"in An Ideal World, 80% Would Be Religious And 20% Married"

[Ave Maria Totus Tuus]

[quote name='the lords sheep' post='1333805' date='Jul 18 2007, 12:37 PM']I think this is a slighty bizzare topic, but my 2 cents:

In an ideal world, 100% would be holy, loving, God-fearing men and women who are striving to be at full communion with the Lord through whatever vocation He calls them too.[/quote]




Bravo Zulu!

[Sr Mary Catharine OP]

[quote name='johnnydigit' post='1333354' date='Jul 18 2007, 01:51 AM']i heard a priest say this and it has stuck with me. i think he said it was Thomas Aquinas, but i have searched and have not found any evidence, yet. he has long since forgotten as well.

anyways, i've been thinking that this scenario makes a lot of sense. in an ideal world where everyone was Catholic and teaching their children the way they should be, most would become priests, brothers, or sisters. they would occupy most of the city's jobs, and the few remaining single people would marry to propogate the species and raise children. then of course the very few single people who are not called to religous or married life would remain single, but hopefully consecrated in some form at least.

now considering the reality of the situation today, we are totally off the mark and in desperate need of change in our younger generation's mentality towards religious life and the culture of death. instead of marriage being the minority and the more rare option, it's completely the opposite, and probably chosen more than 99% of the time.

ok so the point i'm trying to make is, i'm thinking that for anyone who is even considering the notion, or has even pondered the possibility of religious life in our day and age, is beyond rare, and we should be doing our best to really encourage them and point them to religious life. given the above theory, the chances they are called to religious life greatly outweigh the call to marriage.

i don't think this is being done on our part because it seems most people who discern end up choosing marriage. again, given the pure statistics of an "ideal" world, most of these people should be finding their call is to religious life. needless to say we have more than enough people to propogate the species.

"be not afraid." we need you. just try it. if you are that rare person that God has called to marriage, you will know and you can still pursue it afterwards.

(disclaimer: what i say is not always what i am able to do [/quote]

St. Thomas Aquinas???? Good heavens! Anyone who interprets my BIG brother that way hasn't read him!
What you might be thinking of is his discussion on vocation and how only "normal" qualifications are needed and if one has those and one feels God is calling you than you should simply respond and not twist yourself up discerning.
OK, so that's the SMC modern paraphrase.
I'll do some research and see if I can find the section in the Summa.
However, these statiscs are well, bizzare!

SMC

[she_who_is_not]

I remember that reading a private revelation (maybe to John Bosco?) that 1 in every 3 people are actually called to religious life but far fewer respond. However, that would put us at only 33%.

[LouisvilleFan]

I imagine most of us have wondered what the world would be like if nearly everyone was Christian or Catholic, but the problem is that we are Christians for a reason: because we were first sinners.

In an ideal world, Adam and Eve wouldn't have listened to the serpent, there would be no Fall, no original sin, no drunken Noah, scared Moses, fornicating King David, seduced Samson, and Jesus wouldn't have died... and I suppose there would be no death at all, at least within the animal kingdom.

So ideally, there would be no need for priests and religious

Edited July 20, 2007 by LouisvilleFan

[Margaret]

ok well this is my 2 cents with the world how it is today...*ahem*...

[b]"if most of the Catholics in the world became religious or priests, then I would fear that we, as humans who often do these things, would look down upon the married as somehow not being privileged like the bulk of the Catholics in becoming religious. It almost seems like a rejection of the marital act as an imperfect service to God. Yes, it gives us children to become religious, but those who engage it in are *clearly* more fleshly and unable to control themselves... that kind of thing."[/b]

First of all If we are talking about really really good vocations all round There should be no problem with disention about married life being less then religious life in any way there is so much every day self sacrifice that is very different than religiouse life self sacrifice I think religious have a great respect for married and single people in the world who are trying to live a christian life . I think it is probably way harder in the long run to be married and become a saint, than to be a religious and become a saint

[b]"If that were true, I'm not sure that the married 20% would be physically capable of producing enough children to sustain the population."[/b]

[b]"Every married woman would have to have like 8 children just to keep the population where it is right now (which is already too low) for this to work out."[/b]

God intended marriage for procreation or "propagation of the species" if you will. read the Theology of the body and you will see that is its main purpose that is how marriage glorifies God. If people were having larger families there wouldn't be a problem with not enough people. If people are open to life They wont feel like they HAVE to have children but will pray that God will BLESS them with children.

I would like to share 2 examples:

My Maternal Grandparents had 9 children, those nine children all practice there faith and are open to life. there are 68 grand children. most all of us practice our faith and are open to life and so far there are 31 great grand children that is a total of 107 "offspring" from 2 people in a matter of 56 years.

