For those who had considered religious life, what made you realize it was NOT your calling?

[sparkletina]

I considered becoming a nun for some years, but I never did anything more than think about it because I didn’t think I ‘good enough’. .

Wow! You are the first person I’ve ever met who like me thought about religious life but didn’t think they were “good enough.” A Carmelite nun asked me not too long ago what “the real reason” was: I told her that WAS the real reason!! At 13 I felt called to the Discalced Carmelite cloister, but I never acted on it. I didn’t even tell anybody about it, but somehow the Catholic sisters who taught at my school deduced there was something there & were trying to attract me to their teaching order. I never talked to a spiritual advisor either; I basically kept these thoughts to myself. This is something I have regretted all my life–that I didn’t pursue it to find out if it WAS my vocation. I even still think about it to this day. I am a Secular Discalced Carmelite now. Yet, I feel it isn’t enough and there is still that yearning.

 

[irisfromohio]

Wow! You are the first person I’ve ever met who like me thought about religious life but didn’t think they were “good enough.” A Carmelite nun asked me not too long ago what “the real reason” was: I told her that WAS the real reason!! At 13 I felt called to the Discalced Carmelite cloister, but I never acted on it. I didn’t even tell anybody about it, but somehow the Catholic sisters who taught at my school deduced there was something there & were trying to attract me to their teaching order. I never talked to a spiritual advisor either; I basically kept these thoughts to myself. This is something I have regretted all my life–that I didn’t pursue it to find out if it WAS my vocation. I even still think about it to this day. I am a Secular Discalced Carmelite now. Yet, I feel it isn’t enough and there is still that yearning.

I, too, never felt good enough. I wasn’t raised Catholic, but always felt that I was. My mom recognized that in me & signed me up for classes to become Catholic in 1973. I haven’t looked back, but I longed for religious life. I am of African decent, so I didn’t think a black woman could be a religious. If I had heard of the Oblate Sisters of Providence or the St. Augustine Sisters, I would have been knocking on their door. Instead, I had an ill fated marriage that has been annulled, but keep coming back to religious life. As I embark upon formation and a novitiate for OSMM now, I still have doubts. Maybe that’s something that is more difficult to shake than understanding God’s Will.

 

[Matrix_Refugee]

I tried applying to a Visitation Sisters’ convent, since they tend to accept women who are disabled or whose health isn’t the best, but they stopped replying to my letters as soon as I told them I have an autism spectrum condition. I’ve thought about Third Orders (Franciscan, Dominican), but I wasn’t really thrilled about some of their rules: Both of them forbid dancing, and I’m a notorious spontaneous dancer, so I knew that was going to be nigh to impossible to follow.

 

[numealinesimpet]

I thought about being a priest when I was young, but somewhere along the way, I realized that I like girls way to much to stay out of trouble. Yeah, I know, it sounds pathetic, but that was honestly my deciding factor. 13 years later, I am married with five children…

No need to apologize, ahollers, Our Lord said in the Gospels that the gift of celibacy is not given to everyone, but only those He chooses.

For the record, & to answer the original question, I was the kind of lad of whom people often asked (being blissfully unaware of my real spiritual state) “Are you going to be a priest?” But even before reaching double figures for age, whenever I contemplated myself in a chasuble elevating the Sacred Host, something immediately cried, “NO! Not for you!” Interestingly, one of my sons, who is now in Religious Life, had the same experience whenever he began to think of girls and marriage.

And yes, ahollars, a little later on I knew I would love the ladies too much to be able to take a lifelong vow of celibacy. Though I fully support the celibate priesthood. No man can serve two masters, or both a parish and a family… S. Paul explains it very well. One cannot have divided love, but one can still serve God from the position of a parent.

How do we know when we ‘have a vocation’? One young person asked Our Lord in a vision, “What does it feel like to have a vocation?” And He replied, “You will never know, because you will not have one”.

