Is religious life a holier vocation than marriage?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Larquetta
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Once again I insist that if one enters the religious life and gets as far as perpetual vows, one has a vocation to the religious life, and not to marriage, a call confirmed by the Church and ratified by God, no matter what other armchair quarterbacks may imagine.

@InThePew, do you think you might secretly be called to marriage, and have gone down the wrong path?
 
Last edited:
Pre Vatican II Trent had established Holy Orders as superior and marriage as on the lowest rung due to the sexual intimacy of marriage, even though it was still a Sacrament back then.

This is where the thinking that Holy Orders is more holy then marriage stems from. There was that issue with sex and marriage having a person concerned with the baser functions of the body, whilst Holy Orders, not concerned with sex, lifted the person that little bit more.
Trent was concerned more with hierarchy of the Church too, and hence clericalism, where the clergy were the elite.
This thinking lasted right up until Vatican II
Vatican II lifted the Sacrament of Marriage back up so to speak. Also concentrating on the Priesthood of the People, given us at Baptism, we are all priest prophet and king. We all share in Christ’s priesthood and in the priesthood of the people.

The Sacrament of Marriage and the Sacrament of Holy Orders are both Sacraments of Service in the Church. We are all called to serve.
Neither vocation is holier then the other, neither Sacrament is holier then the other. We must live out our vocations as the People of God wherever we find ourselves.

Pope Francis is working very hard to stamp out the perceived elitism of clericalism. It was never intended in the Early Church, Jesus did not set it up.
 
Last edited:
Can you please quote a document of Vatican II that modified this Magisterial teaching please.
 
humilityseeker said:
40.png
Anesti33:
Can you please quote a document of Vatican II that modified this Magisterial teaching please.
Click to expand...
What magisterial teaching exactly?
Click to expand...
e.g.

http://www.vatican.va/content/paul-...uments/hf_p-vi_enc_24061967_sacerdotalis.html
Paul VI:
  1. The choice of celibacy does not connote ignorance of or contempt for the sexual instinct and man’s capacity for giving himself in love. That would certainly do damage to his physical and psychological balance. On the contrary, it demands clear understanding, careful self-control and a wise elevation of the mind to higher realities. In this way celibacy sets the whole man on a higher level and makes an effective contribution to his perfection.
Click to expand...
 
Stick with the question, what magisterial teaching are you referring to? Your cut and paste has no context to it at all, in respect to your question.
You have posted a document about celibacy of priests which is not the topic of this thread.
 
Last edited:
That question is the subject of the thread and precisely covered by the quote I provided. Read the document. It’s a Vatican II document that contradicts you directly.
 
Anesti33 said:
That question is the subject of the thread and precisely covered by the quote I provided. Read the document. It’s a Vatican II document that contradicts you directly.
Click to expand...
You have posted a document regarding priestly celibacy. It has nothing to do with the topic of this thread
 
You’re the one who brought up Holy Orders. The teaching is not on religious life per se but on celibacy for the Kingdom. Now answer the question and furnish the source, because you are executing a stalling tactic.
 
Anesti33 said:
You’re the one who brought up Holy Orders. The teaching is not on religious life per se but on celibacy for the Kingdom. Now answer the question and furnish the source, because you are executing a stalling tactic.
Click to expand...
Personally I think you have not understood the topic of this thread. It is not about celibacy.
The original person asked if
Larquetta said:
Does this mean that those called to this vocation are holier than married people?
Click to expand...
So lets just stick to that topic ok. Lets not start discussing the issue of priestly celibacy here. Start a new thread.

Now exactly which
humilityseeker said:
What magisterial teaching exactly?
Click to expand...
do you mean, in regard to the topic in question.
 
Anesti33 said:
So I see you have no document. OK then, muted.
Click to expand...
You are doing yourself a disservice by cutting and pasting a document that is totally unrelated to this topic, and asking another member of the forum for the magisterial teaching, but when requesting further information on which magisterial teaching, deciding to be incredibly rude and answering that way.

I truly hope you read the document you copy and pasted rather then skim it or not bother reading it (as in your other thread on Church documents) so you see there is nothing in it that states the Sacrament of Holy Orders is holier then the Sacrament of Marriage. In fact that document confirms the crucial aspect of the Sacrament of Marriage in its sexuality.
 
Great quotes!

to OP: It is dogma that the state of perfection is greater than the state of marriage. In other words, if one does not believe this, one is a heretic. A state is different than the moral holiness of the person who belongs to that state. So the state of virginity is greater than the state of widowhood which is greater than the state of marriage. But the moral holiness (degree of charity) that an individual possesses is not correlated to the state in life to which he belongs. The state is a help towards the individual to attain ever deepening charity, but not everyone takes advantage of the graces given.
 
Last edited:
In theory religious life would be holier just by virtue of the position. Prayer, mass everyday, celibacy, etc. However we are all sinful and our priests and other religious are no different. This does not mean a married couple or a single person cannot be holy.
 
