How Downplayed is the Vocation to Single Life?

  • Thread starter Thread starter thecommongentry
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
So you are narrowing your definition of “single vocation” to those who make a commitment to perpetual continence and celibacy. What else are characteristics of this proposed vocation? Is a private commitment the sole identifying characteristic of this vocation or are there rights and responsibilities that go beyond that the baptized are required to observe anyway? Also, you said a definitive commitment before God. That means someone can become an engineer as a commitment before God. Does that make it a Church vocation to be an engineer (let’s say for the sake of argument, to serve as a civil engineer in a developing country to help the people). Isn’t Baptism a definitive commitment before God? Aren’t we committing by our baptismal oaths to remain continent outside of marriage?
 
Last edited:
To oblige oneself to remain single to better serve God or human society is in itself an exemplary example of sacrifice, a sacrifice of great excellence.
In fact, the joys of conjugal or family love are the greater joys than we can hope for in this world. To commit oneself to depriving us of such joy and without receiving the counterpart the “social”, “spiritual” and even “material” security offered by a religious institute, is to take a big risk for God. I find it quite edifying in itself:
 
Last edited:
In fact, if we were in a context where the population of humanity was in danger of extinction, celibacy choice should be a crime against humanity.
But in the context where the challenge is to improve the quality life of the humans, and not to increase the population, to renounce to have a private familly to better help human family in destress is an excellent choice worthy of praise, even for the humanistic
 
Catholics do not subscribe to an “overpopulation” theory. Nor would few numbers of human beings make it wrong for someone to live in continence for the sake of the Kingdom…
 
Sorry, but go to read St Thomas D’Aquin, he have given a similar reason. Rather to tell that "catholic do not susbcribe to the “surpopulation theory”, give a reasonnable objection
 
I think there is also a very practical, and not so spiritual aspect to this. Marriage and religious life are both necessary for the Church. Marriage, by way of procreation, provides the Church with new members. Religious life sustains the Church in an extraordinary way through total dedication and self-giving. While a single person can certainly live a life of tremendous virtue, a single person can also potentially live a more self-centered life, perhaps even convincing themselves that it is not so. I can see, then, why the single life is not so exalted by the Church, and it does not bother me (and I am single).
 
Last edited:
Yes i’ve found it: the apostolic constiution "Provida Mater Ecclesia ".

In the church, there are seculars institutes, which are a form of consacred life officialy recognized since 1947 by the pope Pie12 in the apostolic constiution "Provida Mater Ecclesia ".
Before that, to devote oneself completely to God, one had to “leave the world” by entering religious institutes. But since then, the Church has officially recognized and organized a new form of total consecration to God that is “in the world” and no longer outside the world.
In short, the member of a secular institute make vows of poverty, chastity and obedience just like religious, but unlike religious, they do not live in community, do not exhibit external religious symbols that should distinguishes them from the laity.
 
Secular Institutes are institutes and their members are exactly that: members of an institute with a common charism/mission, etc. They are not simply individuals and thus are not precisely consecrated “singles”.
 
Sorry, but try to learn more. members of secular institutes do not live in community, and have vows of chastity (therefore they are single). They certainly have a common charism, but do not live in community at all! All references that I have are in French otherwise I would have given them to you right away.
And more there are consacreted virgins which are single and not religious. The consacreted virgins exist since the time of St Paul, he himself talk about it in his epistles
 
Last edited:
I believe I know a little bit about members of secular institutes. Like I said, they are not simply individuals even if they may live alone, they are bound together by a common mission. Also, I don’t know if you have noticed or not, but I am a sacred virgin and a canon lawyer specializing in consecrated life. I would be glad to read anything you had to share in French, but I don’t know that that would help this particular discussion.

What precisely is your definition of a “consecrated single”? If you consider secular institute members “consecrated singles”, then does your definition include requiring vows of poverty chastity and obedience? Or is it enough to be, say, single, like a parish priest? Or does it require a vow or promise at all? Is it enough to be a pious individual? What is your definition of a consecrated single?
 
Last edited:
Many call communities of Christian life secular institutes, it is an abuse.
An authentic secular institute is made up of singles who make evangelical vows exactly like the religious and which don’t life in community. It is better to read the texts that recognize the secular institutes and not to rely on the testimony of someone who would be in a secular institute because his specific case would not be a reference of what is a secular institute as recognized by the Church
 
Secular Institutes vary slightly so generalisations can’t be made so much so about who is ‘single’ and who not, in my humble opinion. Some allow males and females and have members who are married which would of course not meet the criteria for ‘single’ life. Others allow only woman and they must be either single or widowed and take vows of poverty, obedience and chastity and so would see themselves as a ‘single vocation’. I am of course referring to authentic secular institutes recognised by the church. In answer to the original question, there is little or no information in parish life about this I don’t think in my parish, however, in our city a ‘young person’s’ community exists where young people discerning vocations can go and live for a year whilst working for various charity’s and/or studying in order to assist them with decisions about vocations and they visit all the parishes regularly, so I would expect they cover all bases.
 
so that there is no confusion I call single those who are not married or religious . In the Church, there are vocations that concern only the single, for example vocations lived in secular institutes
 
I don’t consider myself a “consecrated single”. I’m a sacred virgin.
 
So if I have a two year old sister, she’s a consecrated single?
 
Where is the report? you problem seems to me to be a problem of logic. It has never been said that to be single means being automatically devoted. But it is said that one can devote oneself to god in the celibacy state without necessarily entering into religion! So someone can definitely choose to be celibacy to express his consecration to God without necessarily being a priest or a religious! it’s obvious
 
So one need merely to be serious about baptismal commitment to be considered a consecrated single?
 
But, no! To be baptized don’t means to be single for God! to be baptized does not mean to engage in poverty for Christ and so on! We are consacreted to god when we follow Christ by the means of evangelical counsels professed by public or private vows. One can do that by the religious instituts, or by seculars instituts, or strictily in private “in his room” where God sees us in the secret…
 
So in your opinion, how does the Church know who is a consecrated single?
 
we consecrate ourselves to God and not to men! we act for God to know it and not for men to know, the consecration is a story between a man and his God! it’s not alway necessary that humans know that i’m consacrated to God. Free to God to highlight my consecration in the eyes of men, but it depends only on God, it is not for me to seek that men know it
But, if anyone needs the help of an established human institution to keep up with his commitment, he can turn to religious or secular institutes if he finds them, and it is even advisable to go through one of these institutes. if we can. But even without resorting to a religious or secular institute, devoting oneself to God is always possible, even though a such consecration involves many difficulties …
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top