Giving Testimony

[VeniteAdoremus]

[quote name='Norseman82' post='1711554' date='Nov 26 2008, 09:05 PM']Your "private vows" would most likely be considered a subset of consecrated life (See CCC 933).[/quote]

Every priest, religious or layperson I've talked with considering vocations made the distinction marriage, religious life, or single-in-the-world. For example, the consecrated sisters of the Communite Emmanuel do not take vows, and specifically do [i]not[/i] consider themselves apostolic religious.

I would also say the "permanent" single state (under vows or not) is a subset of consecrated life, but it is distinct from religious life (which is what people tend to think of first when consecrated life is mentioned) to such a degree that it deserves a mention and category of its own.

[BarbTherese]

[quote name='Norseman82' post='1711554' date='Nov 27 2008, 06:35 AM']Your "private vows" would most likely be considered a subset of consecrated life (See CCC 933).

Also, I must have missed in our sparring on CAF the fact that you yourself were once married, so your form of "singleness" at your age (no insult intended) and with your medical conditions is [b]not[/b] the same as healthy young (or middle-aged, for that matter) people who have never been married.[/quote]

Hi there Norseman! While the name is familiar, my memory is truly appalling and I cannot recall any of our exchanges on CAF and no concern. Since an annulment actually means that the person was never been married in the first place, I guess I consider myself a 'spinster or single' not that that really matters either. Just a mature woman who once had an accidental 15yr relationship outside of marriage ...........LOL!.
I have never claimed or stated to be on a par with young or middle aged people who have never been married and do not suffer a mental illness. Nor have I always been 64yrs and suffering Bipolar, although I have been completely mentally stable for many years now and my physical health is excellent also. I cannot understand your point(s) or question(s)?

I do consider that I am living a form of consecrated life outside of canonical consecration under private vows which The Church does recognize as private vows. I am living a form of only religious life and Gospel radical commitment to a specific lifestyle. I have lived thus for over 25 years and probably since I was 38yrs or so. My vows are distinct from canonical vows which are public.

I must confess I dont quite understand why you have made the comments you have in your post above, i.e. the point you are making or the question you are asking?

Certainly this lifestyle is open to any person no matter age and probably no matter health situation either. And whether single, divorced (with or without annulment), widowed. Although one would be very wise and prudent indeed to first seek spiritual direction before making any sort of formal type long term commitment to this way of life. I am perpetually or life vowed now, although not always. Of course there is no need to make any sort of vows........nor does one have of necessity to make them lifelong. This is personal choice and call and best affirmed by a priest or spiritual director.

For the interested, here is Paragraph 933 from the Catholic Catechism:
[quote]933 Whether their witness is public, as in the religious state, or less public, or even secret, Christ's coming remains for all those consecrated both the origin and rising sun of their life:


For the People of God has here no lasting city, . . . [and this state] reveals more clearly to all believers the heavenly goods which are already present in this age, witnessing to the new and eternal life which we have acquired through the redemptive work of Christ and preluding our future resurrection and the glory of the heavenly kingdom.478[/quote]


Barb

Edited November 26, 2008 by BarbaraTherese

[BarbTherese]

Apologies........I have duplicated my post trying to edit. I am still getting used to this discussion board and the various features..................Barb

Edited November 26, 2008 by BarbaraTherese

[Norseman82]

[quote name='VeniteAdoremus' post='1711659' date='Nov 26 2008, 04:28 PM']Every priest, religious or layperson I've talked with considering vocations made the distinction marriage, religious life, or single-in-the-world. For example, the consecrated sisters of the Communite Emmanuel do not take vows, and specifically do [i]not[/i] consider themselves apostolic religious.

I would also say the "permanent" single state (under vows or not) is a subset of consecrated life, but it is distinct from religious life (which is what people tend to think of first when consecrated life is mentioned) to such a degree that it deserves a mention and category of its own.[/quote]

Then both you and the "every priest, religious, or layperson" you've talked with need to reread the CCC, specifically 914-933 and 2233 (unless you and they are going to pull an alicemary and say that the Catechism is of little import).

