Is being single a vocation or a state in life?

[catechizeme]

From an earlier post:
mschrank
If it is the result of a conscious commitment with permanent intent, then yes it is a vocation.

If it is just because you either have not found someone for whatever reason, or do not feel drawn to religious life, then it is not.

This is what I have been taught in our Diocese - but they explain it further. A vocation typically includes a formal, usually public commitment (in front of someone else). If you are not called to marriage, the priesthood,or the religious life, but discern God is calling you to remain unmarried, then you have, in essence, embraced this as your vocation and commit yourself to God and make yourself a complete gift to Him through a conscious act…**AND…this is then done in a formal way - consecrated virgin - for example, or it may be in a less formal way with your priest or spiritual director. But in either case, an actual commitment is made and in essence - you now have a “religious vocation”. ** Therefore, the ‘single life’ isn’t per say a vocation - it could be a transitory state in life until your vocation of priesthood, marriage, or religious life (formal or ‘informal’) is discerned.

Many people are single not because this is their vocation - they haven’t discerned it but are really open to marriage if the right person came along. In this case, being single isn’t a ‘vocation’ - it’s a state in life, with no intent of permanence.

 

[Bruised_Reed]

Unless one is a consecrated virgin (canon 604) singleless is not a vocation. I think of it as being transitional like a being a “transitional deacon” is not the vocation just a step towards the vocation to the priesthood.

Singles can dedicate their lives to noble causes and works (little “v” vocation) but it’s not the same as marriage, religious life or ordination.

ETA: this tidbit from MaryBeth Bonacci:“Catholic singles who are serious about their faith are at a real disadvantage when it comes to finding a mate in today’s world. To find someone who shares that faith, to paraphrase Ann CouIter, is sort of like a woman trying to find a boyfriend in a room full of choreographers.”

 

[barb_finnegan]

I had someone (a Sister, no less!) write and tell me that the 'single state is a forced state, whereas you could not find a spouse or the religious state because of circumstances."

Needless to say, I was NOT HAPPY with that answer!

Catholics who are single-especially the ‘over-35s’ like myself-are a ‘great invisible demographic’ in the Church. I am not much of an ‘organizer’ or ‘initiator’, so I live a very humdrum and drab sort of life as a middleaged single woman.

Never dated in my ‘younger’ years. Didn’t want to. I think of sex as being overrated. Don’t know much about Theology of the Body-much less try to understand it.

Wanted to become a religious-wasn’t accepted. Tried Third Orders (2). Didn’t work out there, either.

So, unless you’re a 'hung-go leader ’ or ‘overly talented organizer’ type, singles are ‘benignly ignored and benevolently neglected’ in the Church. Most activities and events in parishes are geared to married couples with kids and families. Can’t tell you how many times I had the misfortune of being at a Mass where the ‘long-wedded’ married couples were honored…made me feel like a loser sitting solitary in the pews.

BLECH on being single—but what choice do I have?

 

[CathPhilosopher]

I believe more or less this same discussion arose on this forum this Summer, though I don’t know how to find the thread. I wrote a post on my blog about it: Religious Life or Marriage: is there a vocation to the single life?

It seems various participants in the discussion are focusing on different aspects of the issue, and probably in many cases agreeing more than it seems.

The basic points are:

(1) “Love is the fundamental and innate vocation of every human being.” (Familiaris Consortio, n. 11)

(2) the normal ways of fulfilling the vocation to love are (1) marriage, and (2) the dedicated single life: virginity or celibacy.

"Christian revelation recognizes two specific ways of realizing the vocation of the human person in its entirety, to love: marriage and virginity or celibacy. Either one is, in its own proper form, an actuation of the most profound truth of man, of his being “created in the image of God.” (Ibid.)

Nonetheless, if, e.g., one couldn’t responsibly, and therefore not lovingly, make a commitment either in marriage or to the single life, then the vocation to love will have to be pursued in a de facto single life. Such a single life is an expression and means of the divine call to love, and in this sense is a vocation.

 

[jaiyen]

Never dated in my ‘younger’ years. Didn’t want to. I think of sex as being overrated. Don’t know much about Theology of the Body-much less try to understand it.

Wanted to become a religious-wasn’t accepted. Tried Third Orders (2). Didn’t work out there, either.

So, unless you’re a 'hung-go leader ’ or ‘overly talented organizer’ type, singles are ‘benignly ignored and benevolently neglected’ in the Church. Most activities and events in parishes are geared to married couples with kids and families. Can’t tell you how many times I had the misfortune of being at a Mass where the ‘long-wedded’ married couples were honored…made me feel like a loser sitting solitary in the pews.

BLECH on being single—but what choice do I have?

~*

Singleness is not a defective state, in my opinion. Actually, I enjoy it. I’m a very independent person who has never had any draw to the householder life.

You’re right that we are generally neglected in most social institutions, including the Church.

Perhaps this is where we need to start. Not to be a gung-ho organizers but by creating lives that will not make us appear as “lesser beings” to those who choose marriage.

