Singleness

[Aelred_Minor]

I’m sorry, with all due respect, these are your opinions, which you are very much entitled to. So is DavidFilmer. But there is no such Church teaching, rule or law that says you have to get married. There is no such Church teaching, rule or law that says you cannot remain single. The only requirement is that if you live a single lifestyle, that you have to keep it clean according to the teachings of the Church (no sex, etc.) There is no such Church teaching that says you have to either be married or committed to some religious life. None at all.

I think you took away something from my post that was not there. I never said anyone is required to get married. I never even said there is no positive vocation to the single life even when someone could potentially do something else (I’m trying to stay uncommitted on that). What I did mention is that, first, it is possible for someone to remain in single life due to a private selfishness, which would be wrong. And second, there are those people who are for whatever reason incapable of living any other vocation, even consecrated single life. If we take for granted that everyone has a vocation, then the logical implication of this second point is that at least some people really do have a vocation to unconsecrated single life.

 

[DavidFilmer]

There were Saints and blesseds who never married neither were they religious. They used their life to serve God though.

Yes, there are still such people today. If you would read down a bit further, you will see that I quoted a Papal Encyclical (Sacra Virginitas) which explains the role of “consecrated virgins.” These are single people not under public Vows (ie, not Religious or clergy) who forsake companionship in order to serve the People of God. The Church recognizes this as a valid vocation. This is a committed, non-secular life.

What the Church does NOT recognize as a vocation is a single life that is secular and non-committed. This would be a single person who gets up, goes to work, stops off for dinner on the way home, feeds the dog and watches TV - an ordinary, secular life. The Church does not recognize this type of life as a vocation.

 

[DavidFilmer]

And second, there are those people who are for whatever reason incapable of living any other vocation, even consecrated single life. If we take for granted that everyone has a vocation…

I don’t take that for granted, and the Church does not teach it. God does not offer us a vocation which we could not possibly accept.

There is no equality in vocations. Some people have a vocation to the priesthood. Some to marriage. Some to a dedicated life of service. But nobody has a vocation to be single and uncommitted. There is no such thing.

 

[Rence]

Where do people get this idea that I ever said it was not? Sheesh, Rence thought I had said it was “forbidden.” I’ve reread my posts - I never said any such thing.

I will say it again (for the umpteenth time):

The Catholic Church does not recognize the existence of a single, non-committed (secular) vocation.
There is no such thing.

If you choose that life, fine, but you ARE NOT living a vocation - and don’t fool yourself into thinking that you are. It’s OK to not live a vocation - it is not required (and it’s not evil or sinful not to do so). But, if you are in a non-committed single life, you are NOT living any vocation that is recognized by the Catholic Church. If you say you are then you are wrong.

It’s PERFECTLY OK to be single for your entire life - but it’s not a vocation.

If you think I’m wrong, feel free to prove it. I’ve demonstrated that Church teaching recognizes a single, non-secular (committed) vocation. If the Church recognizes any other type of single vocation, feel free to cite the teaching.

You have done nothing to support the notion that the Church doesn’t recognize a single non-secular vocation. Being single is a chosen vocation, it’s a chosen way of life. Where does the Church specifically state that being single is not a vocation? Is there some canon law that says this? Why would the Church make such a nonsensical statement anyway?

 

[DavidFilmer]

Being single is a chosen vocation, it’s a chosen way of life.

It’s a decision, but it is not a vocation. The two are not the same.

Where does the Church specifically state that being single is not a vocation? Is there some canon law that says this?

No, of course not. The Church only teaches about what the Church teaches about (by definition). The Church never teaches about things She does not teach about (and, because such things are beyond the Deposit of Faith, the Church cannot teach about these things). The Church makes no effort to catalog everything (or anything) that she does not teach.

But the fact that the Church does not teach about things that She does not teach about does not implicitly demonstrate that She somehow actually teaches the things that She does not teach. Just because the Church does not explicitly teach against something does not mean She somehow endorses it. I’ve never told my children not to pee in the toaster, but that doesn’t mean they should.

