'Singleness'

[BarbTherese]

the particular/unique vocation that is always under-girded by vows (of some sort) beyond the baptismal vows. 

An opinion if not what The Church states anywhere. The Dogmatic Constitution on The Church (Lumen Gentium) has a very lengthy and informative Chapter V on "The Universal Call to Holiness".  There is also Chapter IV "The Laity".

The evangelical counsels for instance are recommended to all states of life and in accord with their own state in life -  and many do live them out in the laity (both married and single) without any sort of vows or promises, nor is this necessary. Some in the laity may consciously strive to live a secular life marked by the evangelical counsels without making any sort of vows - I also know others who are obviously living such a life without being aware they are living a way of life marked by the evangelical counsels.  Some do make private vows perhaps to live a life marked by the counsels more radically than their state of life would normally require.

The Spirit moves as He Will and nowhere does The Church state that a personal and unique call from God must be undergirded by vows of some kind beyond the baptismal.  Not that I am aware of anyway.

Edited May 1, 2015 by BarbaraTherese

[Norseman82]

Barb,

No offense, but you are giving a lot of "document dumps" that have nothing to do with the question at hand.  The issue is this:  which "states of life" - married, ordained/religious, consecrated, or single - are official vocations?  Instead of confusing people with irrelevant "document dumps", could we please focus on this particular question?

[BarbTherese]

Thank you for the comments, N82 - and not offended at all :)

The original question in this thread was whether one needs to make private vows, or some sort of vow or vows, to remain in the single state as a vocation.   The question of the single state being a potential vocation was not really my issue, while having problems with assertions that it is not.

This was the response into Catholic Q and A which caused me concern (triggering my opening of this thread) which stated that the single life (chaste celibacy in the laity) was a vocation providing one made a vow or vows committing oneself to it.  :http://www.phatmass.com/phorum/topic/137310-vocation-to-singlehood/?do=findComment&comment=2723766   I quoted the various documents out of Rome to support my own response that one does not need to make any sort of vow or vows to remain in the single state and as one's vocation and call.  I was never so much interested in what personal opinions (theological debate) might be, as to what The Church had to state.

Since my last post, I have read that there is considerable theological per se debate over the question of the single state as a potential vocation with nothing settled  - hence I have since concluded that nothing would be settled in this thread either.  Apparently, however, Rome is considering the question and something providing clarity will be forthcoming in the foreseeable, perhaps making it possible for those who do feel called to the single state as vocation to make some sort of valid commitment.  Be this as it may, I still feel that vow or vows are not necessary, although if The Church should state that they are, then I would change my thoughts.

 

 

Edited May 3, 2015 by BarbaraTherese

[Norseman82]

Thank you for the comments, N82 - and not offended at all

The original question in this thread was whether one needs to make private vows, or some sort of vow or vows, to remain in the single state as a vocation.   The question of the single state being a potential vocation was not really my issue, while having problems with assertions that it is not.

This was the response into Catholic Q and A which caused me concern (triggering my opening of this thread) which stated that the single life (chaste celibacy in the laity) was a vocation providing one made a vow or vows committing oneself to it.  :http://www.phatmass.com/phorum/topic/137310-vocation-to-singlehood/?do=findComment&comment=2723766   I quoted the various documents out of Rome to support my own response that one does not need to make any sort of vow or vows to remain in the single state and as one's vocation and call.  I was never so much interested in what personal opinions (theological debate) might be, as to what The Church had to state.

Since my last post, I have read that there is considerable theological per se debate over the question of the single state as a potential vocation with nothing settled  - hence I have since concluded that nothing would be settled in this thread either.  Apparently, however, Rome is considering the question and something providing clarity will be forthcoming in the foreseeable, perhaps making it possible for those who do feel called to the single state as vocation to make some sort of valid commitment.  Be this as it may, I still feel that vow or vows are not necessary, although if The Church should state that they are, then I would change my thoughts.

 

 

​OK, but whether it's called "vows" or "some sort of valid committment", aren't we referring to the same thing - something that "locks us in" permanently, such as the vows married people make or the vows/promises made by ordained/religious/consecrated people? 

[BarbTherese]

Hi again Norseman - I feel that I can state that there is nothing that officially "locks us in" permanently to the lay state of life outside Baptismal vows or a private vow or vow that does lock one in, but then there is nothing to my knowledge that The Church states that a "vocation" per se must be defined by vows outside of the Baptismal vows which will lock the person into a specific state of life.  To my mind Holy Orders, the consecrated state and marriage exist in Canon Law in their own right because they do demand duties outside of the ordinary lay state (chaste celibacy).  They are special states of life in The Church drawn from but outside of the chaste celibate state in the laity. In fact, personally I cannot see how The Church can submit a Document(s) addressing specifically the laity as a specific and clearly defined vocation and then at some future date state that the lay state is not a vocation per se. ("Vocation and Mission of The Laity" 1988) - to mention only one Document.