My life is full enough for me. I like to read, pray, communicate in forums such as this - many things that keep me linked into the rest of the community.

The difference is that we have to create a meaningful life for ourselves. We don’t get the package deal.

I haven’t completely gotten this one right. As for most cultural passages, since I am not part of a family, I am not included. But we can include each other. I’ll grant you that I haven’t done much personally to make that happen.

It seems the first step is to reframe how we think about being single and to stop seeing it as a defective state ourselves.

Peace to you,

~Jai yen

 

[Salonika]

Here’s what I don’t understand, if you decide to remain celibate, why not join a community and take on the yoke of holy obedience?

For many reasons including -

• do not feel called to the religious life in general
• cannot find not a suitable order or comminty
• ineligble for the religious life eg too old, have a disability, have dependent relatives
• are caring for older relatives, siblings or young relatives
• are not suited to life in a community eg have an independent nature, believe they are called to make their own decisons
• believe they have a particular contribution to make in the world

and also FEEL CALLED TO THE SINGLE LIFE IN THE WORLD.

 

[marleelynn]

I am living out the single life vocation. I am not called to married life nor called to religious life. The structure of religious life would be too strict to me. I feel married life isn’t for me either. With the help of my associate pastor/spiritual director, I will dedicate myself to God in the single life on March 7, the feast of Saints Perpetua and Felicity.

 

[Bruised_Reed]

I am living out the single life vocation. I am not called to married life nor called to religious life. The structure of religious life would be too strict to me. I feel married life isn’t for me either. With the help of my associate pastor/spiritual director, I will dedicate myself to God in the single life on March 7, the feast of Saints Perpetua and Felicity.

Are you referring to consecrated virginity? If not, is it something you have considered?

 

[Methos]

Are you referring to consecrated virginity? If not, is it something you have considered?

And why, may I ask, is this limted to women only? Due to a mental disorder, I’m precluded from holy orders. Marriage? I never dated. You might as well give a physics book to a 3 year old because I’ve done things by myself for so long I wouldn’t know how to act and really don’t see the need to learn. I don’t think I have the emotinal maturity for marriage and while I can understand love as an act of will, my disorder prevents it as an emotion.

 

[Salonika]

Bruised Reed:

Unless one is a consecrated virgin (canon 604) singleness is not a vocation. I think of it as being transitional like a being a “transitional deacon” is not the vocation just a step towards the vocation to the priesthood.

But what is it transitional or a step to as this is not clear in the same way as for a “transitional” deacon.

If we stay single does this mean under this view that we have failed to discern our vocation or have rejected it.
Bruised Reed:

Singles can dedicate their lives to noble causes and works (little “v” vocation) but it’s not the same as marriage, religious life or ordination.

This makes us sound very much like second class people and second class citizens. Maybe this why we get treated this way.

 

[barb_finnegan]

But what is it transitional or a step to as this is not clear in the same way as for a “transitional” deacon.

If we stay single does this mean under this view that we have failed to discern our vocation or have rejected it.

This makes us sound very much like second class people and second class citizens. Maybe this why we get treated this way.

You hit it on the nail with the last comment, Salonika! Single people ARE treated that way! :sad_yes:

 

[Salonika]

You hit it on the nail with the last comment, Salonika! Single people ARE treated that way! :sad_yes:

Yes, we are the ones who are expected to do overtime as we have “no-one at home”. We are the ones expected to cover for those have children at school holiday time. Who are expected to baby-sit at short notice.

Don’t get me wrong I am happy to do my share and make life easier for others - what I object is being expected to do so because I am single and for it not to be reciprocal.

Think some of these expectations result from the belief/feeling that single people are not real adults. Marry, become a religious or priest and your status goes up. Regarding singleness as transitional - not a vocation - endorses this view. Also consider this is a reason why some people do not like/want to see singleness viewed as a vocation.

Plus there is the feeling by some people that it fine to speculate on our reason for being single (selfishness, being too finicky, “too long on our own”).

 

[barb_finnegan]

Yes, we are the ones who are expected to do overtime as we have “no-one at home”. We are the ones expected to cover for those have children at school holiday time. Who are expected to baby-sit at short notice.

Don’t get me wrong I am happy to do my share and make life easier for others - what I object is being expected to do so because I am single and for it not to be reciprocal.

Think some of these expectations result from the belief/feeling that single people are not real adults. Marry, become a religious or priest and your status goes up. Regarding singleness as transitional - not a vocation - endorses this view. Also consider this is a reason why some people do not like/want to see singleness viewed as a vocation.

Plus there is the feeling by some people that it fine to speculate on our reason for being single (selfishness, being too finicky, “too long on our own”).

Re your last paragraph-I would add, ‘too set in our ways’.

I remember that Mother Angelica said that in response to a question a caller sent in on her live show years ago. The caller was an older woman who asked about a vocation to religious at her age. And that was Mother’s answer!

