Single Vocation

[pianoanda123]

I often find that in discussions and reading that the vocation of 'single' life is cut out and snubbed out.

Why not, it does not actively seek the helping of others or the continuation of church members as does the preist, sister, monk, or married hood's do.

So why is it that we can not as a society praise the single vocation as highly as the other vocations?

IT jsut bothers me thats all, everyone presses women to get married, and if they are not able to or choose not to, they are told to become a nun, and rarely are they asked to be single.

More so though, while it may not be strongly taught, the males are told to marry, or they are a disgrace to their family or similar for the stereotypical male 'criteria' to be met in their lives. Unless they go as a preset or a monk, again single is entirely ignored.

So why may I ask, can single not be as highly regarded as the others.

If it was seen as it is (just as good as the others) then I think there would be a lot less depressing and self loathing for no more questioning "why can't I get married" "Why doesn't he like me" for there would be the reassurance that, "maybe this is what I'm supposed to do, I ca take care of myself and more people this way"

Just a thought.

[Maggyie]

It probably has something to do with the idea that the single life was not traditionally considered a vocation or a calling in the same way that marriage, the priesthood and the religious life were. This is not as true today although there are a lot of people who still feel that way. They will point out to you that man was "not meant to be alone," and that vocations do not usually involve singleness or aloneness but require one to be in community with others, whether in a religious order, priesthood or in married life. Of course single people have the entire Church as their "community" so to speak but they would counter that so do religious and married have the Church as a community and that a vocation is a call to a "community within the community." This perception is not as strong nowadays but it probably plays a role.

There is also a tendency to think of it as a "selfish" choice, IOW "ah, she or he doesn't want to get married or join the religious life b/c that would mean not getting to do what he or she wants to all the time." But hopefully one's single life would be lived in such a way that it was obvious that selfishness was not the motivation.

They would also argue that the single life was not a vocation but merely a stage, in other words people may be single but that is temporary before they marry or enter; they may claim to be "called" to the single life but that is only because they have had lousy luck with men and have given up. Only let Mr. Wonderful waltz in and that "single vocation" will be dropped faster than you can say I do. And so on and so forth.

However I think that the main reason people do not really talk up the single life is that there is absolutely no shortage of single people. There is a shortage of solid marriages and an even greater paucity of priests and religious, so people tend to focus on that.

Edited February 16, 2008 by Maggie

[shortnun]

I think you've hit on a great hole in our pastoral theology (and our theology of vocation) that exists today. When it is mentioned, it's often the last in the list of "religious life, married life, and the single life." Additionally, as Maggie mentioned above, it's often thought of as a transient stage in life. In my opinion, this makes it a great deal harder to talk about--[i]yet all the more urgent that we do talk about it.[/i]

I have been blessed to know many holy people who were called (and accepted that call) to the single life. These individuals, for whom the single life is truly their call, are in no way "lonely", "isolated", or "selfish" in doing so. Each of them is devoted to those whom they serve--some in direct church ministries others who serve Christ in the world. They love their families, friends, and their Church.

Where I would differ from Maggie's comments (please don't take this as a direct attack, just merely where we differ) is that there IS a shortage of single people. Through the grace of God humans are always able to deepen their relationship with Him and grow in holiness. I think we can all agree, that in our broken world today, [b]there is a great need for each of us to genuinely live our path to holiness and to show the world the hope of Jesus Christ. [/b]People called to the single life do this in a very particular way that is often unique to their way of life and could not be done in the same way by a married person or a religious.

[tinytherese]

Remember, Blessed Pier Giorgio Frassati was single!

[CatherineM]

I had a friend who was interviewed for a Fransican teen newsletter about the single vocation. She said that not having a family allowed her more time to pray, work on spiritual exercises, and do ministries at church. We had a woman consecrated to the single life by the bishop here a couple of weeks ago. She teaches at the seminary during the day, and works as a chaplain in the evenings. A couple of years ago in St. Pete the bishop consecrated a virgin. She was an older nurse who had been in a convent years ago, but it had folded or something, and she thought she was still a nun for decades. The woman who was consecrated here in Edmonton said she didn't want to be called a consecrated virgin because she didn't want sexuality to be an issue in her vocation. I think small steps are being taken as more and more people opt out of traditional marriages.

[Era Might]

Perhaps we should not so much think of "single life" itself as the vocation. Rather, the larger vocation is consecrated celibacy, and this can be lived out in different ways (in the world, in religious community, or in the Priesthood for men). Each way of living that vocation has its own unique characteristics. In religious community, you are not only celibate, but you vow poverty and obedience as well. In the Priesthood you commit yourself to the parish, especially in administering the Sacraments. And in the celibate life "in the world," you have a certain freedom to do things and go places where religious and Priests are not able.

