Consecrated life higher than marriage?

[Alison]

Okay y’all, if you struggle with trusting in God’s love for you this might not be the post for you to read. 

 

Hello all,

I have realized that the thought of being married disturbs me, because the Church does teach that consecrated life is a higher state than marriage. I hear all these things about how consecrated souls give their "whole selves" to God and serve Him with an "undivided heart". I become sad when I think God’s plan for my life may be marriage, because I want to love Him with my whole heart and give Him everything. I don’t want the leftovers of His love, I don’t want to feel like I’m on the back burner and not as loved by Him. I get so confused though because the Bible clearly teaches we’re all supposed to love God with our whole hearts. I just want union and intimacy with the Lord, I want to love nothing but Him or for His sake, I want to be a saint…but I also feel like my vocation might well be marriage and I’m so confused about it all. Like I know there are married saints who were very close to God but I’m confused helppppppppp
 

I feel like I’m getting something wrong here, but I just don’t know what so I figured I’d ask others for input on all this. 

[Lou]

I think it might help you to read Lumen Gentium https://www.vatican.va/archive/hist_councils/ii_vatican_council/documents/vat-ii_const_19641121_lumen-gentium_en.html and know that lay people participate in the fullness of the priesthood given by Christ and that this, in itself, is a beautiful gift and a vocation and call.

 

You will be closest to God in whatever your vocation is. Aquinas describes religious life as a more 'perfect' state, but the reality is: if the Lord is calling you to marriage, it is in THIS way that you will have greatest intimacy with him. If you decide to be a Sister/Nun just because it's traditionally viewed as the way of perfection to Divine love, and not because God is calling you, you will just be... well, bitter and angry and unhappy and probably not loving of God at all! Whatever God is asking of you is what He made you for and is how you will love Him best. If that's as a wife and mother, then that's where your intimacy with Him lies. That's where your complete gift of self will be. 

I've heard Catholic couples speak of how in the Eucharist, it's said 'This is my body, given up for you' and how for them, this is true in their spousal union. They each give of themselves constantly, to each other, to their children- but ultimately to God. The gift of themselves does not stop at the human person to whom they are giving, it goes further and transcends as a gift to God. God is still their first love and in many ways, marriage is a miracle! Graced by Christ. It's a sacrament.

Then though, if the idea of marriage is unattractive to you, that might be God's way of showing you that you ARE called to Religious life. He often makes us more attracted to whatever we are called to. He shapes the desires of our hearts. But both the lay vocation and the Religious vocation, lived well and with love of the Church, are real and true paths to sanctity if they are lived in union with God.

[GraceUk]

I agree with Lou.,Whatever state God calls you to is the holiest way for you. Look at Zelie and Louis Martin. If they hadn't got married we wouldn't have Saint Therese.   Have you visited or contacted any communities. Why not think about going on a vocations retreat. Quite a few communities run them. Keep your mind open. 

[gloriana35]

11 hours ago, Alison said:

I become sad when I think God’s plan for my life may be marriage, because I want to love Him with my whole heart and give Him everything. I don’t want the leftovers of His love, I don’t want to feel like I’m on the back burner and not as loved by Him.

I don't know if this is as common today (and I dearly hope it is not), but what Alison posted reminded me of a dreary attitude some people I knew had fifty years ago (or more) - as if 'what we want' cannot be 'what God wants.' Alison, if you do not want to be married, God isn't a trickster who'll force you into this. Just referring to your own quotation - how could 'God's plan' for you be anything that would prevent you from loving him with your whole heart - or be 'leftovers' of his love - or less loved by Him? 

 

In general, I'm very sorry that, perhaps since around 1970, there have been misinterpretations of the 'universal call to holiness.' Indeed, that calling is universal - and many of the major conflicts in the earliest centuries of Christianity were founded on concepts of what was in accord with this calling. But it was very unfortunate that the idea that the only calling is baptism made some Religious think that their vowed life had no particular value. 