Edited November 26, 2008 by Norseman82

[Norseman82]

[quote name='BarbaraTherese' post='1711695' date='Nov 26 2008, 04:58 PM']Hi there Norseman! While the name is familiar, my memory is truly appalling and I cannot recall any of our exchanges on CAF and no concern. Since an annulment actually means that the person was never been married in the first place, I guess I consider myself a 'spinster or single' not that that really matters either. Just a mature woman who once had an accidental 15yr relationship outside of marriage ...........LOL!.
I have never claimed or stated to be on a par with young or middle aged people who have never been married and do not suffer a mental illness. Nor have I always been 64yrs and suffering Bipolar, although I have been completely mentally stable for many years now and my physical health is excellent also. I cannot understand your point(s) or question(s)?

I do consider that I am living a form of consecrated life outside of canonical consecration under private vows which The Church does recognize as private vows. I am living a form of only religious life and Gospel radical commitment to a specific lifestyle. I have lived thus for over 25 years and probably since I was 38yrs or so. My vows are distinct from canonical vows which are public.

I must confess I dont quite understand why you have made the comments you have in your post above, i.e. the point you are making or the question you are asking?

Certainly this lifestyle is open to any person no matter age and probably no matter health situation either. And whether single, divorced (with or without annulment), widowed. Although one would be very wise and prudent indeed to first seek spiritual direction before making any sort of formal type long term commitment to this way of life. I am perpetually or life vowed now, although not always. Of course there is no need to make any sort of vows........nor does one have of necessity to make them lifelong. This is personal choice and call and best affirmed by a priest or spiritual director.

For the interested, here is Paragraph 933 from the Catholic Catechism:



Barb [/quote]


My apologies if I have offended you, I was really trying to word it so as not to offend.

The point I am trying to make is that the single state only becomes a permanent vocation when it is a form of consecrated life, and I was trying to show that you, being under private vows, are a part of consecrated life, since it might fall under the "less public" or "secret" category.

Thank you for clarifying your health status. The point in my bringing it up is that there are some people out there who may have impediments to religious life or marriage, but that should be recognized as exception cases and not the norm.

I will further clarify by questioning the premise made in the opening post "it is OK to be single".

First, that is a line that is often used to criticize people who want to get married.

Second, considering how hard it is to find a good Catholic spouse these days, why are we encouraging people to "take themselves off the market", so to speak? We need MORE good Catholics making themselves available for marriage, NOT LESS! (Well, at least more women anyway!).

Edited November 26, 2008 by Norseman82

[BarbTherese]

[quote name='Norseman82' date='Nov 27 2008, 10:47 AM' post='1711788']
My apologies if I have offended you, I was really trying to word it so as not to offend.

The point I am trying to make is that the single state only becomes a permanent vocation when it is a form of consecrated life, and I was trying to show that you, being under private vows, are a part of consecrated life, since it might fall under the "less public" or "secret" category.

Thank you for clarifying your health status. The point in my bringing it up is that there are some people out there who may have impediments to religious life or marriage, but that should be recognized as exception cases and not the norm.

I will further clarify by questioning the premise made in the opening post "it is OK to be single".

First, that is a line that is often used to criticize people who want to get married.

Second, considering how hard it is to find a good Catholic spouse these days, why are we encouraging people to "take themselves off the market", so to speak? We need MORE good Catholics making themselves avai

[Norseman82]

Some more "food for thought:

[url="http://www.crosswalk.com/singles/11542873/page1/"]A Serious Conversation for Christian Singles[/url]

[url="http://thegiftofsingleness.blogspot.com/"]The Gift of Singleness[/url]

[BarbTherese]

[quote name='Norseman82' post='1711788' date='Nov 27 2008, 10:47 AM']My apologies if I have offended you, I was really trying to word it so as not to offend.

The point I am trying to make is that the single state only becomes a permanent vocation when it is a form of consecrated life, and I was trying to show that you, being under private vows, are a part of consecrated life, since it might fall under the "less public" or "secret" category.

Thank you for clarifying your health status. The point in my bringing it up is that there are some people out there who may have impediments to religious life or marriage, but that should be recognized as exception cases and not the norm.

I will further clarify by questioning the premise made in the opening post "it is OK to be single".

First, that is a line that is often used to criticize people who want to get married.

Second, considering how hard it is to find a good Catholic spouse these days, why are we encouraging people to "take themselves off the market", so to speak? We need MORE good Catholics making themselves available for marriage, NOT LESS! (Well, at least more women anyway!).[/quote]

Hi again Norseman................I was not at all offended in any way whatsoever nor on any point, just puzzled as to what your point or question may be. Thank you for clarifying!