 

[numealinesimpet]

I am so scared that God might not be calling me to the priesthood. For so long, I have had a deep yearning to enter the priest hood for about five years now… but I am so worried that one day I might not even be able to make it through the seminary. I can’t imagine myself doing anything other than the priesthood.

Then, dear lad, do it! Otherwise it will be like the one who buried his talent in the ground and gave it back at the end. But the Master was not pleased.

If you enter, and if you are genuinely called, then you will be given the Grace on the day. But God does not give every Grace in advance. “Taste and see that the Lord is sweet”. We taste first, then we see. We are not allowed to see first, and then taste. God does not deprive us of the opportunity to make that leap of Faith.

If you are really asked to leave the seminary, then God will open another door. But you have to take it one step at a time. Otherwise, you will have nothing to show at the judgment.

• "Expect the Lord, do Manfully, and let thy heart take courage: Look thou to the Lord!
  (Ps 26:14)*

 

[ErichK]

There are a few reasons why I haven’t dropped everything and become a monastic yet:

1. I’m not yet Catholic
2. My parents want me to finish my last two years of college, get married, etc.
3. It’s HARD to detract yourself away from materialism

 

[CDNowak]

There are a few reasons why I haven’t dropped everything and become a monastic yet:

snip<

The only way to do it is to just do it.

 

[ErichK]

That’s the only way

I’m going to give it a go when I finish my last two years of college and don’t have any other obligations.

 

[JugglingReferee]

Admittedly I didn’t consider being a Priest for all that long, because I have always known that I wanted to have a family. If priests could marry, I would be one in a heartbeat.

Me too.

People have always said that I would make a great father because they see me with other kids. Unfortunately, the faith wasn’t a serious part of my life until 7 years ago. I’ve dated two Catholic women in that time, but neither were marriage matches.

I’m actually in the UGCC, where priests can marry, but I’d have to learn Ukrainian too, and I have a big concern about finances for 6 more years of school. I simply can’t afford it. I don’t even the ability to garnish a loan.

 

[numealinesimpet]

Me too.

People have always said that I would make a great father because they see me with other kids. Unfortunately, the faith wasn’t a serious part of my life until 7 years ago. I’ve dated two Catholic women in that time, but neither were marriage matches.

I’m actually in the UGCC, where priests can marry, but I’d have to learn Ukrainian too, and I have a big concern about finances for 6 more years of school. I simply can’t afford it. I don’t even the ability to garnish a loan.

I know I’m speaking out of turn (not being a married priest) but I would state, as a family man, that you really can’t combine both vocations and do justice to either - any more than you could marry two women and give them both the love they deserve. There isn’t time, in one lifetime, for one thing: you would be in the position of trying to be a father to all your parish when you had “particular attachments” to your own family, and you would be approaching God with a divided heart.

 

[Friar_David_O.Carm]

I know I’m speaking out of turn (not being a married priest) but I would state, as a family man, that you really can’t combine both vocations and do justice to either - any more than you could marry two women and give them both the love they deserve. There isn’t time, in one lifetime, for one thing: you would be in the position of trying to be a father to all your parish when you had “particular attachments” to your own family, and you would be approaching God with a divided heart.

Hmm, so then doctors shouldn’t get married either.

Also then, religious priests should not work in a parish, because they have their community commitments.

 

[CDNowak]

Hmm, so then doctors shouldn’t get married either.

Also then, religious priests should not work in a parish, because they have their community commitments.

I don’t necessarily agree with the poster you’re responding to however, comparing the priesthood and doctors is apples and oranges. And I don’t think that contemplative orders (or so-called mixed orders) should be involved in parish work. Mendicants, perhaps.

 

[numealinesimpet]

Hmm, so then doctors shouldn’t get married either.

I know some women doctors who make precisely that decision. But the apportionment of secular work vs. family has always been one that we must watch carefully.
It has been said that there are significantly fewer Catholics in the very top management positions, because they are less willing to sacrifice their families for their careers.

It is not to be taken for granted that everyone has a right to get married.

