otherwise), the pastor or superior may simply give permission that the public vow take the place of the private vow -- it's as easy as that.  However, if the temporary expires and is not replaced by a permanent vow, I do not know the ramifications of that.

[Feankie]

This are moot questions as none of us, that I know of, are canon lawyers :))

What is being expressed seems to be opinion.  If the question/s are of vital importance, it's best to seek the counsel of someone who has JCD.  He/she can answer questions competently as to what is allowed/permissible under canon law.

[Sponsa-Christi]

15 minutes ago, Francis Clare said:

This are moot questions as none of us, that I know of, are canon lawyers :))

LOL, I'm actually a canon lawyer!  I guess I did a good job posting in stealth ninja mode.

[Sister Leticia]

Just a thought -

Don't forget that when religious make vows, we don't simply say "I vow to God..." we vow to God IN our order. So we vow to live as part of a larger group, in conformity with its constitutions, spirituality and charism. 

As everyone is called to live and love chastely, I imagine a private vow of chastity per se doesn't exclude the possibility of marriage, or dating - unless the vow formula is explicit. Or a person can simply say "chastity", and privately desire it to mean no dating, no thoughts of marriage, but not specify out loud - which means chaste dating would be possible, should the person then fall in love. (Obviously, I have no idea what people say when they are making this vow). 

But a vow made within an order is a vow made in a group whose members are all celibate. So when I vowed chastity within the Society I didn't need to specify how I would live this vow (or the other vows), because I was also vowing to live in conformity with our constitutions. I just said "chastity" and that embraced non-marriage, non-dating and 101 more things - all of them positive  

(Hoping this makes sense - it's late, and been a long day!)

[Sponsa-Christi]

8 minutes ago, Sister Leticia said:

As everyone is called to live and love chastely, I imagine a private vow of chastity per se doesn't exclude the possibility of marriage, or dating - unless the vow formula is explicit.

I think in the context of VS, when people talk about private vows of chastity, they evangelical chastity, i.e. refraining altogether from marriage and the acts proper to marriage. 

Some people do discern private vows of evangelical chastity/perpetual virginity/celibacy as their vocation in life. As in, they are fully laypeople living in the world, but they make a purely personal commitment to living this aspect of the Gospel more radically. I guess you could call this "dedicated single life," but putting it in terms of private vows seems more accurate to me.

It's also fairly common for aspiring consecrated virgins to make private vows of virginity as part of their discernment and/or formation, even though this isn't a requirement. The thought with this is that it's kind of a way for aspiring CVs to have something roughly parallel to temporary profession. (I personally have mixed feelings about whether this should be considered standard practice for aspiring CVs, but that's a rabbit hole for another day!)

[Guest]

Certainly, as a lay woman living alone and single, my vow of Chastity does and did embrace celibate Chastity.  While we are all called to the evangelical counsels in accord with our personal vocation and call, religious and those who might choose to do so vow to live out the evangelical counsels in a more radical manner than some other vocations.

It would be a far easier process for a privately vowed person to the evangelical counsels to be dispensed, than for a religious.  With private vows a priest can dispense. Be that as it may, to make even a private vow to God is a serious move and the vow or vows must be fulfilled under the virtue of religion.  I don't think anyone should make a vow or vows even privately without spiritual direction.  It is a serious move.

In religious life, the rule and constitution spell out how members are to live out the evangelical counsels.  There is no need to write one's own rule.  Membership of a religious order implies and is an embrace of that Order's rule and constitution.  With private vows, one does need to sort of spell out how one intends to live out those vows.  When my priest religious SD asked me to write out my rule, I simply put in writing how I had been living for many years......under the paragraph headings of the Our Father, which to me is a whole rule of life in itself.

If one is in religious life, then they could make some other private vow or vows (for example only, to pray The Rosary daily if their community does not) providing, I would think, their superior is in agreement.  

At one point in my journey, I did fall in love.  I chose however to continue with private vows.  It was a difficult thing to do, putting it mildly.  I do feel now down these many years, I did make the right choice for me.  When I consider that God Is Love, to fall in love is a wondrous and serious gift, but equally is the gift of celibacy.  They are, in the big picture, gifts to The Church for the good of The Church.

To my mind, if someone has made life private vows to the evangelical counsels and then enters into temporary vows in religious life, the latter is the superior vocation, or a greater good as spelt out in Canon Law - and if memory serves, therefore there is no need for dispensation from private vows.

But @Sponsa Christiwould know far more than me re Canon Law and other matters.....for sure.

[adoro.te.devote]

18 hours ago, Alberto Guimaraes said:

Peace and Good!

When I joined the Secular Franciscan Order I did some purposes, better than «private vows»:

To pray the Liturgy of the Hours.

To wear the holy penance habit, or garments, or robe.

To live barefoot whenever possible, and when it be not possible, opt for simple and humble sandals, except when the weather or the socio-familiar occasions don't allow it.

Blessings from Jesus, Mary and Francis!