I think the single state is kind of uncertain, because many people are single, but they have not vowed celibacy for the rest of their lives. Whereas the Priesthood and religious life [i]are[/i] final states, so there is no question about the vocation of Priests and religious. I think it is right to assume that most people who are single are still discerning their vocation, and that is why they are asked to consider a vocation to marriage or religious life. But for those who have committed to consecrated celibacy "in the world," I think they are spiritually united with Priests and religious in the honor of their celibacy, even if they are not united in community (similar to hermits who live alone). And they can join third orders or another apostolate in the Church, to help them live their vocation.

[the lords sheep]

I agree with some of what you say in principle, but theologically you are incorrect on some things. There is a difference between the single life as a vocation and being a consecrated virgin or celibate. The difference? The consecration. Right now, I am living the single, celibate life. I am actively discerning God's will for my life, and that includes being open to the possibility that He will not call me to a religious order or to marriage, but to be a professional, living in the world, and as such, living as a witness to Him in a radically different way than a religious or a married person. There is a HUGE difference, however, between me and a woman I know who will be making a promise of perpetual virginity to her bishop. Again, there is a difference her, myself, and my friend who is 45 years old and is consciously and actively living the single life, choosing to remain celibate for the rest of his life so that he may serve the Church.

[quote]Perhaps we should not so much think of "single life" itself as the vocation.[/quote]
I'm sorry, but I can't agree with this. Holy Mother Church has defined the single vocation, in both it's transitory and permanent state as a dignified form of life where one can achieve sanctification. (I am not sure where exactly a consecrated virgin and a hermit live, I believe if vows are taken it falls under religious/consecrated life)

[quote]I think the single state is kind of uncertain, because many people are single, but they have not vowed celibacy for the rest of their lives.[/quote]
I actually think it's more uncertain because people do not fully understand their current vocation. They forget that above all, we have a vocation to learn to love and live in love, thus acheiving a more profound union with God and a deeper holiness. Instead people focus on the fact that they don't know exactly what they're doing: they don't have a boyfriend or girlfriend or community, and they spend a lot of time worrying about this (I am SO guilty of this!) rather than remaining open and living the will of God as well as they can. [please note: I am not dismissing the importance of discernment, just merely stating my opinion]

[quote]I think they are spiritually united with Priests and religious in the honor of their celibacy,[/quote]
I'm not sure exactly what you mean by that... I think all vocations are united merely because we are all working together and seeking holiness as part of the Body of Christ, working to make the Kingdom of Heaven known here on earth....

[quote]And they can join third orders or another apostolate in the Church, to help them live their vocation.[/quote]
This is very true. I think it's very important that those of us who are single find a community to support us on the path to sanctity. Even if we don't have a community surrounding us where we are bound by vows, everyone needs others to support them in love, in prayer and by example.


Just my thoughts! God bless!

[shortnun]

[quote name='Era Might' post='1464708' date='Feb 17 2008, 12:17 PM']I think the single state is kind of uncertain, because many people are single, but they have not vowed celibacy for the rest of their lives. Whereas the Priesthood and religious life [i]are[/i] final states, so there is no question about the vocation of Priests and religious. I think it is right to assume that most people who are single are still discerning their vocation, and that is why they are asked to consider a vocation to marriage or religious life. But for those who have committed to consecrated celibacy "in the world," I think they are spiritually united with Priests and religious in the honor of their celibacy, even if they are not united in community (similar to hermits who live alone). And they can join third orders or another apostolate in the Church, to help them live their vocation.[/quote]
I don't want to get too into semantics here, but I don't want to be presumptuous either. All Christians are called to live their lives obedient to God, chaste in all things, and with a preferential option to the poor (evangelical councils: obedience, chastity, and poverty). I think the single life often has two threads: those for whom the state is temporary and those for whom it is a permanent vocation. Yet I don't know if we can say with great certainty that "most people who are single are still discerning their vocation." That would see, to me at least, to be unfair to those for whom the single life is their path to holiness.

[Era Might]

The evangelical counsels in religious life are very specific. It is not just obedience to God, but obedience to the religious order. Chastity is not just the general virtue of chastity, but the final renunciation of marriage (i.e., celibacy). And poverty is not just a preferential option for the poor, but personal poverty by which they become the poor.

The one essential distinctive about the permanent "single life" is consecrated celibacy, that is, the final renunciation of marriage. Other than that, there is nothing that a person in the permanent single life does which cannot be done by someone who is still discerning their vocation. That is why I would say that celibacy is the essential characteristic of the "single life" as a vocation, rather than a transitory state.