You are right about impediments, age, health issues etc. and a vocation. God calls whomsoever He may and no person should ever be discouraged because of impediments, health issues etc. Some religious institutes will consider one perhaps under certain conditions. Also, institutes of religious life that are new in concept are appearing in the life of The Church that may embrace people with age and health impediments to other institutes. I am about to OP a thread on the Daughters of The Heart of Mary. Or one may indeed have a call from God to the single lay state as a permanent state of life for the sake of The Kingdom.

I think with vocation and call.........it is not a question so much of what is needed or I want or someone else wants - rather it is a question of where God is calling. Certainly the single lay state is drawing more to it as a vocation and call from God..........involving a quite radical commitment to the Gospel way of life.......sometimes too a specific ministry to which the person intends to devote themselves. As yet the single lay state as a vocation of commitment is not recognized in the official sense of canon law as a state in life with formal and public consecration. Perhaps it will be at a future point. We are continually unfolding as a Church and Mystical Body of Christ and this unfolding and growth will ask of necessity change, since one cannot unfold, flower nor grow unless there is change somewhere.

Just as a LOL that occured to me as I read your Post.............if those seeking spouses are loosing suitable applicants to The Lord and The Gospel - then perhaps they should speak to Him about the situation ............LOL and meant entirely in jest!

Blessings and my warm regards, Norseman. Always welcoming to come across familiar faces in new places ................Barb

[BarbTherese]

[quote name='Norseman82' post='1711778' date='Nov 27 2008, 10:39 AM']Then both you and the "every priest, religious, or layperson" you've talked with need to reread the CCC, specifically 914-933 and 2233 (unless you and they are going to pull an alicemary and say that the Catechism is of little import).[/quote]

Forgive me, but again I cannot understand what your point and/or question may be? I am aware the above was not addressed to me, but I am really curious as a poster interested in the unfolding generally of this thread and also as a person long interested in the single state embraced as a vocation from and call from God. Some do have impediments to traditional religious type life in its various forms and may not be aware of the single lay state embraced under private vows, which can be received by a priest at Mass. Though such a Mass may be a public Mass, the vows are still canonically private vows. This is a form of religious living when undertaken for the sake of The Kingdom committed to the evangelical counsels of poverty, chastity and obedience - and as one's vocation from God. It remains lay in canonical status embracing the priviledges, responsibilities etc. of the lay state.

The Archbishop of Brisbane I think it is ........ I am South Australian...........is setting up a form of life under private vows for women who wish to commit themselves to some ministry in the diocese for either life or over a certain period - there will be provision for those who wish to share a type of lifestyle in community and communal living. This will remain lay status under private vows open to widowed, divorced (with or without annulment) and single women as I understand things at this point. I think it is just off the ground and in the very very early stages as yet and undoubtedly there will be teething problems to be sorted out.

Many wonderful new things are happening in The Church and especially in religious ways of living and are movements of The Holy Spirit:

[quote]919 Bishops will always strive to discern new gifts of consecrated life granted to the Church by the Holy Spirit; the approval of new forms of consecrated life is reserved to the Apostolic See.459[/quote]

Some however can find it exceptionally difficult to totally impossible to embrace change of any kind anywhere for any reason whatsoever.

Barb

[VeniteAdoremus]

[quote name='Norseman82' post='1711778' date='Nov 27 2008, 01:09 AM']Then both you and the "every priest, religious, or layperson" you've talked with need to reread the CCC, specifically 914-933 and 2233 (unless you and they are going to pull an alicemary and say that the Catechism is of little import).[/quote]

To join with Barb, I fail to understand why you would say this in the first place, why you would say it this way, and what Alicemary, who probably would not agree with your classification of her, has to do with people teaching me about vocations. But I trust I misunderstood you somehow.

I did re-read the Catechism. It states the many different ways in which people can express their vocation, and also that the Holy See can approve new forms of consecrated life. I was going to say it's one of my favourite chapters, but that might discredit all my other favourite chapters

In any case, what I meant to say above (sorry if that was unclear), and what I will repeat now, is that nowhere in the Catechism I read that "unconsecrated" singlehood (be it private or public) can only serve as an upstep to marriage or consecration.

