"single life" and private vows

[adoro.te.devote]

I'd appreciate any help - I'm getting so confused researching this! 

There is the undedicated single life, while people are living out their Baptismal call while hoping for marriage or discerning their path in life. 

Then, there are other single people, who have made a lifelong commitment to chastity for the Kingdom. Let's say they couldn't enter a religious community, or were called to remain in the world with a vow, like St Catherine of Siena and other Saints.

When I think about it, these people have vowed their chastity to God, and chose Him instead of a human spouse. I know they are still called "single" because the commitment was private, or because they are unmarried.. but isn't there a difference, are they truly single? 

I'm trying to live in this way and I feel like I've given myself to God... being "single" to me implies being available, not having made a gift of oneself to God or another person, yet. Since I'm not "available" anymore, I've noticed that it feels really counterintuitive to call myself "single". 

I can think for example of St Kateri Tekakwitha, who lived with a private vow, and she said that she chose Jesus as her only Spouse. There are soo many Saints like this. It's hard to think of them as single, because they gave themselves in God in a spousal way?? I've read in some books on vocations that for women, the giving of self in chastity has a spousal character, because it is especially suited to women. I know it's something private and not official, but there is a gift of the self that happens. To me, "single" implies that one is available.

What are we to think of this, and what does the Church say? 

Edited November 8, 2020 by adoro.te.devote

[Lilllabettt]

1 hour ago, adoro.te.devote said:

I'd appreciate any help - I'm getting so confused researching this! 

There is the undedicated single life, while people are living out their Baptismal call while hoping for marriage or discerning their path in life. 

Then, there are other single people, who have made a lifelong commitment to chastity for the Kingdom. Let's say they couldn't enter a religious community, or were called to remain in the world with a vow, like St Catherine of Siena and other Saints.

When I think about it, these people have vowed their chastity to God, and chose Him instead of a human spouse. I know they are still called "single" because the commitment was private, or because they are unmarried.. but isn't there a difference, are they truly single? 

I'm trying to live in this way and I feel like I've given myself to God... being "single" to me implies being available, not having made a gift of oneself to God or another person, yet. Since I'm not "available" anymore, I've noticed that it feels really counterintuitive to call myself "single". 

I can think for example of St Kateri Tekakwitha, who lived with a private vow, and she said that she chose Jesus as her only Spouse. There are soo many Saints like this. It's hard to think of them as single, because they gave themselves in God in a spousal way?? I've read in some books on vocations that for women, the giving of self in chastity has a spousal character, because it is especially suited to women. I know it's something private and not official, but there is a gift of the self that happens. To me, "single" implies that one is available.

What are we to think of this, and what does the Church say? 

Private vows are a form of consecration. They aren't treated as consecrated in terms of canon law... because they are private, between the individual and God. 

I think the closest thing that would be an "official" form of consecrated life would be secular institutes. Although they do obedience and poverty as well as celibacy, which doesn't gel well imo with private vows. ( With private vows theres no one to vow obedience to. One might have a spiritual director but it's usually imprudent to vow to obey them. Because with private vows there is no canonical oversight or redress if your spiritual director turns out to be irresponsible or abusive to you as a privately vowed individual under his "authority." Which once again, he has none, because the Church doesn't have anything to do with giving people authority to accept private vows. They are private. )

But once again, private vows are a legit way one gives oneself in a stable permanent way to God, forsaking all others.

Now, if you are still discerning and haven't made the final decision, that's different. You're in the same category as a woman who is in a serious relationship with the expectation of marriage. Not quite engaged but nearly, and definitely not on the market either. 

 

[Anastasia]

1 hour ago, adoro.te.devote said:

I'm trying to live in this way and I feel like I've given myself to God... being "single" to me implies being available, not having made a gift of oneself to God or another person, yet. Since I'm not "available" anymore, I've noticed that it feels really counterintuitive to call myself "single". 

To others or to yourself?

I wrote the response below before Lilllabettt answered and now I have no idea if I understand your original post correctly; probably not. But here it is, just in case.

------------------------------

Each Christian is a bride of Christ. In this sense they cannot be called “single” yet if they do not have a human spouse they are called “single”.

Nuns and monks are clearly single. In Russian the words “nun” and “monk” are “monahinja” and “monah” from Greek work “monos”, one, single. Yet it is a custom in Russia to refer to any nun as “a bride of Christ”.

At the same time, many female saints were married (not single) and yet they felt they were mystically espoused to Christ, so as some men. Did they have two spouses?

A single person is someone who does not have an earthly (visible) spouse. Yet the same single person who is surrendered to God is clearly not single, in an inner sense.

[I am speaking as an Orthodox though]

Edited November 9, 2020 by Anastasia

[Guest]

When I first made private vows, I was over 35 years younger.  If anyone wanted to know, I said I was in a committed relationship.  I never had problems - if anyone wanted to engage in conversation past the fact that I was committed, I was quite polite. I have never had problems with another person and renewing my vows at a Home Mass informed those that wondered why I did not date and had not remarried.

In my own rule of life, I have spelt out how to live out poverty and also obedience, which is obedience to my rule of life with a focus on Divine Providence.  If perhaps thought that is easy - try it . Obedience to my rule is not as demanding possibly as obedience in religious life although it is nothing like it used to be, but my rule on poverty is very radical indeed.  My rule focuses also on conversion of heart.