Br. Alberto Guimaraes OFS

Braga ─ Portugal

Sometimes I wonder about joining a third order if God wants me to stay in the world with private vows, it's the way many Saints lived like St Catherine of Siena, St Rose of Lima, St Margaret of Cortona (another Franciscan! :)) Thanks for sharing, and God bless you!

8 hours ago, Sister Leticia said:

Just a thought -

Don't forget that when religious make vows, we don't simply say "I vow to God..." we vow to God IN our order. So we vow to live as part of a larger group, in conformity with its constitutions, spirituality and charism. 

As everyone is called to live and love chastely, I imagine a private vow of chastity per se doesn't exclude the possibility of marriage, or dating - unless the vow formula is explicit. Or a person can simply say "chastity", and privately desire it to mean no dating, no thoughts of marriage, but not specify out loud - which means chaste dating would be possible, should the person then fall in love. (Obviously, I have no idea what people say when they are making this vow). 

But a vow made within an order is a vow made in a group whose members are all celibate. So when I vowed chastity within the Society I didn't need to specify how I would live this vow (or the other vows), because I was also vowing to live in conformity with our constitutions. I just said "chastity" and that embraced non-marriage, non-dating and 101 more things - all of them positive  

(Hoping this makes sense - it's late, and been a long day!)

From what I understand, typically people mean evangelical counsel of chastity when they make this private vow.. I've heard of people simply vowing to be chaste according to their state of life, but I always thought of the vow as mainly having the same meaning as a public vow of chastity, except that it's private and not associated with an order, and not received by the Church. When I made my private vow and said that i vow chastity, for me this meant the evangelical counsel, so it would be wrong for me to date/seek marriage because this is what I vowed... but it wouldnt' be wrong of course if someone vowed to be chaste in any state of life

7 hours ago, Sponsa-Christi said:

I think in the context of VS, when people talk about private vows of chastity, they evangelical chastity, i.e. refraining altogether from marriage and the acts proper to marriage. 

Some people do discern private vows of evangelical chastity/perpetual virginity/celibacy as their vocation in life. As in, they are fully laypeople living in the world, but they make a purely personal commitment to living this aspect of the Gospel more radically. I guess you could call this "dedicated single life," but putting it in terms of private vows seems more accurate to me.

It's also fairly common for aspiring consecrated virgins to make private vows of virginity as part of their discernment and/or formation, even though this isn't a requirement. The thought with this is that it's kind of a way for aspiring CVs to have something roughly parallel to temporary profession. (I personally have mixed feelings about whether this should be considered standard practice for aspiring CVs, but that's a rabbit hole for another day!)

That's my understanding as well...

I actually started wondering, if someone is making a private vow of chastity in terms of the evangelical counsel, are they supposed to clarify that somehow so it is clear that they are vowing this, and not to be chaste but still marry? hmm

[Sister_Laurel]

In terms of intentions all public vows are meant to be perpetual. This is true even when the community/church requires the vow to expire after a year or three. When one makes a private vow of chastity, one intends (or should intend) to give oneself in the same way; however, one is not extended any specific rights and obligations with such an entirely private commitment beyond the commitment to be chaste. Should a change in situation allow one to be admitted to public vows with very different and public rights and obligations,  the private vow is replaced by the public vow. Since the rights and obligations differ for public vows (that is, there are some!), it is appropriate for there to be a temporary commitment to test one's ability to keep this vow. What is critical here is that private commitments (including vows and promises) do not come with or imply public rights and obligations.  When one makes a public vow of consecrated celibacy one is not merely vowing to remain chaste but to remain celibate, and also to represent this unique form of love in a public way in an ecclesial vocation. 

Edited November 4, 2020 by SRLAUREL

[Sister_Laurel]

Postscript: I should note that an unmarried person in the lay state is obligated to chastity by virtue of their state of life. Ordinarily one does not make vows re something one is already obligated to. If one is vowing to remain unmarried for the sake of the Kingdom, for instance, then it might be better to call the vow something other than chastity like, "remaining unmarried for the sake of the Kingdom."

[gloriana35]

Anyone, in any state of life, is obligated to practise the virtue of chastity, which varies according to state. Fidelity to a spouse, for example, is part of the commitment in marriage. Sex is supposed to be a part of commitment in marriage, so the unmarried who engage in sexual relations have committed fornication or adultery.

I do not like vows of 'chastity according to state of life,' because that is a commandment. Nor do I think someone should make a vow of chastity with an attitude of 'unless I fall in love and decide to marry.' Of course, people who have made vows often have been dispensed, but I do not like the idea of acting as if vowing 'chastity according to state' is the same as a vow of total, permanent chastity. Those not living chastity according to state are committing a sin.

[Guest]

In the single state of life we are called to celibate chastity and hence no need to vow or promise it, although in today's sexual climate, even licentiousness, there might be some value.  It is like saying to The Lord that I live in a time that does not embrace our values pressing in on all sides of me, and therefore vow or promise I will not abandon our values and remain celibate and chaste if and until marriage - and for the good of The Kingdom.  When and if I marry, I vow and promise to embrace married chastity and for the good of The Kingdom.