 

Do you know right from wrong? Do you fulfil your responsibilities? Then, you are doing nothing contrary to God's will. You need to discern in which manner you will best love God and neighbour, but you sound so fearful and wound up that you just might need a breather. I'm not a spiritual director, but it's possible that, for the time being, you might need to focus on a disciplined prayer life and worship. People should not seek religious life because they fear any alternative would mean they were less loved or having 'leftovers,' but neither should they marry because they think God wants them to sacrifice what they believe to be their calling. (Yes, this is anecdotal - but there were people I knew personally who lived to regret marrying 'to do God's will', and 'as a sacrifice.' Such did exist - and those devoted to Therese were most prone to such mistakes.) 

 

 

[Dymphna]

14 hours ago, Alison said:

 the Church does teach that consecrated life is a higher state than marriage.

I'd be interested in your source for this. I'm a theologian, and AFAIK, the Church does NOT teach this, at least since Vatican II. There are certainly a lot of people around who express thoughts like the ones you cite ("undivided heart" etc.), but for all I know, official Church teaching makes it very clear that there is no state of life (as in marriage, single life or consecrated life) which is per se higher than another. You got this totally right with your impression that the Bible teaches we are all called to love God with all we are and have. Maybe you just read some older material which gave you a misleading impression?

[Alison]

14 minutes ago, Dymphna said:

I'd be interested in your source for this. I'm a theologian, and AFAIK, the Church does NOT teach this, at least since Vatican II. There are certainly a lot of people around who express thoughts like the ones you cite ("undivided heart" etc.), but for all I know, official Church teaching makes it very clear that there is no state of life (as in marriage, single life or consecrated life) which is per se higher than another. You got this totally right with your impression that the Bible teaches we are all called to love God with all we are and have. Maybe you just read some older material which gave you a misleading impression?

St. Thomas Aquinas did express however that consecrated life is more perfect. I think it would be possible for both vocations to enable someone to live God with their whole heart, while one still being objectively more perfect maybe. 

[Dymphna]

8 minutes ago, Alison said:

St. Thomas Aquinas did express however that consecrated life is more perfect. I think it would be possible for both vocations to enable someone to live God with their whole heart, while one still being objectively more perfect maybe. 

Yes, Thomas Aquinas did so, and with him the theology of consecrated life - until Vaticanum II. Lumen Gentium, as Lou pointed out, clarified this and gave it a new direction: The question is no longer "how do I (the individual) become a more perfect person?", but "what is the specific task of consecrated persons in the people of God?" - and that task is, to be a sign. A sign that reminds of Jesus' life, a sign that a lot of stuff (material things, careers, even a spouse) is unnecessary in the reign of God.

So, we are asked to strive no longer for perfection as individuals, but for the best possible way in which we can be helpful for each other. That's how I understand it. It doesn't solve the problem completely though, because if consecrated persons are signs, then is this not again a "better" way of life than being not consecrated? Therefore, I like your thougth that maybe there is an objective "more perfect", but for an individual it always is the better way to follow one's own vocation.

Sorry if I sound a bit confusing, welcome to the limits of my knowldedge of English ?

[Lady Grey, Hot]

6 hours ago, gloriana35 said:

as if 'what we want' cannot be 'what God wants.' Alison, if you do not want to be married, God isn't a trickster who'll force you into this.

Not the OP, of course, but I just wanted to say that I found this really encouraging. Thank you.

[JHFamily]

10 hours ago, Lou said:

You will be closest to God in whatever your vocation is.

⭐

... and our inmost desires are often an indication of where our vocations lay.

[gloriana35]

People still say it - but I have to bite my tongue whenever anyone says, "Not what you want - what God wants...", or some variation. Of course, in any vocation or field, there may be circumstances where we do not achieve a goal - but that is the way of the world, not some divine hand pushing a button. I've known all too many people who thought whatever makes us happy isn't what God wants - or that 'what God wants' is whatever we want least, or is the most difficult.

