Anyone called to be single?

[CarolAnnSFO]

Do you happen to know why he thinks there is no permanence in a single vocation?

I was wondering about that, too. It certainly seems permanent in my case…

 

[Norseman82]

Do you happen to know why he thinks there is no permanence in a single vocation?

I’m going from memory here…

Probably because unless you take a vow (like a consecrated virgin), you are not “locked in” (for a lack of a better term) like marriage or Holy Orders; it is a temporary state of life you are free to change by marriage or religious vow/ordination.

He also stated that the Church never formally declared it a vocation.

 

[JohnnyReb]

Right now I am. I am in the single state, but that may change, or it may not

 

[kentuckyliz]

I can’t reply at length–I’m dealing with some other stuff right now*–but I will say this:

Single is the most permanent vocation of all! There is no marrying and being given in marriage in heaven. Everybody ends up single in eternity. That’s why marriage vows are not for eternity, but til death do we part.

It is false to equate the fruits of the Holy Spirit with mere emotions. Discernment is done by judging the fruits, not mere feelings, wo wo wo feelings.

I already mentioned consecrated virgins and consecrated widows. This is different. I am not consecrated to a bishop. I am betrothed of the Lord.

The “what if everybody did it” appeal is false. Paul clearly says to follow the call (charism) you were given; Jesus in the eunuchs passage says the same. If you are called to the vocation of marriage and family life, you would be miserable to ignore it. If you are not called to marriage and family life and do it anyway, you will not have the fruits of the Spirit and you will make yourself and everyone else around you miserable.

Anyway, sorry I can’t go deeper with this right now…but I have a lot of things to do before I am laid up for a while…just learned I have breast cancer (though I did beat the thyroid cancer, yay)…and I am trying to help a dear friend in another state who just got diagnosed with Hep C and she has no health insurance to cover her interferon therapy. Yikes! Back to my caretaker self…that’s my job in the world…being Christ to others…it’s yours too…we’re all broken and blessed.

Praised be our dear sweet Lord and Savior, Jesus Christ–
Now and Forever!

 

[Dale_M]

just learned I have breast cancer (though I did beat the thyroid cancer, yay)…and I am trying to help a dear friend in another state who just got diagnosed with Hep C and she has no health insurance to cover her interferon therapy.

Liz, so sorry to hear this! I will be praying for you both.

 

[Norseman82]

Kentuckyliz,

Prayers to St. Peregrine for your cancer battle. I hope you caught it in time.

That being said, there are still holes in what you have posted:

The “what if everybody did it” appeal is false.

???

When was that done?

I am not consecrated to a bishop. I am betrothed of the Lord.

Can you explain about this bethrothal you went through? Is it of the type that constitutes an official impediment to marriage under canon law like ordination does?

Paul clearly says to follow the call (charism) you were given; Jesus in the eunuchs passage says the same.

You still did not address the other things that Paul said regdarding “to avoid immorality, everyone should have their own spouse” and “better to be married than to burn”, and you also avoided the part where Jesus said that not everyone can accept this teaching and to let him who do so that can handle it. Additionally, please keep in mind the context of what Paul was talking about regarding to “continue the life you lead when the Lord called you” and that his audience was mainly adult converts, so by that logic since most of us were baptized as infants NONE of us should get married! That is ridiculous. Additionally, for those who are going to privately interpret 1 Cor. 7 to state that St. Paul preferred the single life please factor in that it was his preference and he made it clear that it was his preference, and that there was a belief in the early church that Jesus’ second coming would occur in their lifetimes.

If you are called to the vocation of marriage and family life, you would be miserable to ignore it. If you are not called to marriage and family life and do it anyway, you will not have the fruits of the Spirit and you will make yourself and everyone else around you miserable.

First of all, you are ignoring the part of the CCC that I posted earlier regarding how the vocation to marriage is part of our very being, so until we discern otherwise in favor of a celibate vocation, it is our “default” vocation.

Additionally, be VERY careful about the whole “if you do this you will be miserable” argument, as it has the potential of being manipulative just like religious cults manipulate people (so if you inveite me over for a BBQ, please understand if I decline any Kool-Aid served from metal tubs! ).

Additionally, we still need to address the question of what happens to all the men who need wives if all the women take themselves “off the market”? The inability of males to find spouses is a known social problem (I know Dr. Jack Wilke made mention of it regarding China’s abortion policies in one of his “pro-life minutes” in the past year or so).

 

[lak611]

Additionally, we still need to address the question of what happens to all the men who need wives if all the women take themselves “off the market”? The inability of males to find spouses is a known social problem (I know Dr. Jack Wilke made mention of it regarding China’s abortion policies in one of his “pro-life minutes” in the past year or so).

Don’t you agree that if a woman does not care for children and has no desire to be a mother that she would be doing the right thing by remaining single and taking herself “off the market”? Would not the same be best if a man has no desire to be a father? Shouldn’t he then take himself “off the market”?