I could quote more. But in deference to you, I will not

  I have taken a quite active interest in the lay vocation and related Church documents since the lay state is my own vocation.  But then again, I am certainly not any sort of theologian.

I think probably the theological debate is or will be centred on what constitutes a vocation per se.  I can certainly quote a rather lengthy document by a theologian which does specify the criteria for vocation per se and that the lay state meets this criteria.  The author is Fr John A Hardon SJ (decd)who was  a renowned theologian in The Church of the 20/21st century and was a major contributor to our Catholic Catechism post VII. I know that you don't particular like quotations although I have no idea what "dumped" means.  I always prefer to check out my thoughts with what The Church might have to state and I will quote with links for the benefit of others if they wish.  If they don't wish then they can simply ignore the quotes.

As I have stated, I am personally resigned that this thread (from what I have read since starting it) will probably resolve nothing in light of the continuing theological debates on the question or questions.  If theologians in The Church do not agree, I doubt we will, although not an impossibility just an unlikely.

[BarbTherese]

The moment a person is baptised they are locked into the lay state of life (celibate chastity) and as their vocation with its attendant duties and for life - unless God should call them out of that state into some other special state of life in The Church, which will have its own attendant duties and indeed, life vows.

Where private vows are concerned in the lay state, very often it is a vow or vow locking the person into something that is more demanding than their celibate chaste state in the laity would demand.

Edited May 4, 2015 by BarbaraTherese

[bardegaulois]

Forgive me if I'm a little confused here. I think that you're drawing too close a correspondence between baptism and the lay state, not even to mention celibacy being drawn into the equation. Nowhere in any magisterial documents nor in any theological writings have I seen the two correlated in that way. If baptism makes one lay, then are priests or religious, who are no longer lay, no longer baptized? Of course not. Can we say that the universal call to holiness underpins the lay vocation and state of life, whether that is expressed through marriage or celibacy? Absolutely. However, we can also say that it underpins every other particular vocation in the Church.

I think Truthfinder got it spot-on in drawing a good distinction between our general vocation received through the waters of baptism and the particular vocation to which the individual soul must respond. When you inquire about singleness or lay celibacy, you're talking about something quite particular, not something general. Perhaps when you can clarify what its particularities are, not falling back about generalities that are simply true of all states of life, then the question as to whether it is a vocation (that it is a state of life is beyond doubt) will be much more pointed and will show a good angle to approach the question.

[BarbTherese]

 If baptism makes one lay, then are priests or religious, who are no longer lay, no longer baptized? Of course not.

 When you inquire about singleness or lay celibacy, you're talking about something quite particular, not something general.

Gosh, nowhere have I stated for sure or even hinted that priests or religious are no longer baptized!!!!!   What I have stated is that some (not all) are called to quite special states of life and vocations in The Church: i.e. Holy Orders, Matrimony or Consecrated Life.

Baptism underpins all the states of life and vocations in The Church. 

 Those baptised are called specifically to chaste celibacy in the laity unless God calls them to one of the other states in life i.e. Holy Orders, Marriage or Consecrated life (incorporates religious life, consecrated virginity, hermits under Canon 603 and secular institutes).

In the laity, there are two groups.  The celibate laity and the married laity.  The celibate laity are called to chaste celibacy, while the married are called to married chastity.   Both groups are lay states but only one group is called personally and in a particular and personal manner (as you have stated above) to remain in the laity and chaste celibacy - and I have read that this latter call is probably not a common one.  It is the obligation of all the baptised to seek God's Will and particularly for their state in life or the life road they are to take striving for holiness.  Certainly, discernment is a very serious matter and not to be taken lightly - with prayer and sound spiritual advice.  In my case it was not taken lightly but prayerfully and affirmed by very sound spiritual direction all along the way and still ongoing (I am now over 30 years with private vows in the laity).   My vocation affirmed now by two Archbishops.  I do not at all think I am alone in a vocation to celibate chastity in the laity - nor do I think that I had to make private vows in order to do so.......it is simply the way I was called over 30years ago now.