 

We cannot help being anthropomorphic - we have our human limitations. But God isn't pushing buttons!  If 'what you want' is to be head of a crime syndicate, obviously it is wrong - but nothing we want to do or which we pursue is opposed to 'God's will' unless it is sinful. 

[Nunsuch]

In light of what so many have said here--there would be nothing more contrary to God's will, or your call to holiness, if you attempted to live religious life if you were not called to it! In fact, no responsible community would accept you if they thought that you were not truly called. If you feel called to marriage, then that is probably where you belong; find a spouse who will be a loving and wise and prayerful companion on your mutual journey to God. What would be more beautiful than that?

[JHFamily]

4 hours ago, Dymphna said:

 the Church does NOT teach this, at least since Vatican II. 

What the Church once taught, the Church will always teach.

In this particular case, it is quite clearly set out in the CCC 916 ... "The religious state is... "more intimate"... "dedicated totally to God"... "follow Christ more nearly"... "give themselves to God who is loved above all"... "pursuing the perfection of charity". In CCC 923 consecrated virgins "are betrothed mystically to Christ" and become a "sacred person". So, no, the CCC does not come outright with the statement that it is a higher state. However, it seems obvious to me that all of this points to the statement nonetheless.

The religious life is higher because it is a total gift of self. Yet still, it is only for those whom God has called out of the world. The rest of us will love and serve God more fully by fulfilling our duties in our state in life. We may have smaller glasses, but God will still fill them up to the brim if we cooperate with His graces.

[Sister Leticia]

22 hours ago, Alison said:

I don’t want the leftovers of His love, I don’t want to feel like I’m on the back burner and not as loved by Him.

NOBODY receives the leftovers of God's love, or is "not as loved", because God does not love in measures, or unequally. There are no leftovers, or back burners. He does not love me more or less than he loves you. He doesn't ignore me because he's too besotted by someone else. His love for each of us is equally immense, equally unlimited and unconditional.

If there's any doling out or leftovers of love, they come from us, not God! (unfortunately)

[BarbTherese]

Poverty, chastity and obedience are the way of perfection and we are all called to some form of these evangelical counsels i.e. Holy Orders for men, consecrated, single or marital state.  I think that The Church sort of shot itself in the foot by naming the consecrated life as the 'highest vocation'. The highest vocation and call is God's Will and in whichever state in life God calls and vocates.  It is He who calls and He who vocates, or grants the Graces necessary to live out God's call to the highest degree of sanctity and holiness granted to every faithful person.  Nothing at all is higher than God's Will.  It is all a question of our response in free will.  God does not say "live this vocation or else 'hell and damnation' nor anything in that vein.

If a person has the qualities necessary for consecrated life, then POSSIBLY they have a call to consecrated life.   Each of the states in life does ask certain qualities in the person, granted by God.  If one makes a mistake and chooses some other state in life, God still grants Graces to live out that state to high sanctity and holiness.  God is not mean.  Our general call is to holiness and, therefore intrinsically, to spread The Gospel according to our means, which means are granted by God.

G

Edited March 25, 2023 by BarbTherese

[freedomreigns]

On 3/24/2023 at 3:54 PM, JHFamily said:

⭐

... and our inmost desires are often an indication of where our vocations lay.

but literally not always.  as a convent flunkie, i can guarantee that my inmost desire was most definitely not my vocation.  the whole affair sucked to be honest.  but I am okay now.  happily married, but at times still have regret that I didn't make it in the vocation my heart longed for. 

On 3/24/2023 at 4:11 PM, JHFamily said:

What the Church once taught, the Church will always teach.