SerraSemper said:
to OP: It is dogma that the state of perfection is greater than the state of marriage.
Click to expand...
There is absolutely nothing in Church teaching that the Sacrament of Holy Orders is holier then the Sacrament of Marriage. They are both Sacraments of Service and are to be treated that way. I suggest people having a problem with this, have a thorough reading of what it means to have either Sacrament and what it means to have the Sacrament of Baptism.
I would also suggest people become conversant with what clericalism is and why our current Pope is working so hard to stamp it out.

It is the person who becomes holy. It is not the virtue of the Sacrament that makes a person holy. As we all know there are very holy homeless paupers living on the streets of Nepal and there have been very unholy clergy living in the houses of Christ.
 
Last edited:
humilityseeker said:
There is absolutely nothing in Church teaching that the Sacrament of Holy Orders is holier then the Sacrament of Marriage. They are both Sacraments of Service and are to be treated that way. I suggest people having a problem with this, have a thorough reading of what it means to have either Sacrament and what it means to have the Sacrament of Baptism.
I would also suggest people become conversant with what clericalism is and why our current Pope is working so hard to stamp it out.
Click to expand...
You are simply wrong. First of all, I didn’t say “Holy Orders”, I said “State of perfection”. Church Councils and the Popes have infallibly declared the state of virginity to be superior to that of marriage.

Second, I am very well acquainted with this. I am a Vatican-diploma holder of the Theology and Law of Consecrated Life from the Congregation for Institutes of Consecrated Life and Societies of Apostolic Life, a canon lawyer, and my specialization is in this area. I have a few decades of research under my belt on this topic. I would like you to explain why you do not accept the dogma that virginity is superior to marriage.

Clericalism is the attitude of clerics towards the laity that is disrespectful to their dignity as human people. They think it is the role of the laity to “pray, pay, and obey”, with the focus on paying and obeying. They ignore certain fundamental truths about the dignity of people in their pride. But it is one thing to be in a hierarchical superior position, and another to look down upon or demean people who are not in it.
 
Last edited:
SerraSemper said:
You are simply wrong. First of all, I didn’t say “Holy Orders”, I said “State of perfection”. Church Councils and the Popes have infallibly declared the state of virginity to be superior to that of marriage.
Click to expand...
The original question is about holiness, not perfection. Lets not conflate the two. Lets also give credence to what Vatican II taught us about these Sacraments of Service.

I will not trot my credentials out, as this is not what this thread is about.
People are making a confusing conflation between perfection and holiness and this is simply wrong.

Clericalism is about a lot more then pray pay and obey. It is about elitism.
 
Last edited:
humilityseeker said:
The original question is about holiness, not perfection. Lets not conflate the two. Lets also give credence to what Vatican II taught us about these Sacraments of Service.

I will not trot my credentials out, as this is not what this thread is about.
People are making a confusing conflation between perfection and holiness and this is simply wrong.
Click to expand...
And I am responding to the question. You are the one conflating things. I don’t care what your credentials are if you are denying that objectively, the state of perfection is higher than the state of marriage. That has already been taken care of by the Fathers of the Church, the Councils, and even the Popes.
 
SerraSemper said:
And I am responding to the question. You are the one conflating things. I don’t care what your credentials are if you are denying that objectively, the state of perfection is higher than the state of marriage. That has already been taken care of by the Fathers of the Church, the Councils, and even the Popes.
Click to expand...
The question is, Is one Sacrament of Service holier then the other. The answer is no, neither Sacrament of Service is holier then the other. This was driven home by Vatican II
 
Last edited:
That is not the question from the OP. You are twisting what I said and what the OP asked. The OP didn’t ask about what you term a “Sacrament of Service”. The OP asked whether those in the religious state are holier than those who are not. I gave a careful, nuanced answer which I will reproduce here so you get the fact I AM making distinctions:

It is dogma that the state of perfection is greater than the state of marriage. In other words, if one does not believe this, one is a heretic. A state is different than the moral holiness of the person who belongs to that state. So the state of virginity is greater than the state of widowhood which is greater than the state of marriage. But the moral holiness (degree of charity) that an individual possesses is not correlated to the state in life to which he belongs. The state is a help towards the individual to attain ever deepening charity, but not everyone takes advantage of the graces given.

So I show that there are three states when it comes to a comparison with virginity: virginal, vidual, and marital. It is dogma that the virginal state is superior to the married state. And the Fathers talk about the vidual state being in-between virginity and marriage. If you need to see documents on that, try Sacra Virginitas as a starter.

In contrast to states, I talk about moral holiness. Moral holiness is connected with the virtue of charity. People are judged on their level of charity when they die and it is that which makes them more or less holy.

I then state that there is no correlation between someone’s degree of charity, and the state they happen to be in. Thus a married person might possess more charity than a widowed person.

I don’t understand why this is so difficult to understand, but now that I have expanded on what I have said, you will see that there is nothing new in what I have stated and the Church’s doctrine.

And, for the record, I didn’t mention the clerical state because as you may or may not know, holy orders does not by nature require celibacy or even continence. Clerical celibacy/continence is a discipline, not an essential element intrinsic to holy orders.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top