We know what the Church DOES teach about a single vocation - it is a committed, non-secular life (and I cited this teaching). This is the ONLY lifestyle that the Church teaches as a valid single vocation. True, the Church has never taught that the opposite is not ALSO a valid single vocation. But it is absurd to imagine that She somehow teaches that it is ALSO a vocation by NOT specifically contradicting it.

I say, yet again, the Catholic Church does not recognize the existence of a secular, non-committed single vocation. There is no such thing. If you are living such a life, you have not accepted any vocation that is recognized by the Catholic Church.

I have cited what the Church DOES teach about a single vocation. I say again - feel free to cite something that adds to this knowledge.

 

[MtnDwellar]

The word “vocation” comes from the Latin vocare (verb to call). Since we are all born single, there is no reason to “call” anyone to this state in life. We are all born into this state.

It does not make singleness any less holy. It just means that single people were not called to leave their current state in life.

 

[Skittles73]

Well I asked a priest about this half an hour ago and he said its fine to be single.

Thank you. I will be going to discuss things with the priest where I am. I was actually told yesterday that my marriage of 2.5 years may not even be recognized because we never went through the pre-marriage counseling that is considered to be a prereq to marriage. I need to find out.
My problem is that I have been in “BAD” relationships that did nothing but bring me down and now I have a real hard time with trusting anyone. I always thought that being with someone who claims to love you is suppose to support you in all areas of your life. This has been the opposite for me. I have worked so hard in the past to gain a degree which took a lot of hard work and the “one who loved me” took all that hard work and crushed it in one night.
Now that I have chose to remain single, I seem to achieve so much more than ever. I will be obtaining my AA degree this fall and will be going all the way to masters. I have discovered who I am, currently I do not like her (me), but I am working on this. So I believe it would be wise to remain single until I figure it out.
My next step is to see if I have it in me to open up to a priest (here is where my trust issue comes to play). I will survive!

 

[Skittles73]

I am so sorry to everyone!!! I really did not mean to stir up such a debate. I read every single post and I absorb them all. Please, don’t argue over this. Each person has their own way of how they want to live and there is nothing wrong with this.
I only asked this question about singleness because I am in the process of reevaluating my own life and I can’t help but to question the paths that I chose. In order for me to consider marriage I need to figure out just “who” I really am. As of now there is no one in my life. As I stated in my original post, I am in college and I dedicated at least 10 years to myself. I am taking these promised years and I am using them to better myself. If I accomplish my self identity before the 10 years then maybe I would be more comfortable on settling.

 

[DavidFilmer]

The word “vocation” comes from the Latin vocare (verb to call). Since we are all born single, there is no reason to “call” anyone to this state in life. We are all born into this state.

Yes, absolutely - good point. Singleness is not a vocation - we cannot “accept” that to which we are born - we have no choice in the matter.

It just means that single people were not called to leave their current state in life.

A vocation is something that is offered to us - we are not compelled to accept it. God offers everyone (who is capable of accepting it) a vocation in either marriage or a consecrated single life - these vocations are not denied to anyone who is willing and able to accept them.

People who are able but unwilling to accept such a vocation should not imagine that are somehow living some OTHER vocation by default.

 

[RosaryFan]

Yes, absolutely - good point. Singleness is not a vocation - we cannot “accept” that to which we are born - we have no choice in the matter.

A vocation is something that is offered to us - we are not compelled to accept it. God offers everyone (who is capable of accepting it) a vocation in either marriage or a consecrated single life - these vocations are not denied to anyone who is willing and able to accept them.

People who are able but unwilling to accept such a vocation should not imagine that are somehow living some OTHER vocation by default.

After reading the posts, I do understand, now, what you mean, by single not being a vocation. And I’m sure you are correct. HOWEVER, “single vocation” is not something we’ve all imagined because of a lack of acceptance of the other 2 vocations. This is something I, personally, was taught in my 12 years of Catholic education (figures, right?). So please do not accuse us unknowing fools of imagining something that was pounded into our heads over the years (I’m speaking for myself, here).

What I remember being taught is there are three vocations: (1) married; (2) religious; (3) single. In addition, I can’t tell you how many times I’ve heard people say over the years, “Don’t forget - ‘single’ is also a vocation…” So, I do not think I’m imagining this because of my unwillingness or inability to accept a vocation - because I am, in fact, married. I just learned (albeit, erroneously) that “single” was also a vocation.