If I were to summarise : it is the laity that are called to be as their duty specifically in the world for the world immersed in temporal affairs and secular life and striving always in all things temporal and secular to "seek the Kingdom of God......according to the Plan of God" in the strictly temporal and secular.  Holy Orders does not have this duty, neither does consecrated life - not as a defined duty of their state in life. Both these latter states probably do venture into the temporal and secular even often but not as a defined duty of their state to do so as with the laity.

I am unsure about the consecrated secular institutes and what the criteria of their vocations might be.

-----------"30. Having set forth the functions of the hierarchy, the Sacred Council gladly turns its attention. to the state of those faithful called the laity. Everything that has been said above concerning the People of God is intended for the laity, religious and clergy alike. But there are certain things which pertain in a special way to the laity, both men and women, by reason of their condition and mission. Due to the special circumstances of our time the foundations of this doctrine must be more thoroughly examined. For their pastors know how much the laity contribute to the welfare of the entire Church. ".

LUMEN GENTIUM "Dogmatic Constitution on The Church" ......"........ the laity, by their very vocation, seek the kingdom of God by engaging in temporal affairs and by ordering them according to the plan of God. They live in the world, that is, in each and in all of the secular professions and occupations. They live in the ordinary circumstances of family and social life, from which the very web of their existence is woven. They are called there by God that by exercising their proper function and led by the spirit of the Gospel they may work for the sanctification of the world from within as a leaven. In this way they may make Christ known to others, especially by the testimony of a life resplendent in faith, hope and charity. Therefore, since they are tightly bound up in all types of temporal affairs it is their special task to order and to throw light upon these affairs in such a way that they may come into being and then continually increase according to Christ to the praise of the Creator and the Redeemer.

Edited May 4, 2015 by BarbaraTherese

[BarbTherese]

Forgive me if I'm a little confused here. I think that you're drawing too close a correspondence between baptism and the lay state, not even to mention celibacy being drawn into the equation. Nowhere in any magisterial documents nor in any theological writings have I seen the two correlated in that way. If baptism makes one lay, then are priests or religious, who are no longer lay, no longer baptized? Of course not. Can we say that the universal call to holiness underpins the lay vocation and state of life, whether that is expressed through marriage or celibacy? Absolutely. However, we can also say that it underpins every other particular vocation in the Church.

 

​Very obviously when one is baptised one is then in the lay state and called to celibate chastity by virtue of one's Baptism into the laity which has its own Church-defined duties.  It might be that one is called to another special state of life and vocation in The Church and Baptism underpins all of of them : Holy Orders, Matrimony or Consecrated Life.  I cannot see the problem with correlating matters as I have.  I can't see anything contradictory nor invalid.

[BarbTherese]

Catholic Culture Dictionary

The state of being unmarried and, in Church usage, of one who has never been married. Catholicism distinguishes between lay and ecclesiastical celibacy, and in both cases a person freely chooses for religious reasons to remain celibate.

Lay celibacy was practiced already in the early Church. The men were called "the continent" (continentes) and women "virgins" (virgines). They were also known as ascetics who were encouraged to follow this form of life by St. Paul. According to the Apostle, "An unmarried man can devote himself to the Lord's affairs, all he need worry about is pleasing the Lord . . . In the same way an unmarried woman, like a young girl, can devote herself to the Lord's affairs; all she need worry about is being holy in body and spirit" (I Corinthians 7:32, 34). Throughout history the Church has fostered a celibate life in the lay state. Towering among the means of sanctity available to the laity, declared the Second Vatican Council, "is that precious gift of divine grace given to some by the Father to devote themselves to God alone more easily with an undivided heart in virginity or celibacy. This perfect continence for love of the kingdom of heaven has always been held in high esteem by the Church as a sign and stimulus of love, and as a singular source of spiritual fertility in the world" (Constitution on the Church, 42)."

[bardegaulois]

 Those baptised are called specifically to chaste celibacy in the laity unless God calls them to one of the other states in life i.e. Holy Orders, Marriage or Consecrated life (incorporates religious life, consecrated virginity, hermits under Canon 603 and secular institutes).

​So then are you arguing that "chaste celibacy in the laity," as you call it, is the general vocation, of which all other vocations and states of life are particular expressions? And if it be general, so correlated in your thinking with baptism as it is, then you must be implying that it cannot therefore be a particular vocation, as it cannot be both the general category as well as a specific example. Are you so implying?

[BarbTherese]

​So then are you arguing that "chaste celibacy in the laity," as you call it, is the general vocation, of which all other vocations and states of life are particular expressions? And if it be general, so correlated in your thinking with baptism as it is, then you must be implying that it cannot therefore be a particular vocation, as it cannot be both the general category as well as a specific example. Are you so implying?