 

[Norseman82]

Don’t you agree that if a woman does not care for children and has no desire to be a mother that she would be doing the right thing by remaining single and taking herself “off the market”? Would not the same be best if a man has no desire to be a father? Shouldn’t he then take himself “off the market”?

“Does not care for children?”

“No desire to be a parent?”

If there is a calling to priesthood or religious life, or have health issues, I understand.

But if they hate kids, then that might constitute a canonical impediment to marriage based on mental defect.

But the question then becomes what is causing them to have no desire, considering that the CCC states that the vocation to marriage was instilled in our very nature. Is this truly a call from God, or a physical or psychological problem due to unresolved trauma (like skittishness over divorce that goes beyond prudence)?

 

[lak611]

“Does not care for children?”

“No desire to be a parent?”

If there is a calling to priesthood or religious life, I understand.

But if they hate kids, then that might constitute a canonical impediment to marriage based on mental defect.

It is not correct to state that everyone who does not wish to be a parent is mentally ill. People may not hate children. They just may not wish to have any of their own.

 

[Norseman82]

It is not correct to state that everyone who does not wish to be a parent is mentally ill. People may not hate children. They just may not wish to have any of their own.

Why wouldn’t they?

 

[LilyM]

Why wouldn’t they?

Not everyone is emotionally or financially equipped, nor called by God, to be a parent, nor married, nor to take orders or the religious life. Which are all 24/7 jobs, remember!

These vocations all require different gifts and abilities, and some people don’t have the right gifts for any of 'em!

Examples: St Catherine of Siena, influential adviser to the Pope and Doctor of the Church - but an unmarried childless laywoman. St Benedict Joseph Labre, rejected by all the religious orders to which he applied. Never married or had kids, never became a religious nor a priest.

 

[CarolAnnSFO]

Additionally, we still need to address the question of what happens to all the men who need wives if all the women take themselves “off the market”? The inability of males to find spouses is a known social problem (I know Dr. Jack Wilke made mention of it regarding China’s abortion policies in one of his “pro-life minutes” in the past year or so).

No sympathy from me at all. We don’t have China’s skewed male/female ratio in the US (only in childhood do males outnumber females here). There are plenty of single women who haven’t taken themselves “off the market” (I know loads of them, just in my own community). Men can’t find spouses because they insist on marrying women who look like young Hollywood starlets, even when they themselves look like over-the-hill Elmer Fudds.

If Elmer Fudd was willing to consider Elmira Fuddess, he would have no trouble finding a spouse.

Not to mention all the guys who want to rob the cradle, and can’t manage to be attracted to someone their own age.

 

[Norseman82]

Not everyone is emotionally or financially equipped, nor called by God, to be a parent, nor married, nor to take orders or the religious life.

Again, I am seeing the theological error that we are “vocationless” until officially called by God to something. Please reread CCC 1603 that states that the vocation to marriage is instilled in our very nature.

As far as “emotionally or financially equipped”, if it is so severe that something causes a canonical impediment, I understand, and that CCC 1658 refers to people single due to particular circumstances they have to live, but many circumstances are changeable (through getting an education and staying out of trouble, for example), so in these circumstances we should not mistake our *own refusal *to improve something as a “call from God”.

 

[Norseman82]

No sympathy from me at all. We don’t have China’s skewed male/female ratio in the US (only in childhood do males outnumber females here). There are plenty of single women who haven’t taken themselves “off the market” (I know loads of them, just in my own community). Men can’t find spouses because they insist on marrying women who look like young Hollywood starlets, even when they themselves look like over-the-hill Elmer Fudds.

If Elmer Fudd was willing to consider Elmira Fuddess, he would have no trouble finding a spouse.

Not to mention all the guys who want to rob the cradle, and can’t manage to be attracted to someone their own age.

1. Just because there are “many fish in the sea” does not mean that all the fish are “edible”; some will give you “mercury poisoning”.
2. The reason many men “rob the cradle” is that the women in their own age group are past child-bearing age (partially because those women wasted their lives following the feminazi career women idol or due to this “single vocation” push or because they don’t know what they want in life even in their thirties, which is the case with the last female I dated). The solution to this is for women in their own age group to make themselves available for marriage before it is too late.

Th-th-th-th-that’s all folks!

 

[CarolAnnSFO]

1. Just because there are “many fish in the sea” does not mean that all the fish are “edible”; some will give you “mercury poisoning”.
2. The reason many people “rob the cradle” is that the people in their own age group are past child-bearing age (partially because those women wasted their lives following the feminazi career women idol or due to this “single vocation” push).

Th-th-th-th-that’s all folks!

Hi, Elmer! (Nyah, what’s up, doc?)

We didn’t all waste our lives following any idols – some of us were just born or grew up “inedible” and with “mercury poisoning”.