 

[DavidFilmer]

So please do not accuse us unknowing fools of imagining something that was pounded into our heads over the years

Gosh, I never intended to accuse anyone of anything. A belief is either real or imaginary. If someone believes s/he is living an uncommitted single vocation - but there is actually no such thing - then the belief is not real (meaning it does not reflect reality) - it is imaginary. The belief might be heartfelt and sincere, but it is a belief in something that does not actually exist. That doesn’t mean people are foolish - only that they are mistaken.

Given three generations of substandard Catholic education and catechesis, it hardly surprises me that there is a lot of misinformation out there. Fortunately, as an adult convert, I was not exposed to any of this - I basically catechized myself (and my textbooks were written by people such as Ludwig Ott, Blessed John Henry Newman, and St. Thomas Aquinas). There are some advantages to being an adult convert in this day and age.

 

[DavidFilmer]

I am so sorry to everyone!!! I really did not mean to stir up such a debate.

Please don’t apologize. This is an apologetics forum - debate is what we do here. We debate Catholic teaching against non-Catholic teaching. You have done nothing wrong, and hopefully your question in this particular forum will have produced more thoughtful and orthodox answers for you to consider.

Each person has their own way of how they want to live and there is nothing wrong with this.

This is true, provided the person does not want to live a sinful life.

But such a single person is not living any sort of “vocation” that is recognized by the Catholic Church in living an ordinary, uncommitted secular life (ie, get up, go to work, come home, feed the dog, watch TV, and go to bed). Such an ordinary secular life is not any sort of “vocation” that is recognized by the Church.

I am in college and I dedicated at least 10 years to myself. I am taking these promised years and I am using them to better myself.

Then you have made your choice. But, in doing so, you have not accepted any sort of vocation that is recognized by the Catholic Church - you have committed yourself to yourself (for at least 10 years). This is not the ultimate vocation of (non-selfish) Love, which Pope John Paul II taught. It is perfectly OK for you to make this choice, but you should know that such a choice is not recognized as a vocation by the Catholic Church. You would live outside the Grace that the Church offers to anyone who is willing and able to accept the Grace of a committed relationship.

 

[Aelred_Minor]

I don’t take that for granted, and the Church does not teach it. God does not offer us a vocation which we could not possibly accept.

There is no equality in vocations. Some people have a vocation to the priesthood. Some to marriage. Some to a dedicated life of service. But nobody has a vocation to be single and uncommitted. There is no such thing.

Do I interpret you correctly in taking you to mean that some people simply have no vocation, that a vocation is by definition a calling out of unconsecrated single life, so those who must stay in unconsecrated single life simply are not given any vocation?

 

[thequeen]

Just for everyones information the Church does recognize that there are people called to the chaste celibate lifestyle and who are not called to the religious life. Some of Jesus’s best friends were sing Mary Martha and Lazarus.

 

[thequeen]

Well I asked a priest about this half an hour ago and he said its fine to be single.

The dear old priest who gave me instructions when I was converting to catholcism said the same thing.

 

[DavidFilmer]

Do I interpret you correctly in taking you to mean that some people simply have no vocation, that a vocation is by definition a calling out of unconsecrated single life, so those who must stay in unconsecrated single life simply are not given any vocation?

A vocation is not something that we are given - it is something that we are offered. We can choose to accept it or not. Acceptance is not required of anyone, and it is not evil or sinful to decline (but it is not righteous either).

Everyone who is able to accept a vocation to marriage or a consecrated single life is offered these vocations. There are extreme examples of people who are unable to accept such a vocation (severe mental problems, for example). This vocation is not available to such people because they are unable to accept it.

People who are able but unwilling to accept such a vocation are not living any type of vocation that is recognized by the Catholic Church - they have chosen to decline the offer. But the offer is always there.

 

[DavidFilmer]

Just for everyones information the Church does recognize that there are people called to the chaste celibate lifestyle and who are not called to the religious life.