There is no reason whatsoever in Church Teaching, including Canon Law, that content of a valid private vow is under some sort of Church legislation.

When I made a private vow of celibate chastity for one, I meant it as a lifelong commitment, although initially I made the vow for a year and renewed at the end of that year.  It was a time of testing myself and back then I had trouble defining for myself what I was about.  I had been married for 15 years (two children) and celibacy was not at all easily achieved.  I knew I needed the gift of celibacy from The Lord in order to continue as I hoped and intended.   After some years, quite some years, I made my private vow for life and back then I kept it all quite private in the common understanding of the word "private".  At every point, I sought sound and wise, experienced, spiritual direction.  Fortunately for me and with gratitude, it was always a priest who knew me quite well.  Although nowadays a priest SD is not strictly necessary.  For a couple of years, I had a trained SD who was a religious sister and it was a rewarding spiritually experience.

I think that is very different from making a private vow of celibate chastity until I find a partner for life and marry, although as in my first paragraph above, there might be some value.

Edited November 4, 2020 by BarbaraTherese

[Guest]

For me, private vow or vows are of a strictly private matter between the person and The Lord (relationship) rather than some third party 'in on the act' - i.e. something governed by some sort of Church legislation, do's and don'ts, which does not exist anyway other than Canon Law stating that valid private vow or vows can be made by any person of "suitable use of reason" unless some kind of law may prohibit it. Canon Law (Vatican website) Chapter 1 - "A Vow"

[Sister_Laurel]

On 11/2/2020 at 3:29 PM, Francis Clare said:

A private vow SHOULD be discussed/discerned if one is seeing a SD.  My point was simply that a SD could not/should not  witness a private vow.  It is something that is discouraged in our training.  That does not fall into the purview of spiritual direction.  If a directee wishes to make a private vow, then it should BE private.....between the person and God alone.   If they wish to involve a priest, that is their decision.  We guide.....we don't witness :))

Sponsa-Christi.....I know where you're coming from, and I think you know where I'm coming from :)) I believe we agree, but words are getting in the way!  No "food fights" here over technicalities, please.

Technicalities though can be important and in this matter they are really significant. That said, a spiritual director can witness a private vow; what they cannot do, qua spiritual director, is receive such a vow. They do not have the authority to do this. Private in this sense does not mean no one else knows of or even witnesses the vow; it means there are no additional public rights or obligations extended to the person or embraced by them in the making of the vow including initiation into a new state of life. ( Btw, All of this other "stuff" -- public rights, obligations, and the initiation of the person into a new state of life, etc., is involved in an act of "profession" and their absence in private vows is a reason we do not use the term profession for private vows. Profession is a broader act than the simple making of a vow.)

Reception of a vow implies someone mediating this process on behalf of the Church and this mediation of canonical rights and obligations in the name of the Church (and their embrace by the one making profession) is what makes the profession public, not the number of folks attending or witnessing. So, for instance, some have misused the term private for vows a diocesan hermit makes in the privacy of the sacristy or deserted chapel, for instance, with only the bishop or his delegate present. But such vows are public because the bishop and hermit intend them to be, and intend them to initiate the hermit into a new state of life with public rights and obligations.

Again, the critical distinction between public and private vows is not a matter of others being present or not; that is a different sense of public and private. Instead it is about the distinction between someone mediating public rights/obligations through an act of reception done in the name of the Church, and someone merely witnessing a vow in a way which intends and does none of this.

[adoro.te.devote]

17 hours ago, SRLAUREL said:

In terms of intentions all public vows are meant to be perpetual. This is true even when the community/church requires the vow to expire after a year or three. When one makes a private vow of chastity, one intends (or should intend) to give oneself in the same way; however, one is not extended any specific rights and obligations with such an entirely private commitment beyond the commitment to be chaste. Should a change in situation allow one to be admitted to public vows with very different and public rights and obligations,  the private vow is replaced by the public vow. Since the rights and obligations differ for public vows (that is, there are some!), it is appropriate for there to be a temporary commitment to test one's ability to keep this vow. What is critical here is that private commitments (including vows and promises) do not come with or imply public rights and obligations.  When one makes a public vow of consecrated celibacy one is not merely vowing to remain chaste but to remain celibate, and also to represent this unique form of love in a public way in an ecclesial vocation. 

Sr Laurel, when I made my (temporary) private vow, I vowed chastity but I meant not only to be chaste, but to be celibate, to give myself to God. I thought this is how normally the meaning of a private vow of chastity, and that it is to the evangelical counsel? Should I have phrased it differently, for instance if one day I make this vow perpetual? Even though the vow was temporary, I've promised myself to Our Lord for my whole life, and I am not open to marriage any more - it was just advised to me to start with a temporary vow. To me, it has always meant celibacy, but the reason I made a vow of chastity is to practice chastity in virtue of religion, which in my understanding is the meaning of a vow. The reason I made it is to love God exclusively and not seek earthly marriage. I'd be grateful for any thoughts on this?

Edited November 5, 2020 by adoro.te.devote