My paternal Grand Parents did not practice there faith regularly they had 3 children only my dad practices His faith and I only have 2 cousins there and neither of them practice the faith. 2 people in a mater of 70 years have 16 "offspring"



My point is a couple things Christian Marriage is a vocation that is very needed. If married Christian People lived out there vocation completely More people would become religious there would and We wouldn't have to worry about not having enough people or having to many.

I have heard in a couple different vocation type books that 1 third are called and maybe that is a lot different than
80% but still do 1 third answer ? People are selfish I think that is the main prob. Any way

GOd bless you all and have a great day

[Totus Tuus]

My point in saying that a woman would "have" to have so many children was because in this age children [i]are not[/i] looked on as blessings most of the time. They are looked on as something to be controlled and limited and chosen at a certain time.

Just fyi, because you seem to be correcting the notion I was referencing current mind-set, not my personal feeling (I love children )

[Mary-Kathryn]

The bottom line is that numbers don't matter.{of course I say this as I sit in a diocese that does not lack in vocations] What matters the most is the person called to the vocation and the strength and fidelity of this person.

As for the 80-20 theory...good gravy people, I ain't a rabbit popping out bunnies left and right. There's no way I could help populate the world like [b]that[/b]. The well-meaning priest who said that didn't stop to think of us poor women!

Edited July 23, 2007 by Mary-Kathryn

[johnnydigit]

[quote name='Rose_of_Sharon' post='1335827' date='Jul 20 2007, 04:22 PM']I think it is probably way harder in the long run to be married and become a saint, than to be a religious and become a saint[/quote]

iirc, a girl from one of the Marian apparitions grew up and when Mary visited her again she asked, "what did you do with your life?"
the girl responded, "i got married."
Our Lady said, "ah, you chose the harder path.."

[quote name='Rose_of_Sharon' post='1335827' date='Jul 20 2007, 04:22 PM']I would like to share 2 examples:

My Maternal Grandparents had 9 children, those nine children all practice there faith and are open to life. there are 68 grand children. most all of us practice our faith and are open to life and so far there are 31 great grand children that is a total of 107 "offspring" from 2 people in a matter of 56 years.

My paternal Grand Parents did not practice there faith regularly they had 3 children only my dad practices His faith and I only have 2 cousins there and neither of them practice the faith. 2 people in a mater of 70 years have 16 "offspring"
My point is a couple things Christian Marriage is a vocation that is very needed. If married Christian People lived out there vocation completely More people would become religious there would and We wouldn't have to worry about not having enough people or having to many.

I have heard in a couple different vocation type books that 1 third are called and maybe that is a lot different than
80% but still do 1 third answer ? People are selfish I think that is the main prob. Any way

GOd bless you all and have a great day[/quote]

great examples. i don't think sustaining the population would be an issue at all. if anything i would have reduced the number to 10% or less because that would still offer an "abundant harvest" over time. honestly i am quite surprised some of you would rather have more married than religious..

as far as the tables being turned and married life being looked down upon if it was to be the minority, the theory already consists of a society whose devout catholics are mature enough to see that all vocations are equally important and loved by God. even if it were true, i would rather have it that way, as a world full of religious would seem a lot closer to God's kingdom and heaven on earth (remember there are no married couples in heaven). alas these are all still just broad, speculative theories..

as far as the "80% religious", i should have referred to that as being 80% "non-married", which would consist of priests, brothers, sisters, and consecrated singles. the breakdown on those would be a whole topic in itself..


wow i had no idea this topic would spark in so many directions and raise emotions. i actually was just looking for confirmation on the author and reading more about why he said it.

[Totus Tuus]

FYI - I heard Father Corapi yesterday on EWTN. He was giving a talk on the Sacrament of Matrimony, and he also talked about consecrated virginity in relation to that. He repeatedly stated that [i]most people are called to marriage[/i] and used Genesis to back up his claim. I have a note on it and I'll look at it again. I think he may have backed it with something else.

God bless!

[johnnydigit]

[quote name='Totus Tuus' post='1340416' date='Jul 25 2007, 08:27 AM']FYI - I heard Father Corapi yesterday on EWTN. He was giving a talk on the Sacrament of Matrimony, and he also talked about consecrated virginity in relation to that. He repeatedly stated that [i]most people are called to marriage[/i] and used Genesis to back up his claim. I have a note on it and I'll look at it again. I think he may have backed it with something else.

God bless![/quote]

interesting. perhaps he was addressing the probable reality and the current state of the world, versus the notion of a more ideal state.

[Totus Tuus]

[quote name='johnnydigit' post='1340428' date='Jul 25 2007, 10:38 AM']interesting. perhaps he was addressing the probable reality and the current state of the world, versus the notion of a more ideal state.[/quote]

Nope. He was talking about reality and God's plan. If you could hear the talk the context would be better understood. Maybe you could download it on EWTN? I'm not sure. I know you can buy his stuff from Santa Cruz Media.