Yes, I cited the teaching of the Church (Sacra Virginitas) which defines the concept of a “conescrated virgin” back in post #6. But there’s more to it then just being chaste and celibate and not living a sinful life - the person makes a private vow to God to remain this way in order to serve the people of God and attain greater spiritual sanctity. The person forsakes marriage only because it would be an impediment to the service that he or she is doing.

That’s not the same thing as a person who chooses to remain single and celibate but lives a life which is otherwise indistinguishable from the life of anyone else (ie, an ordinary, secular lifestyle). There is no vocation to be found in this choice.

 

[davidv]

Yes, I cited the teaching of the Church (Sacra Virginitas) which defines the concept of a “conescrated virgin” back in post #6. But there’s more to it then just being chaste and celibate and not living a sinful life - the person makes a private vow to God to remain this way in order to serve the people of God and attain greater spiritual sanctity. The person forsakes marriage only because it would be an impediment to the service that he or she is doing.

That’s not the same thing as a person who chooses to remain single and celibate but lives a life which is otherwise indistinguishable from the life of anyone else (ie, an ordinary, secular lifestyle). There is no vocation to be found in this choice.

As the CCC quotes provided earlier indicate, consecrated virgins are not the only valid single vocation.

Moreover this selection from the CCC gives no preference for consecration nor vowed religious.

Virginity for the sake of the Kingdom

1618 Christ is the center of all Christian life. The bond with him takes precedence over all other bonds, familial or social.113 From the very beginning of the Church there have been men and women who have renounced the great good of marriage to follow the Lamb wherever he goes, to be intent on the things of the Lord, to seek to please him, and to go out to meet the Bridegroom who is coming.114 Christ himself has invited certain persons to follow him in this way of life, of which he remains the model:
"For there are eunuchs who have been so from birth, and there are eunuchs who have been made eunuchs by men, and there are eunuchs who have made themselves eunuchs for the sake of the kingdom of heaven. He who is able to receive this, let him receive it."115
1619 Virginity for the sake of the kingdom of heaven is an unfolding of baptismal grace, a powerful sign of the supremacy of the bond with Christ and of the ardent expectation of his return, a sign which also recalls that marriage is a reality of this present age which is passing away.116
1620 Both the sacrament of Matrimony and virginity for the Kingdom of God come from the Lord himself. It is he who gives them meaning and grants them the grace which is indispensable for living them out in conformity with his will.117 Esteem of virginity for the sake of the kingdom118 and the Christian understanding of marriage are inseparable, and they reinforce each other:
Whoever denigrates marriage also diminishes the glory of virginity. Whoever praises it makes virginity more admirable and resplendent. What appears good only in comparison with evil would not be truly good. The most excellent good is something even better than what is admitted to be good.119

 

[DavidFilmer]

As the CCC quotes provided earlier indicate, consecrated virgins are not the only valid single vocation.

It’s the only single vocation that is recognized by the Church. I’ve quoted this before (#6) but some people apparently have not read the actual doctrine of the Church, so I will quote it again. Per Sacra Virginitas:

[Chastity] also flourishes among many who are lay people in the full sense: men and women who are not constituted in a public state of perfection and yet by private promise or vow completely abstain from marriage and sexual pleasures, in order to serve their neighbor more freely and to be united with God more easily and more closely.

In this vocation, chastity is a means to an end - which is service to the people of God and greater spiritual union with him. In this vocation, marriage would be an impediment to service and sanctity.

The Catechism (which is not doctrine) uses different language to say the same thing; it says “Virginity for the sake of the kingdom of heaven.” This is the ONLY single vocation that is recognized by the Catholic Church - there is no other (nor does the Catechism list any other type).

This is not the same thing as simply choosing to remain single. There is no vocation in such a choice.

 

[Bruised_Reed]

Not a church document but it quotes several: Is the Single Life a Vocation.

I think everyone has a vocation, perhaps to: Marriage (men and women), consecrated single (women only) religious life (men and women) and ordination (men only-I believe this includes the diaconate). But, not all will answer the call; not all vocations will lived out. I imagine there are some who were called to the religious life who got married instead, for example, but as Mary Beth wrote, God writes with straight with crooked lines.