[Norseman82]

[quote name='BarbaraTherese' post='1711850' date='Nov 26 2008, 07:46 PM']Forgive me, but again I cannot understand what your point and/or question may be? I am aware the above was not addressed to me, but I am really curious as a poster interested in the unfolding generally of this thread and also as a person long interested in the single state embraced as a vocation from and call from God. Some do have impediments to traditional religious type life in its various forms and may not be aware of the single lay state embraced under private vows, which can be received by a priest at Mass. Though such a Mass may be a public Mass, the vows are still canonically private vows. This is a form of religious living when undertaken for the sake of The Kingdom committed to the evangelical counsels of poverty, chastity and obedience - and as one's vocation from God. It remains lay in canonical status embracing the priviledges, responsibilities etc. of the lay state.

The Archbishop of Brisbane I think it is ........ I am South Australian...........is setting up a form of life under private vows for women who wish to commit themselves to some ministry in the diocese for either life or over a certain period - there will be provision for those who wish to share a type of lifestyle in community and communal living. This will remain lay status under private vows open to widowed, divorced (with or without annulment) and single women as I understand things at this point. I think it is just off the ground and in the very very early stages as yet and undoubtedly there will be teething problems to be sorted out.

Many wonderful new things are happening in The Church and especially in religious ways of living and are movements of The Holy Spirit:



Some however can find it exceptionally difficult to totally impossible to embrace change of any kind anywhere for any reason whatsoever.

Barb [/quote]


[quote name='VeniteAdoremus' post='1712096' date='Nov 27 2008, 04:56 AM']To join with Barb, I fail to understand why you would say this in the first place, why you would say it this way, and what Alicemary, who probably would not agree with your classification of her, has to do with people teaching me about vocations. But I trust I misunderstood you somehow.

I did re-read the Catechism. It states the many different ways in which people can express their vocation, and also that the Holy See can approve new forms of consecrated life. I was going to say it's one of my favourite chapters, but that might discredit all my other favourite chapters

In any case, what I meant to say above (sorry if that was unclear), and what I will repeat now, is that nowhere in the Catechism I read that "unconsecrated" singlehood (be it private or public) can only serve as an upstep to marriage or consecration.[/quote]

The reason I am bringing this up is to correct people who insist that unconsecrated single life is a vocation. According to the catechism, only consecrated single life / priestly ministry are considered "vocations" (as far as state of life is coincerned) for the unmarried. Does that clarify things?

And the alicemary remark was based on her own statement:

[quote name='alicemary' post='1710674' date='Nov 25 2008, 11:17 AM']What the catachism says is of little import to me, this is my life.[/quote]


Another point regarding "it is OK to be single". I was reading [url="http://www.boundless.org/2005/articles/a0001254.cfm/"]a review of Debbie Maken's book "Getting Serious about Getting Married"[/url], and she quotes from John Calvin, saying that "the man who chooses to stay single (without a specific call from God) is guilty of 'stealing' a husband from a wife. Logically, I'm sure it applies the other way around. And just because it is John Calvin saying it does not necessarily make it wrong; I'm sure even he could correctly state that 2 + 2 = 4.

[BarbTherese]

I dont think that a single person should be obliged to marry or to enter religious life or the priesthood since there is no attraction or awareness of being called by God to these vocations. There may be no attraction either to a life under private vows of some kind.

Primarily our Baptism is a vocation and call from God to live The Gospel and to follow Christ - to be united to God - no matter at all our state in life. Hence a person can remain single and uncommitted other than to one's Baptism and The Gospel and the Unity to which we are all called through our baptism. Once nuns and religious sisters alone were clalled "Brides of Christ" or espoused to Christ.........we now insight that we are all espoused to Christ and His brides by virtue of our Baptism, since we are The Church and The Church is the Spouse of Christ.

[quote][url="http://www.adelaide.catholic.org.au/sites/CatholicVocationsCentre/a-vocation"]What is a Vocation? Sr. Mary Ryan RSJ Cath. Vocations Ministry Australia[/url][/quote]
[quote]Canon Law: Can. 204 ß1 Christ's faithful are those who, since they are incorporated into Christ through baptism, are constituted the people of God. For this reason they participate in their own way in the priestly, prophetic and kingly office of Christ. They are called, each according to his or her particular condition, to exercise the mission which God entrusted to the Church to fulfill in the world.[/quote]

[quote][url="http://www.cin.org/v2relig.html"]Adaptation & Renewal of Religious Life - "Perfectae Caritatis"[/url]

5. Members of each institute should recall first of all that by professing the evangelical counsels they responded to a divine call so that by being not only dead to sin (cf. Rom. 6:11) but also renouncing the world they may live for God alone. They have dedicated their entire lives to His service. This constitutes a special consecration, which is deeply rooted in that of baptism and expresses it more fully.[/quote]