But on the spiritual level, it is not just a question of having the time to give to different projects. The priest or nun ought not to have ‘particular attachments’ - that is why they were welcomed into homes.

And there are graces that accrue to the celibate life.

That having been said, the quesion is a disciplinary one; the prohobition on marriage has not been without its allowed exceptions (as e.g. the Byzantine Rite) and it is on a very different level than the question of women ‘priestesses’. Nonetheless, I believe that the Church acts wisely in maintaining the celibate discipline in the Latin Rite.

Also then, religious priests should not work in a parish, because they have their community commitments.

That depends very much on what Religious Order they belong to. Carthusians and other strict contemplatives certainly have no business running a parish. But the prime motivation of the Franciscans and Dominicans (according to Fr G. Vann O.P. in his “Life of St Thomas Aquinas”) is “to give to the world the fruits of one’s contemplation”. These could certainly operate within a parish setting if the Religious Superior judges this appropriate. In fact, it was these two Orders that broke the deadlock of worldly bishops and moribund parishes in the 12th & 13th centuries.

 

[Hidden_One]

It is not to be taken for granted that everyone has a right to get married.

We have no right to **any ** vocation, but our vocations are what they are.

That having been said, the quesion is a disciplinary one; the prohobition on marriage has not been without its allowed exceptions (as e.g. the Byzantine Rite) and it is on a very different level than the question of women ‘priestesses’.

The Eastern rites - not merely Byzantine ones - are not the exception, but rather more of the rule. It is only the Latin rite wherein celibacy is required of all priests.

But the prime motivation of the Franciscans and Dominicans (according to Fr G. Vann O.P. in his “Life of St Thomas Aquinas”) is “to give to the world the fruits of one’s contemplation”. These could certainly operate within a parish setting if the Religious Superior judges this appropriate. In fact, it was these two Orders that broke the deadlock of worldly bishops and moribund parishes in the 12th & 13th centuries.

In your treatment of ByzCath’s remark as though he actually believed it, you give precisely the same sort of defense as can be raised of the non-obligation for diocesan priests in the Eastern rites to be celibate. It is the prime motivation of those married priests to serve in parishes ergo they can and do “operate within a parish setting”.

 

[numealinesimpet]

We have no right to **any ** vocation, but our vocations are what they are.

Agreed. The priesthood is not a “career”; it is God alone who calls whom He will.

The Eastern rites - not merely Byzantine ones - are not the exception, but rather more of the rule. It is only the Latin rite wherein celibacy is required of all priests.

There is a good discussion on the topic of priestly celibacy on

catholiceducation.org/articles/facts/fm0014.html

Not too long or involved.

I don’t think it’s quite accurate to call the Latin Rite discipline “an exception”. They followed more thoroughly the apostilic injunctions, and very gradually the Eastern Patriarchates have fallen into line. In both East and West, historical circumstances interfered (the collapse of order in Europe during the 10th century; the power of the Byzantine emperor followed by the Moslem invasions).

I don’t think BYZCath is completely wrong: I’m just contributing to the debate.
The Catholic Encyclopaedia has a comprehensive article on the topic:

newadvent.org/cathen/03481a.htm

Here are some extracts, slightly shortened but with no change to the wording:–

… We shall probably be justified in saying that the principle which underlies the Church’s action in enforcing celibacy is not limited to this utilitarian aspect but goes even deeper. From the earliest period the Church was personified and conceived of by her disciples as the Virgin Bride and as the pure Body of Christ, or again as the Virgin Mother (parthenos meter), and it was plainly fitting that this virgin Church should be served by a virgin priesthood.

Among Jews and pagans the priesthood was hereditary. Its functions and powers were transmitted by natural generation. But in the Church of Christ, as an antithesis to this, the priestly character was imparted by the Holy Ghost in the Divinely-instituted Sacrament of Orders. Virginity is consequently the special prerogative of the Christian priesthood. Virginity and marriage both holy, but in different ways.