​All due respect, bardegaulois,  but I think we are now starting to go round in circles.  I have quoted quite a few Church Documents that state that the laity is a vocation and if one disagrees with what The Church states, then our thinking can never meet.

Everyone has the general call to holiness which is inclusive in all vocations.  The particular call is to that road one is invited to take to holiness.  The particular road once one is baptised is lay celibacy and to follow Jesus and His Gospel - in accord with what The Church tells us about this vocation and call including what  Canon Law states on the Laity.  We might be called to another road or vocation and taken out of the laity to undertake a special state of life in The Church  or we may not - and other roads or vocations contain other duties to that of the laity.  ("Vocation and Mission of The Laity in The Church and in The World"  "Christifideles Laici" John Paul II Dec 1988)

We are not baptised willy nilly as it were.  We are baptised because we are receiving a vocation and call from God.

 

DOGMATIC CONSTITUION ON  THE CHURCH "What specifically characterizes the laity is their secular nature. It is true that those in holy orders can at times be engaged in secular activities, and even have a secular profession. But they are by reason of their particular vocation especially and professedly ordained to the sacred ministry. Similarly, by their state in life, religious give splendid and striking testimony that the world cannot be transformed and offered to God without the spirit of the beatitudes. But the laity, by their very vocation, seek the kingdom of God by engaging in temporal affairs and by ordering them according to the plan of God. They live in the world, that is, in each and in all of the secular professions and occupations. They live in the ordinary circumstances of family and social life, from which the very web of their existence is woven. They are called there by God that by exercising their proper function and led by the spirit of the Gospel they may work for the sanctification of the world from within as a leaven."

 

Edited May 5, 2015 by BarbaraTherese

[BarbTherese]

​So then are you arguing that "chaste celibacy in the laity," as you call it, is the general vocation, of which all other vocations and states of life are particular expressions? And if it be general, so correlated in your thinking with baptism as it is, then you must be implying that it cannot therefore be a particular vocation, as it cannot be both the general category as well as a specific example. Are you so implying?

Holy Orders, Consecrated Life and also Marriage are special states of life in The Church and since they are calls to holiness (general category) in a particular manner (specific category), they all fall into both the general and specific categories............as does the laity.  Everyone has a vocation - and it will be either Holy Orders, Consecrated Life, Marriage or Chaste Lay Celibacy (single life).

"  "general and specific vocations" are elements of personal vocations."  Zenit https://www.ewtn.com/library/Theology/ZVOCATIO.HTM

Edited May 5, 2015 by BarbaraTherese

[bardegaulois]

Holy Orders, Consecrated Life and also Marriage are special states of life in The Church and since they are calls to holiness (general category) in a particular manner (specific category), they all fall into both the general and specific categories............as does the laity.  Everyone has a vocation - and it will be either Holy Orders, Consecrated Life, Marriage or Chaste Lay Celibacy (single life).

​So now you are saying that the general vocation, coming through baptism, is not to lay celibacy but to holiness, something that accords more with every catechism I've read, and that the clerical, religious or consecrated, and married states are specific vocations into which one might be called to live out that general vocation. I'm not disagreeing with you so far. However, you do not indicate lay celibacy as a specific vocation. Why is that? You began asking if lay celibacy was an official vocation; we need first to determine what it is specifically as a vocation, if it is a vocation, before we can even address the question of its officiality.

With respect, I think the questions that others and I are asking here are very direct, and, as this is a matter about which many are quite dubious, ought to be asked and discussed in order to have a better and more fruitful understanding. If you don't want this to go around in circles, perhaps you could answer them somewhat more directly?

[BarbTherese]

At times you are either misquoting and/or misunderstanding what I have posted.

I have already quoted Church Documents clearly and emphatically stating that the chaste celibate state in the laity is indeed a vocation and included in these documents are the duties of this vocation. If it is asserted that the chaste celibate state in the laity is not a vocation -  then it is contrary to what The Church states.  If you want to disagree with The Church, your problem.  If "others are dubious" about chaste lay celibacy as a vocation, then they too are disagreeing with The Church and I sure know in which I would invest and whose opinions I would dismiss.

 I do not intend to go round in circles.

You began asking if lay celibacy was an official vocation

If you you read my opening post again - this is only one statement where you have misread and misunderstood my posts  since I never asked a question at all -  and it had nothing at all to do with the chaste lay state as an official vocation other than in passing and as a statement - no question posed at all.  It was related to private vows and I did not pose a question, rather I made a statement.