There is no third party other than the rule (which embraces The Church of course) in my obedience i.e. no vow to a spiritual director or some sort of superior, no other person at all.  I always discussed how I was going with my rule with my SD at each visit.  At times he would offer advice, which was always just that i.e. with no mandate to take up advice offered.

My rule uses each petition of The Our Father as a heading for how that petition is to be lived out.  To me, The Our Father is a total rule of life.

Edited November 9, 2020 by BarbaraTherese

[Guest]

____________

It was while psychiatry was still trying to make up its mind about which mental illness I suffered that I learnt not to be concerned about tags (what people called me).  A tag or name etc. is just that and does not mean that it is correct.

Hence, I am not concerned about the tags given to private vows to the evangelical counsels in the Laity.  Both with mental illness and also private vows etc. it is to search for a compartment into which a person will fit.   I may present my own concept or concepts but in the final analysis a private vow(s) is between the person and The Lord.  It is their relationship no matter what tag it is given.

Take good heart, ATD, cling to The Lord in all things and things will become clear in time, His Time, not ours.  Clarity will come too as to why one has had to wait so long.  Keep asking your questions and seeking answers while clinging to Him accepting His Way of doing things and if that is problematic - believe it or not, He is doing things.

I used to say that I was knocking on Heaven's Employment Office door for situations vacant - but it never opens.

[Guest]

While to vow to the evangelical counsels takes up the same vows that religious make, private vows is not at all religious life as traditionally lived out - nor does one strive to follow traditional religious life.  One strives to follow the Poor, Chaste and Obedient One and more radically than what is the duty of those in the Laity, who are called to poverty, chastity and obedience too as baptised persons.  Vowed poverty, chastity and obedience adopts a more radical way of life, building on their baptism.

Apologies for three posts.  Sometimes thoughts on a subject do not come to me immediately, nor have I ever had the gift of conciseness.

[Anastasia]

adoro.te.devote

For whatever reason, I am still thinking about your message. It is probably because I am use to analyze and it seems to me that there is deep underlying reason for ongoing research and topics which all seem to be about “is it a true vocation?”, “is it real?”, “can I really do that?” or something g like that. I apologize if I am imagining things – I actually want to help (just like others here). In my experience, it is impossible to settle no matter how many vows, promises etc. one makes unless the reason for an anxiety is dealt with. (For example, I read that young Luther would run into a confessional immediately after he left it so his confessors used to hide from him.)

I knew a person who was given a grace of a spousal relationship with Christ. Yet, the abuse she experienced when she was very young made her doubt herself and constantly seek reassurance from others (not just about spiritual things but also mundane things in the realm of human relationships). She felt that her relationship with the Lord somehow had to be “confirmed” via some externals. But no matter what she did she still would come to the same condition. The only solution here is a total surrender to God, complete “let go” (same works with scruples). Our psyche and personal history colours our relationship with God and even twists it, in some cases.

Research is useful, for the sake of placing own situation into a context and learning from others. In my experience, identifying a suitable spirituality (like Carmelite in my case) gives an excellent frame and a rule. I think a rule is especially important for people with anxiety, so as a confessor/spiritual father. But all those things are secondary to a relationship with Christ so I think the best to concentrate on Him and on your attachment to Him, no matter what is called and not care about how others would define it. Why can define those things if it is something that takes a place between a soul and God?

Finally, in a book ‘Can Christianity Cure Obsessive-Compulsive Disorder” the author, Ian Osborn says something I find very useful: scruples and anxiety and OCD are caused by enormous sense of own responsibility. Shift/share a responsibility and they lessen. Then it makes a sense to say to Our Lord “You caused in me that response to You so it is not just my responsibility. I believe You will tell me if I am mistaken” – and then just go on trusting that He will.

No one can be mistaken if they give themselves completely to God (I mean in their decision to do so). He will guide and fix mistakes made by a person on a path, turning them into something with a value.

[Guest]

Really excellent response from Anastasia.........especially: 

Quote

"it makes a sense to say to Our Lord “You caused in me that response to You so it is not just my responsibility. I believe You will tell me if I am mistaken” – and then just go on trusting that He will.  (I mean in their decision to do so). He will guide and fix mistakes made by a person on a path, turning them into something with a value.

No one can be mistaken if they give themselves completely to God (I mean in their decision to do so).  He will guide and fix mistakes made by a person on a path, turning them into something with value.

As I stated, a really excellent response.   

My tuppence....again ..........total and absolute trust in The Lord cannot and will not ever take one astray.  How could it! Take good heart, ATD, I had many questions and confusions when I first started out.  You are on a journey with The Lord, a discernment journey.  The Lord can indeed write very straight in very crooked lines.  Cling to Him and all will eventually be made clear to you.  "Knock and the door will open"..... problem is that He has not stated how long to knock.  The first quality of Love, as St Paul states, is "patience".

Prayer for you and blessings on your journey, ATD.  And may The Lord grant you clarity soon.

Edited November 9, 2020 by BarbaraTherese

[adoro.te.devote]

Thank you for the kind responses!  they've all been helpful - thanks to Lilllabettt, Anastasia and Barbara 

Anastasia, I think I understand what you mean about there being another definition of "single" - in the way that nuns are single, or alone, rather - alone with God. That makes sense. I think there might be two ways of using the word "single" - i meant the one where we are not committed to a relationship. 

Regarding your other post, I actually do struggle with scruples and anxiety, and just to be honest, my discernment path has been kind of rough. I know that I want to give myself to God in chastity, but the particular way to do this / sense of my unworthiness, often get in the way. Hopefully God could help me heal more over time with this.. God bless you!