The conviction that virginity possesses a higher sanctity and clearer spiritual intuitions, seems to be an instinct planted deep in the heart of man. Even in the Jewish Dispensation where the priest begot children to whom his functions descended, it was nevertheless enjoined that he should observe continence during the period in which he served in the Temple. No doubt a mystical reason of this kind does not appeal to all, but such considerations have always held a prominent place in the thought of the Fathers of the Church; as is seen, for example, in the admonition very commonly addressed to subdeacons of the Middle Ages at the time of their ordination. "With regard to them it has pleased our fathers that they who handle the sacred mysteries should observe the law of continence, as it is written ‘be clean ye who handle the vessels of the Lord?’ "(Maskell, Monumenta Ritualia, II, 242).

In the First Century, the Church was expanding into a pagan world in which most people were married or in concubinage. By the time the church was organising itself into regional and ecumenical councils, this matter was frequently addressed. You will notice that not only the Latin rite, but the East, were tightening the laws against marriage of those in Holy Orders.
Quoting the Catholic Encyclopaedia again:

In the history of clerical celibacy conciliar legislation marks the second period during which the law took definite shape both in the East and in the West. The earliest enactment on the subject is that of the Spanish Council of Elvira (between 295 and 302) [which] imposes celibacy upon … the clergy, bishops, priests, and deacons. If they continue to live with their wives and beget children after their ordination they are to be deposed.
…
[In the East] marriage [was not contemplated] on the part of those who were already bishops or priests; in fact, that it was assumed to be contrary to the tradition of the Church. [cf] the Council of Ancyra in Galatia, in 314 … and of Neo-Caesarea in Cappadocia, in 315 … The latter canon absolutely forbids a priest to contract a new marriage under the pain of deposition; the former forbids even a deacon to contract marriage, if at the moment of his ordination he made no reservation as to celibacy.
…
The Council of Trullo, in 692, [mandated] celibacy in a bishop. If he were previously married, he had at once to separate from his wife upon his consecration; and] priests, deacons, and subdeacons [were forbidden] to take a wife after ordination … This canon (xiii of Trullo) still makes the law for the great majority of the Churches of the East, though some of the Eastern Catholic communions have adopted the Western discipline.

Turning now to the Oriental Churches in communion with the Holy See, we may note that as a general principle married clerics are [eligible] for the subdiaconate, diaconate, and priesthood.

There has, however, been a strong movement of recent years among the Eastern Catholic Churches favouring conformity with Western Christendom in this matter of celibacy. … The Armenian Church [in] July, 1869, passed a resolution that celibacy should be required of all the higher orders of the clergy.

Again the Synod of Scharfa in Syria, in 1888, decreed that “the celibate life which is already observed by the great majority of the priests of our Church should henceforth be common to all”, although the deacons and priests who were already married were allowed to continue as before, and though a certain power of dispensation in cases of necessity was left with the patriarch.

Similarly in 1898 a synod of the Catholic Copts at Alexandria decreed that henceforth all candidates for any of the higher orders must be celibate “according to the ancient discipline of the Church of Alexandria and the other Churches of God”.

 

[numealinesimpet]

In your treatment of ByzCath’s remark as though he actually believed it

It would be a queer discussion in which we assumed that the other person did not mean what he said …

you give precisely the same sort of defense as can be raised of the non-obligation for diocesan priests in the Eastern rites to be celibate. It is the prime motivation of those married priests to serve in parishes ergo they can and do “operate within a parish setting”.

I can’t agree. The contemplative vocation (Carthusians etc) is by its nature opposed to direct parochial work. Those of the Mendicants (as discussed above) is very suitable as one option. But they still need to be celibate, both for the spiritual reasons given above, and so that they will not have divided loyalties. A father or mother of a family cannot approach parish work in the same spirit as a celibate priest or nun. Those of us with a desire to do “more” for our neighbour have The Legion of Mary for spiritual help, the Society of S. Vincent de Paul for material help, and many other church organisations. But it is always understood that the demands of our family may call us away at any time. That is the difference.