[Mary-Kathryn]

[quote name='johnnydigit' post='1340320' date='Jul 25 2007, 03:27 AM']iirc, a girl from one of the Marian apparitions grew up and when Mary visited her again she asked, "what did you do with your life?"
the girl responded, "i got married."
Our Lady said, "ah, you chose the harder path.."
great examples. i don't think sustaining the population would be an issue at all. if anything i would have reduced the number to 10% or less because that would still offer an "abundant harvest" over time. honestly i am quite surprised some of you would rather have more married than religious..[/quote]

Now, my grandfather was the youngest of 18 children. I have tons of relatives from that marriage, way too many to count. So they pretty much populated their share of the earth right? Well I was only able to have three children--not much as far as being "abundant" goes huh? So I guess my grandfather's family would seem far more impressive to The Church as far as vocations go--except no one in my family is Catholic except me. I was the one who converted as an adult. It is my small family that are the first Catholics in that family bible.

Re-think your position. Human beings can juggle the numbers all they want. God decides.

[cathoholic_anonymous]

Mary-Kathryn is right. The parents of one of my close friends really wanted a big family. But after the second child was born her mother kept having miscarriages. Eventually a third child was conceived, and this is the youngest and the last. It just wasn't physically possible for the mother to have any more children. Even being 'open to life' doesn't mean that you have a new baby every year for the next decade. Human biology is more complex and subtle than that. Sometimes there is nothing overtly wrong, but conception still isn't possible. And of course, it may not be God's will for parents to have more than three children.

I am an only child. My sister died before I was born. I think their lack of children is one of the reasons why my parents are so wary about participating fully in the life of the parish. This is probably my fault, and I kick myself for it, as when my dad made a dismissive (almost sneering) remark about a couple we know who have six children, I snapped back, "It's because they're practising Catholics." Through prayer and patience and a lot of remorse, I have been trying to undo the effects of that remark every since. Your worth as a couple should not be determined by how many children you have. My parents are not failing in their vocation because they have only one child, and that's what you're implying if you say that the primary purpose of marriage is to keep the earth populated while the majority of people go off to the convent or the seminary.

As a disabled child, I probably took up the energy and resources that my parents would have needed for three children. My disabilities were especially pronounced when I was little. I needed a lot of care. My parents may have contributed to the population decline, but unlike many of my friends with the same disabilities, I have never become so distressed at my state that I attempted suicide - despite the anxiety attacks and a nervous breakdown. My parents' love and care kept me from believing what the bullies had to say. By the grace of God they worked miracles for me. I don't think they could have done any better for the Kingdom of Heaven if they had had ten children. They've done their work perfectly well with just one. Again, numbers are God's territory, not ours.

[Maria]

A couple we know (they've been friends of my parents for years, and he's now principal of Loyola High School, the only really Catholic, English High School in the area) were only able to have one child. It was a real disappointment to them, but it meant that they were able to put time and energy into caring for mentally disabled adults. I think they have some living with them, but I'm really not sure of any details.

Edited July 26, 2007 by Maria

[LouisvilleFan]

All this talk about "fertile" marriages reminds me that some of the most important and life-giving marriages in the Bible were relatively "infertile": Abraham & Sarah, Zechariah & Elizabeth, and, of course, Mary & Joseph.

[quote name='Totus Tuus' post='1340416' date='Jul 25 2007, 11:27 AM']FYI - I heard Father Corapi yesterday on EWTN. He was giving a talk on the Sacrament of Matrimony, and he also talked about consecrated virginity in relation to that. He repeatedly stated that [i]most people are called to marriage[/i] and used Genesis to back up his claim. I have a note on it and I'll look at it again. I think he may have backed it with something else.

God bless![/quote]

To me, religious vocations are the higher calling just as Sunday is the highest day of the week. The only reason the other six days are lower is because they cannot give meaning to themselves, just as we cannot save ourselves. Rather, the Sabbath gives meaning to the rest of the week, so everything secular should rightly point towards God: being made lower. So I think a healthy marriage would rightly view religious as higher vocations, not because they're "better," but because they reflect a unique relationship with God that is like yeast for the rest of the Church -- of which the vast majority are called to marriage and secular careers. After all, strong Catholics living in the world are "religious" to those living of the world.

[quote name='johnnydigit' post='1340428' date='Jul 25 2007, 11:38 AM']interesting. perhaps he was addressing the probable reality and the current state of the world, versus the notion of a more ideal state.[/quote]

What is the "ideal state" supposed to be? Is it not what I described earlier, a world without original sin?