Of course, one does not have to enter monastic or religious life or the priesthood .......or even to make private vows............to live a radical commitment to Christ and The Gospel and their Baptism and the call to Unity with God. Monastic and religious life as well as the priesthood are - in one aspect - public professional witnesses to an interior disposition (ideally and it would be hoped) of the Baptised. We are all called without exemption by virtue of our Baptism to Poverty, Chastity and Obedience of spirit.
[quote]From [b]Lumen Gentium, the Dogmatic Constitution on the Church, Chapter IV: The Laity[/b]

"31. The term laity is here understood to mean all the faithful except those in holy orders and those in the state of religious life specially approved by the Church....they carry out for their own part the mission of the whole Christian people in the Church and in the world..."
[quote]"...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...."[/quote]
32. By divine institution Holy Church is ordered and governed with a wonderful diversity. "For just as in one body we have many members, yet all the members have not the same function, so we, the many, are one body in Christ, but severally members one of another".(191) Therefore, the chosen People of God is one: "one Lord, one faith, one baptism"(192); sharing a common dignity as members from their regeneration in Christ, having the same filial grace and the same vocation to perfection; possessing in common one salvation, one hope and one undivided charity. There is, therefore, in Christ and in the Church no inequality on the basis of race or nationality, social condition or sex, because "there is neither Jew nor Greek: there is neither bond nor free: there is neither male nor female. For you are all 'one' in Christ Jesus".(193)
[quote]If therefore in the Church everyone does not proceed by the same path, nevertheless all are called to sanctity and have received an equal privilege of faith through the justice of God.(194)....[/quote][/quote]

[quote]Catholic Catechism:
940 "The characteristic of the lay state being a life led in the midst of the world and of secular affairs, lay people are called by God to make of their apostolate, through the vigor of their Christian spirit, a leaven in the world" (AA 2 § 2).

941 Lay people share in Christ's priesthood: ever more united with him, they exhibit the grace of Baptism and Confirmation in all dimensions of their personal family, social and ecclesial lives, and so fulfill the call to holiness addressed to all the baptized.

942 By virtue of their prophetic mission, lay people "are called . . . to be witnesses to Christ in all circumstances and at the very heart of the community of mankind" (GS 43 § 4).

943 By virtue of their kingly mission, lay people have the power to uproot the rule of sin within themselves and in the world, by their self-denial and holiness of life (cf. LG 36).

944 The life consecrated to God is characterized by the public profession of the evangelical counsels of poverty, chastity, and obedience, in a stable state of life recognized by the Church.
945 Already destined for him through Baptism, the person who surrenders himself to the God he loves above all else thereby consecrates himself more intimately to God's service and to the good of the whole Church.[/quote]

.

Edited November 28, 2008 by BarbaraTherese

[BarbTherese]

....oh boy, I have done it again and got the icons mixed up and duplicated my Post. Herein deleted!

Edited November 28, 2008 by BarbaraTherese

[VeniteAdoremus]

I think the source of our discussion here is whether laity (that is, non-priests) should -in the end- be either married or consecrated in some sort (under religious vows or otherwise).

As I read it, neither the Catechism nor Canon Law explicitly states one [i]should[/i]. They do list several options of consecration - but never say "unmarried people, pick your choice, or else". Private vows are beautiful, but not required to live chastely or under obedience to the Church - after all, every baptised Christian is called to do just that.

[BarbTherese]

[quote name='VeniteAdoremus' post='1712651' date='Nov 28 2008, 09:43 PM']I think the source of our discussion here is whether laity (that is, non-priests) should -in the end- be either married or consecrated in some sort (under religious vows or otherwise).

As I read it, neither the Catechism nor Canon Law explicitly states one [i]should[/i]. They do list several options of consecration - but never say "unmarried people, pick your choice, or else". Private vows are beautiful, but not required to live chastely or under obedience to the Church - after all, every baptised Christian is called to do just that.[/quote]

Well stated.

I think there can be misunderstanding afoot of Baptism as a vocation and call from God to The Gospel and to Unity with Christ - that we are spouses of Christ by virtue of our Baptism and this is why it cannot be stated accurately theologically that its "unmarried, pick something, or else". Misunderstandings have arisen because The Church once restricted "vocation" to the religious life or the priesthood and Spouse of Christ, espoused to Christ or Bride of Christ most often as being nuns and religious sisters. Vatican 2 helped clear the theological air.