If a poll were taken, I think the overwhelming majority of single people would say they are still discerning their vocation (by vocation I mean their major state in life, either married or celibate, and if celibate either Priesthood, religious life, or single life). Nobody is born married, or born a Priest or religious, but everyone is born single, and everyone has to discern their vocation in that single state. Those who have chosen to remain single permanently must live alongside the majority of people who are single but still discerning their vocation. That is what I meant when I said that the single state is "uncertain" (that is, uncertain to those who do not know which group you belong to), whereas when we see a Priest or religious or married person, we know that they have already chosen a vocation. That is why in general we assume that a single person has not found their vocation. It is not a slight at those who have chosen to remain single permanently, who are united with Priests and religious in the unique honor of their celibacy, because they [i]are[/i] celibate (that is, they have renounced marriage), even though they have remained "in the world." They are not discerning their vocation, they have found their vocation in celibacy. Within this larger vocational state of celibacy, I think there are smaller vocations, such as their profession. As an analogy, the major vocation of religious is poverty, chastity, and obedience. Their smaller vocation may be in the Carmelites, Franciscans, etc. But the essence of religious life is poverty, chastity, and obedience. Likewise, I would say that the essence of permanent "single life" is celibacy.

[shortnun]

[quote name='Era Might' post='1465109' date='Feb 18 2008, 11:42 AM']The evangelical counsels in religious life are very specific. It is not just obedience to God, but obedience to the religious order. Chastity is not just the general virtue of chastity, but the final renunciation of marriage (i.e., celibacy). And poverty is not just a preferential option for the poor, but personal poverty by which they become the poor.[/quote]
Oh I absolutely agree with you. I think perhaps my original point was that all Christians, through our baptisms, are called to be poor, chaste, and obedient. Our specific path to holiness (our vocation) will "color" those virtues in a specific way. In the case of religious life, they are lived as evangelical councils.

[Guest Perpetualove]

I think there seems to be a general fear of being alone. I believe (me, personally - I am not speaking for anyone else) the single life is not often referred to or promoted because few people see the beauty in that call. I think some of that comes from an inability to imagine being alone (with the intimacy of marriage or community life) in peace and happiness. However, I think many in religious communities as well as married couples, must often look wistfully upon the single life and sigh! (Just a little humour...)

[Saint Therese]

I think one reason the single vocation is not as commonly spoken about is because it is not as common as one would be made to think. A single person may not necessarily have a single's vocation. It seems to me that if a person had such a vocation it would be fruitful and would be characterized, as any vocation is, by a call to profound self-giving. That's just my opinion, though.

Edited February 20, 2008 by Saint Therese

[Thomist-in-Training]

Dear Lord's sheep,
[quote]Holy Mother Church has defined the single vocation, in both it's transitory and permanent state as a dignified form of life where one can achieve sanctification.[/quote] I was not aware of this--a former chaplain of mine expressed, as his view on a topic that has not been spoken on one way or the other, that he did not believe the single life to be a vocation. (I.e., to be a consecrated virgin is a vocation, to be a nun is a vocation, but not simply to be unmarried. This would be a "state in life.") If you have references to the contrary, where Holy Mother Church speaks about this, I would be interested to read them.

[quote](I am not sure where exactly a consecrated virgin and a hermit live, I believe if vows are taken it falls under religious/consecrated life)[/quote] I don't know much about hermits. Consecrated virgins = consecrated life, but not religious life: religious life means that one has a Rule, such as the Benedictine or Carmelite.

I know one consecrated virgin. I think she either lives with her family or has her own apartment.

[Era Might]

[quote name='Thomist-in-Training' post='1466793' date='Feb 21 2008, 03:56 PM']a former chaplain of mine expressed, as his view on a topic that has not been spoken on one way or the other, that he did not believe the single life to be a vocation. (I.e., to be a consecrated virgin is a vocation, to be a nun is a vocation, but not simply to be unmarried. This would be a "state in life.") If you have references to the contrary, where Holy Mother Church speaks about this, I would be interested to read them.[/quote]
Technically, anything can be a vocation. For example, the Holy See has a document "on the ecclesial vocation of the theologian." A vocation in general is whatever you are called to do. But usually when we speak of a "vocation" we mean our major state in life. The phrase "state of life" is used in reference to marriage as well as religious life (see CCC #914 and #1663). Pope John Paul II says in the Apostolic Exhortation "Ecclesia in Oceania" that "through the witness of love in the Sacrament of Matrimony or the generous dedication of people [b]called to the single life[/b], through their activity in the world whatever it might be, lay people can and must be a true leaven in every corner of society..." Those who have chosen to remain single permanently are not merely "unmarried," but have chosen to be celibate, which means that they have given up the companionship of a spouse for the undivided companionship of Our Lord. I think that is what makes the single life a vocation (i.e., a calling), as opposed to the temporary situation where you are single. Maybe that is what your chaplain was referring to, the state of being single when you haven't made a final decision yet, which I agree would not be a vocation, because you are not responding to a calling, but rather trying to discern the calling. But I was listening to Bishop Bruskewitz on EWTN recently, and he included the [i]permanent[/i] single life as a vocation.

[pianoanda123]

Ok thank you all, I hope ou stop posting for many of the posts are quite distracting and discouraging, I thank you for your proposed assistance in my questioning, but the reasonons may be clear to you but to me they're indescriable.

Thank you for your time, I apologize that I do not know how to understand what was told to me in such of your fasion