In this particular case, it is quite clearly set out in the CCC 916 ... "The religious state is... "more intimate"... "dedicated totally to God"... "follow Christ more nearly"... "give themselves to God who is loved above all"... "pursuing the perfection of charity". In CCC 923 consecrated virgins "are betrothed mystically to Christ" and become a "sacred person". So, no, the CCC does not come outright with the statement that it is a higher state. However, it seems obvious to me that all of this points to the statement nonetheless.

The religious life is higher because it is a total gift of self. Yet still, it is only for those whom God has called out of the world. The rest of us will love and serve God more fully by fulfilling our duties in our state in life. We may have smaller glasses, but God will still fill them up to the brim if we cooperate with His graces.

Lots of us are never going to have the humility on this earth be okay with being loved less than or being called to love less than others who are the apparent chosen ones. But we can't all be Rachel and some of us have to be Leah.

In heaven, hopefully, it is all healed. And the vast majority of humanity doesn't have any debate about which is the higher vocation between religious life or lay life, they are just trying to survive in the world, and have no idea all the fun they are missing out on in not having these debates about who is the greatest acccording to Catholic theology. I imagine those people are just as loved by God as the rest of us. The vying for "who will be the greatest" was silly in Jesus time and silly in ours. 

On 3/24/2023 at 4:11 PM, JHFamily said:

What the Church once taught, the Church will always teach.

In this particular case, it is quite clearly set out in the CCC 916 ... "The religious state is... "more intimate"... "dedicated totally to God"... "follow Christ more nearly"... "give themselves to God who is loved above all"... "pursuing the perfection of charity". In CCC 923 consecrated virgins "are betrothed mystically to Christ" and become a "sacred person". So, no, the CCC does not come outright with the statement that it is a higher state. However, it seems obvious to me that all of this points to the statement nonetheless.

The religious life is higher because it is a total gift of self. Yet still, it is only for those whom God has called out of the world. The rest of us will love and serve God more fully by fulfilling our duties in our state in life. We may have smaller glasses, but God will still fill them up to the brim if we cooperate with His graces.

Lots of us are never going to have the humility on this earth be okay with being loved less than or being called to love less than others who are the apparent chosen ones. But we can't all be Rachel and some of us have to be Leah.

In heaven, hopefully, it is all healed. And the vast majority of humanity doesn't have any debate about which is the higher vocation between religious life or lay life, they are just trying to survive in the world, and have no idea all the fun they are missing out on in not having these debates about who is the greatest acccording to Catholic theology. I imagine those people are just as loved by God as the rest of us. The vying for "who will be the greatest" was silly in Jesus time and silly in ours.  

No offense meant. Theologically you are right on target, of course. This is just such a tricky topic and I don't think it really ever goes anywhere good.  Either religious can start to feel a bit superior if they focus too much on their specialness or others of us can start to feel a bit unpreferred and left out.  Human nature is what it is, and it is a tempation to pride on either side.  

[BarbTherese]

The object of life is to love and serve God in holiness and sanctity, not to be called to consecrated life or consecrated virginity.

13 hours ago, freedomreigns said:

In this particular case, it is quite clearly set out in the CCC 916 ... "The religious state is... "more intimate"... "dedicated totally to God"... "follow Christ more nearly"... "give themselves to God who is loved above all"... "pursuing the perfection of charity". In CCC 923 consecrated virgins "are betrothed mystically to Christ" and become a "sacred person". So, no, the CCC does not come outright with the statement that it is a higher state. However, it seems obvious to me that all of this points to the statement nonetheless.

Not quite accurate I dont think to suggest or infer that the above qualities cannot be fulfilled and achieved in any other vocation other than religious life.   Saints are raised to the altar because  their holiness and saintliness are confirmed by The Church - and because they have something to say to the whole Church, like the Martins, the parents of St Therese of Lisieux.........a married couple.  

The reason, possibly, probably/perhaps/might be at least in most cases I suspect , because, we have more saints that were in Holy Orders and/or religious life is because they tend to document their spiritual autobiographies in some form.   That alone, however, cannot and will not indicate a life lived in holiness and sanctity.  The path to the altar is a long and involved.  