 

 

 

[BarbTherese]

​So now you are saying that the general vocation, coming through baptism, is not to lay celibacy but to holiness, something that accords more with every catechism I've read, and that the clerical, religious or consecrated, and married states are specific vocations into which one might be called to live out that general vocation

 According to the Constitution of The Church, all mankind is called to unity with Christ (holiness) - baptism establishes the baptised person in the vocational chaste celibate lay state in which they remain unless called to another state of life.  Some might be so called, others not - and if not called into another state of life, their personal vocation continues as the chaste celibate lay state.

You statement in the above quotation box is a misquote - if, I am presuming only, that in the above you do mean The Catholic Catechism :

http://www.scborromeo.org/ccc/p123a9p4.htm#898

898 "By reason of their special vocation it belongs to the laity to seek the kingdom of God by engaging in temporal affairs and directing them according to God's will. . . . It pertains to them in a special way so to illuminate and order all temporal things with which they are closely associated that these may always be effected and grow according to Christ and maybe to the glory of the Creator and Redeemer."⁴³¹

Edited May 6, 2015 by BarbaraTherese

[BarbTherese]

​

With respect, I think the questions that others and I are asking here are very direct, and, as this is a matter about which many are quite dubious, ought to be asked and discussed in order to have a better and more fruitful understanding. If you don't want this to go around in circles, perhaps you could answer them somewhat more directly?

Problems with accessing Phatmass normally.  I hope this will post ok.

It is a few days since anyone posted other than you and I, bardegaulois ............ and with respect I'm not going back over old posts and posts which I have already addressed.  I am presuming that other members who have dropped out of this thread, and not posted again for a few days, have their questions are answered to their satisfaction.

Whoever wants to disagree with what The Church is teaching, not my problem and I am not going to take it on board nor travel in a circle. It is a complete waste of time - I have done what I can quoting several Church Documents as well as the Catholic Catechism to support my own concepts.  Nowhere to date has any poster into this thread quoted where The Church states that only Holy Orders, Consecrated Life and Matrimony are vocations - and that the chaste celibate state in the Laity is not; whereas I  have quoted Church Documents and the Catechism which state that the chaste celibate lay state (single life) is indeed a vocation and what the duties of the vocation actually are. Therefore, opinions to the contrary are personal opinions only to which all are entitled.  I however adhere to what The Church teaches.

​

[bardegaulois]

You have only spoken about the general vocation of the baptized (encompassing all Christians) and the general vocation of the laity (encompassing the married as well), with ample and perhaps excessive citations. You have not, however, addressed any definition of the specific vocation to lay celibacy, its rights, its duties, and so forth, beyond those general either to all Christians or to all laymen. If you wish to progress on this issue, that is what you'll need to do. Our attempts to shepherd you through this with leading questions just seem to be agitating you. If you're unable or unwilling to do this, then please do admit it to yourself and understand that you are talking about either the vocation of all the baptized or the vocation of the laity, not the specific vocation of the lay celibate.

[BarbTherese]

 

   

POST-SYNODAL
APOSTOLIC EXHORTATION
CHRISTIFIDELES LAICI
OF
HIS HOLINESS
JOHN PAUL II
ON THE VOCATION AND THE MISSION
OF THE LAY FAITHFUL
IN THE CHURCH AND IN THE WORLD

http://w2.vatican.va/content/john-paul-ii/en/apost_exhortations/documents/hf_jp-ii_exh_30121988_christifideles-laici.html

  Precisely with this in mind the Synod Fathers said: "The secular character of the lay faithful is not therefore to be defined only in a sociological sense, but most especially in a theological sense. The term secular must be understood in light of the act of God the creator and redeemer, who has handed over the world to women and men, so that they may participate in the work of creation, free creation from the influence of sin and sanctify themselves in marriage or the celibate life, in a family, in a profession and in the various activities of society"(39).                                                           

​

[bardegaulois]

Yes, the laity has a vocation, and laypersons can be either married or celibate. We established that long ago. Let me ask my question again, as directly as I possibly can.

I am asking about the specific vocation of the lay celibate, not about the more general vocation of the laity. Married persons are laypersons as well, as yet their duties are quite more specific than the general vocation of the laity, as I'm sure we all know. Please tell me the "definition of the specific vocation to lay celibacy, its rights, its duties, and so forth, beyond those general either to all Christians or to all laymen."

If I'm not being clear, then I'd ask that someone observing this conversation kindly let me know. Thank you.