You also hit the nail on the head [again] with your sentence, “Marry, become a religious or priest, and your status goes up”.

:sad_yes: :sad_yes:

 

[Salonika]

Re your last paragraph-I would add, ‘too set in our ways’.

I remember that Mother Angelica said that in response to a question a caller sent in on her live show years ago. The caller was an older woman who asked about a vocation to religious at her age. And that was Mother’s answer!:

It’s sad when people make assumptions about a group of people without knowing them. It’s even sadder when they make decisions about them based on these assumptions without checking out if they apply to individual in front of them.

Yes, some older single people are set in their ways but not all are.

Some older single people who are set in their ways are willing to change, some are not.

Some older single people who try to change their ways will succeed and some will not.

Think we need to discern our call based on it’s suitablity for us and us for it. Think it is sad when make choices based on/predominantly based on a perceived hierarchy rather than personal fit for it.

I’m also a strong believer that we should stretch ourselves in what we think and do but there are limits to how much we can do it. In this regard we are like a piece of elastic or a rubber band - ultimately the elastic or rubber band breaks.

An irony just struck me - more traditional religious orders lead a very structured life yet a selection criteria often includes flexibility. Interesting.

 

[Bruised_Reed]

But what is it transitional or a step to as this is not clear in the same way as for a “transitional” deacon.

No, but for most it mean marriage and for others the religious or consecrated life.

If we stay single does this mean under this view that we have failed to discern our vocation or have rejected it.

For a few, maybe it does but for most, not by a long shot. Read again the quote from MB (it links to an article) - she acknowledges that it is harder to find a spouse especially if you are serious about your faith. No spouse or no prospects does not mean one doesn’t have a vocation to marriage. Someone at a conference I went to suggested that if you are [a certain age I can’t remember] and not married it means that marriage probably isn’t your calling and should consider the religious life. Um, no. I defer to MB on this one.

This makes us sound very much like second class people and second class citizens. Maybe this why we get treated this way.

Yes, I would agree. How much I agree depends on the day. But a vocation is something we give wholeheartedly to. Most people take vows and there is no getting out of it except death. As “transitional” singles we can (and want to) move on to something more permanent. I’m not thrilled with the second class treatment (and worse- try being a single woman and ride a motorcycle-all kinds of fodder there) but it is what it is.

ETA: I’ve been searching in vain for a blog post I think is very useful here. I’ll try to find it later.

 

[Cara_Serrano]

I think single is what you are before you discover your vocation. If you hear God calling you to the priesthood or religious life, then you take a vow to be faithful to Him exclusively. If you get married, you take a vow to be faithful to your spouse. Ifyou didn’t go in either of those directions, then you’ve taken no vow and you have no vocation. You can still be a committed Christian, but no vow holds you to the state of being single.

 

[Salonika]

I think single is what you are before you discover your vocation. If you hear God calling you to the priesthood or religious life, then you take a vow to be faithful to Him exclusively. If you get married, you take a vow to be faithful to your spouse. Ifyou didn’t go in either of those directions, then you’ve taken no vow and you have no vocation. You can still be a committed Christian, but no vow holds you to the state of being single.

Some of us see staying single as being true to our deepest self and also being fair to potential spouses by not marrying them. We do the later because we believe we do not have the attitudes and abilities to be as good a spouse as they deserve. Some us also know we would not make good parents.

I see this as fulfilling our vocation.

 

[Cara_Serrano]

Some of us see staying single as being true to our deepest self and also being fair to potential spouses by not marrying them. We do the later because we believe we do not have the attitudes and abilities to be as good a spouse as they deserve. Some us also know we would not make good parents.

I see this as fulfilling our vocation.

Yes, I see your point. If you’re staying single because you think you might not be suited to the vocation of marriage, that’s commendable and shows good discernment.

However, I think that if being single really is a “vocation” and not just a “state in life”, then there has to be more to it than simply not getting married. What exactly do you see yourself doing in this vocation?

 

[wjp984]

I would think it is a vocation.

Priests and religious can still be given a dispensation to leave the priesthood and marry. Married people can get their marriages annulled or be widowed. Single people can become married or enter the religious life or priesthood. Therefore, none of them are permanent vocations per se and as such I would think the single life is also a vocation.

However, the argument can be made that everyone starts off single and one has to take affirmative action to become a priest or religious or get married. Therefore the single life must be a state and only temporary on the path to a vocation.

Even so, there is precedant for temporay vocations. It is my understanding all priests are first deacons but considered part of the temporary diaconate. There are, however, permanent deacons. If a deacon in the termporary diaconate determined he was not called to the priesthood, my guess would be he could still retain his diaconate and be a permanent deacon.

Therefore, after careful discening, the single person who is discerning his vocaton can determine he is called to actually remain to a permanent singlehood similar to a permanent diaconate.

That being said, right now, all I know is I need to finish law school. I’m still open to whatever my vocation might be…

 

[katy]

I don’t see “both”, so here it is!