The Church, in my book, was being unkind to God to suggest He can be a bit mean-minded where vocations are concerned.?

Edited March 28, 2023 by BarbTherese

[BarbTherese]

If a theology states the vocations, some of them, are 'short changed' where some vocations are concerned made me scratch my head in confusion about the nature of God AND therefore, in this instance, about the nature of some vocations.  Put me into a crisis type state re faith for a bit of time as to what I believed, until I referred to the fact that I knew God was not mean minded at all, therefore sorting me out re vocations.

This subject seems to keep cropping up on Pham.  Then I thought, perhaps it is an old thread resurrected.  I had a look........nope! It is indeed current..........AGAIN?.......... 

 

On 3/26/2023 at 9:58 AM, BarbTherese said:

Holy Orders for men, consecrated, single or marital state

I should have mentioned consecrated virginity in the above 'list'......see my post on 16th March.

Edited March 28, 2023 by BarbTherese

[BarbTherese]

On 3/25/2023 at 1:59 AM, Alison said:

St. Thomas Aquinas did express however that consecrated life is more perfect. I think it would be possible for both vocations to enable someone to live God with their whole heart, while one still being objectively more perfect maybe. 

Very broadly and quite generally speaking, there are three indications of a likely particular subjective vocation:

1. A desire for a particular vocation
2. The qualities necessary for that vocation
3. Acceptance into that vocation

I am only a lay person in a quite rickety very amateur armchair of 'theology'.  I think that the consecrated state and Holy Orders, through public profession, are a quite public declaration of lifetime-intent and public consecration/ordination to it; whereas in the other vocations i.e. in the Laity, the evangelical counsels are only most often implied intrinsically as to intent without any kind of actual public declaration.  The latter is unnecessary really, since the public declaration of intent is in Baptism.  The personal vocation spells out (usually and most often publicly in public) how a person intends to live out their Baptismal intent.  

___________________________________________

Two thoughts just 'connected' for me:  1) I don't think that the Theology of Baptism is sufficiently developed or known in The Church.  Baptism is initiation into The Catholic Church.  2) St Joseph is our patron and only ever now and then mentioned................well, I know what I mean anyway.........the bipolar mind and all that...........

 

Edited March 28, 2023 by BarbTherese

[Sapientia]

On 3/24/2023 at 11:13 AM, Dymphna said:

I'd be interested in your source for this. I'm a theologian, and AFAIK, the Church does NOT teach this, at least since Vatican II. There are certainly a lot of people around who express thoughts like the ones you cite ("undivided heart" etc.), but for all I know, official Church teaching makes it very clear that there is no state of life (as in marriage, single life or consecrated life) which is per se higher than another. You got this totally right with your impression that the Bible teaches we are all called to love God with all we are and have. Maybe you just read some older material which gave you a misleading impression?

"If any one shall say, that the marriage state is to be preferred before a state of virginity, or of celibacy, and that it is not better and more blessed to remain in virginity, or in celibacy, than to be joined in matrimony; let him be anathema." (Council of Trent, Canon X on the Sacrament of Matrimony)

This is official Church teaching, and Vatican II did not change this (nor could it have, since official Church teaching cannot change). In fact, the belief that marriage and celibacy are on equal footing is a heresy known as Jovinianism. Note that Church teaching does *not* say that every celibate person is holier than every married person, or even that each and every individual would be holier as a celibate person than as a married person. For some people, because of their personal circumstances or dispositions (and what specific circumstances or dispositions these may be could be open to discussion), marriage may be a better option. In itself, however, celibacy is better and provides more powerful means for attaining union with God.

[GraceUk]

But on the other hand you might get a saintly married person and a not very saintly priest or nun. Maybe it means that an individual can attain a higher state of holiness if they are celibate. Not that it's automatic. It is a bit confusing.