The Divine Life

Why We Were Created
a blog by Eric Sammons
January 13, 2010

Why the single life is not a vocation

This week is National Vocations Awareness Week, in which we contemplate the vocational call in each person’s life. In recent years I have noticed that prayers for vocations often include the following, “We pray for vocations to the priesthood, the permanent diaconate, religious life, married life, and the single life.” I admit that the addition of “the single life” as a vocation has always troubled me: is being an unconsecrated single person really a vocation? It seems politically correct in many circles to make such a claim, but I can’t help but think that such a life, while capable of including a saintly way of living, is not really a vocation per se. But as a married person, I felt it was improper for me to make such an observation publicly.

So I was very happy to see Catholic author and speaker Mary Beth Bonacci, who is single, declare that the unconsecrated single life is not a vocation:

[F]rom the first time I heard it, something rubbed me wrong about the concept of a single “vocation.”

Reading the Holy Father’s letter on women, Mulieris Dignitatem, reinforced my suspicions. In that document, John Paul II says that God calls all women to give themselves in one of two ways – in motherhood or in consecration to Christ.

No mention of singleness in there.

In fact, I find no mention of an unconsecrated single “vocation” in Church teaching anywhere. As far as the Church is concerned, it doesn’t exist.

Here is the problem: “vocation,” in the sense the Church understands it, means “to give oneself completely.” The Vatican II document Gaudium et Spes says that man finds himself only through a sincere gift of himself. John Paul II, in Mulieris Dignitatem, speaks of the “spousal disposition of women.” We – women and men — were made to give ourselves, in love, to others. That’s where we find happiness.

Don’t singles give? Of course we do – often more than most. But vocation doesn’t mean “being a generous person.” It means giving our lives completely to another – either to a spouse in marriage or to God in consecrated virginity. And singleness doesn’t do that. In fact, the single state is defined by the lack of that gift. We are unattached, un-given.

Be sure to read the whole article here.

In our overly sensitive world, we try to avoid saying anything that might offend another. By saying that someone else’s life is “missing” something, we appear to be judging them unduly. But the fact remains that we are created to give our whole selves over to another. For married people, they give themselves to their spouses; for religious, they give themselves directly to Jesus. A single person is not able to do this. But that does not mean that they cannot achieve holiness; on the contrary, their cross gives them a unique ability to do so.

Let us all pray for single people during this week of Vocations Awareness; not that they embrace their current life as a “vocation”, but that they might bear their cross lovingly and in union with Christ’s Cross and one day find their true vocation.

If you enjoyed this post, make sure you subscribe to my RSS feed!

The Church

  1. Amen!

    Comment by Tito Edwards — January 13, 2010 @ 2:33 pm
  2. Yes. On the one hand we must be careful not to sacrifice sound theological reflection on the altar of the great idol of ‘inclusiveness.’

    On the other hand, there are folks out there who seem to be living the single life, but whose lifestyles are consecrated by certain private vows in the internal forum. Others are living without a vocation to marriage, consecrated life, of priesthood because of various misfortunes. So you never know.

    Comment by Br. Charles — January 13, 2010 @ 4:50 pm
  3. [...] Why the single life is not a vocation – Eric Sammons tackles the common misconception that single life is a vocation. [...]

    Pingback by Happy National Vocation Awareness Week « Halbrook.net — January 13, 2010 @ 11:45 pm
  4. if you are single, or a widow, then remain so if you can.

    -st.paul

    Comment by anthony — January 14, 2010 @ 5:59 am
  5. Perhaps an elaboration of Bonacci’s comments is in order. The “giving oneself completely” here is, of course, loving with the whole self, i.e., with body and soul. This loving in one’s entirety is necessary for a Christian vocation because God has created mankind in His image and likeness and has called humanity to live out that image and likeness, which is Love and a communion of Persons (see Familiaris consortio, 11 for the best treatment of this topic). The single life, even one with a private vow of chastity, does not allow for this kind of love and communion.

    A Christian vocation is meant to help one to progress in becoming more completely conformed to the image of God. It is also meant to be a sign of that image to the world.

    Comment by Peregrinus — January 20, 2010 @ 1:48 pm
  6. i just thought that married life is the happiest point of my life.`*’

    Comment by Brian Hughes — June 30, 2010 @ 9:58 am
  7. As a gay, celibate Catholic, I must take issue here. The single life for me is absolutely a vocation! It is a matter of record that homosexual Catholics are NOT invited into seminary studies, and it would be a lie for me to marry a woman. God calls me to live out my life in the single, celibate state. It’s not the state that’s the vocation– it’s the call to it. Let us all be careful about defining or classifying God’s call to others. The word vocation comes from “voice,” and it refers to God’s voice. That’s all. To define vocation as a total giving of self to another is certainly not incorrect, but it may not be complete. Let’s stop putting our own words in God’s voice and call to others. It’s not YOUR conversation….

    Comment by B Doyle — July 9, 2010 @ 2:08 pm
  8. married life is actually the best if both the man and the woman compliments each other;*-

    Comment by Food Scales  — October 12, 2010 @ 12:48 pm
  9. B Doyle, semantics aside, what you are doing by living as a gay, celibate Catholic gives more witness than the way many married Catholic couples live. Mother Teresa says that we are not called to be successful, we are called to be faithful. Also, I don’t know if gay men are forbidden from the priesthood. I think it’s more about being able to transcend one’s sexuality in order to love everyone in charity. Sexually immature men – gay or straight – do not belong in the priesthood. Food Scales, I compliment my wife all the time – I tell her she’s fantastic! Do we complement each other? I don’t know. I wouldn’t recommend anyone marrying their opposite. My wife and I are different, to be sure, but we have a lot in common where it counts.

    Comment by Ned — October 12, 2010 @ 1:45 pm

Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.

kvindelige viagra