God made us all, and loves us all. I’ve heard the expression “God doesn’t make junk.” Well, either God is wrong, or the human cradle-robbing Elmer Fudds are wrong. Hmmm, I wonder which it is…

 

[Norseman82]

Hi, Elmer! (Nyah, what’s up, doc?)

We didn’t all waste our lives following any idols – some of us were just born or grew up “inedible” and with “mercury poisoning”.

God made us all, and loves us all. I’ve heard the expression “God doesn’t make junk.” Well, either God is wrong, or the human cradle-robbing Elmer Fudds are wrong. Hmmm, I wonder which it is…

You still haven’t addressed the point that the reason many “rob the cradle” is because they are looking to have their own children.

Additionally, regarding “Elmer Fudds looking for Hollywood starlets instead of settling for Elmer Fuddress”, what about all the “Elmer Fuddressses” who are looking for Tom Cruise or Brad Pitt? Works both ways, you know.

And no, God doesn’t make junk; sometimes we turn ourselves into junk.

 

[CarolAnnSFO]

You still haven’t addressed the point that the reason many “rob the cradle” is because they are looking to have their own children.

Additionally, regarding “Elmer Fudds looking for Hollywood starlets instead of settling for Elmer Fuddress”, what about all the “Elmer Fuddressses” who are looking for Tom Cruise or Brad Pitt? Works both ways, you know.

And no, God doesn’t make junk; sometimes we turn ourselves into junk.

Many of the cradle-robbers already have biological children (talking about widowers, for example). And not everyone is going to have biological children, although people seem to think it is their constitutional right to do so (hence all the in vitro procedures, etc., etc. – must be the same phony sense of entitlement that makes people think they can’t possibly live in a house smaller than 5,000 square feet with fewer than 5 bathrooms. )

Yes, some women want Tom Cruise or Brad Pitt. But take a look at any large newspaper with pictures of weddings and engagements – I see far more Elmer Fudd-Angelina Jolie combinations than Tom Cruise-Elmira Fuddess ones. Go downtown and look around you – same thing.

There are plenty of us who haven’t turned ourselves into junk (I know several single women (who don’t happen to be nuns) who are very beautiful people even though they aren’t “pretty”). We are simply being labeled as “junk” because men insist on seeing us with eyes operating under values that are far from God-centered.

 

[Norseman82]

Shhhh…I’m hunting wabbits…

Many of the cradle-robbers already have biological children (talking about widowers, for example).

OK, for people who have children already, your point is valid. However, for those of us in the “forty-year old virgin” demographic, wanting our own children is a valid desire.

And not everyone is going to have biological children, although people seem to think it is their constitutional right to do so (hence all the in vitro procedures, etc., etc. – must be the same phony sense of entitlement that makes people think they can’t possibly live in a house smaller than 5,000 square feet with fewer than 5 bathrooms. )

Apples and oranges.

It’s one thing to say “tough luck” in a situation where one is infertile and the only way to have chidlren is through methods the church considers sinful. It is quite another to take prudent measures to avoid getting yourself in that situation in the first place - such as seeking someone in a childbearing age range - and it is wrong to “guilt” someone who has no children for doing so!

There are plenty of us who haven’t turned ourselves into junk (I know several single women (who don’t happen to be nuns) who are very beautiful people even though they aren’t “pretty”). We are simply being labeled as “junk” because men insist on seeing us with eyes operating under values that are far from God-centered.

When I refer to “junk”, I mean “morally”.

And I do agree, God-centered values are not present (except when a virgin seeks a fellow virgin, then out come the charges of being an unforgiving lout!). I’ve been burned by that myself.

 

[LilyM]

Again, I am seeing the theological error that we are “vocationless” until officially called by God to something. Please reread CCC 1603 that states that the vocation to marriage is instilled in our very nature.

As far as “emotionally or financially equipped”, if it is so severe that something causes a canonical impediment, I understand, and that CCC 1658 refers to people single due to particular circumstances they have to live, but many circumstances are changeable (through getting an education and staying out of trouble, for example), so in these circumstances we should not mistake our *own refusal *to improve something as a “call from God”.

I’m not talking about an official call. I’m talking about the ordinary ways people recognise a vocation. Taking careful stock of your strengths, weaknesses, resources and capabilities, and realising that you can best serve God in a chaste single life rather than marriage and motherhood OR the convent, priesthood etc.

Are you suggesting that the examples I gave - St Catherine of Siena and St Benedict Joseph Labre - and there are others - were somehow ‘settling’, or didn’t truly have a vocation to be single laypeople?

 

[Teeliumtrozzle]

I think maybe I am called to be single.I have never had a boyfriend and Im not interested in getting one.I could never do anything sexual, in fact it strikes me as disgusting, and I want to be chaste forever.I don’t think Im capable of being emotionally atached to someone,(even as a friend, and I prefer not to have intimate friends) and I prefer a simple life.So I dont think I’ll ever have a boyfriend or get married.