Bride Of Christ

[Chiquitunga]

okay, something I want to point out here.... 

 

what you quoted from Vita Consecrata on Consecrated Virgins

 

"It is a source of joy and hope to witness in our time a new flowering of the ancient Order of Virgins, known in Christian communities ever since apostolic times. Consecrated by the diocesan Bishop, these women acquire a particular link with the Church, which they are commited to serve while remaining in the world. Either alone or in association with others, they constitute a special eschatological image of the Heavenly Bride and of the life to come, when the Church will at last fully live her love for Christ the Bridegroom."

 

Verbi Sponsa on Nuns -- quoting from Vita Consecrata also

 

"The Church as Bride of the Word shows forth in an exemplary way in those dedicated to a wholly contemplative life the mystery of her exclusive union with God. For this reason the Post-Synodal Apostolic Exhortation Vita Consecrata presents the vocation and mission of cloistered nuns as “a sign of the exclusive union of the Church as Bride with her Lord, whom she loves above all things”, (1) showing how they are a unique grace and precious gift within the mystery of the Church's holiness."

 

The word "image" and "sign" and pretty close. Most likely either of those words are used in documents to describe the other vocation also. Also the "unique grace" here reminds me of the "new grace" of a CV (referenced at beginning of thread, for others) And again, Verbi Sponsa does refer to the nun as "bride of the Incarnate Word"

 

What about this for a hypothesis? That really they (the CV and Nun) can both be rightfully called brides of Christ in an extraordinary way (ordinary being by common Baptism, as we know) However, a CV would posses the title in an even more extraordinary way than a Nun, since it is the very essence of her vocation. This works for me :like:

 

The CV Nun would then be extra-extraordinary!! lol (sorry, getting a little goofy bc of the hour, I'm just going to go to Mass and take a nap :sleep3:)

[Chiquitunga]

Okay, going to attempt to give a few thoughts in reply to the rest of your post.

 

It is certainly true that cloistered nuns represent the Church better than other forms of religious life and are more suited to being called brides of Christ for the reasons we both accept as true.  What I am concerned with, though, is that people who are discerning the vocation to being a cloistered nun will confuse the greater participation aspect for the full representation of the Church as bride and miss the beauty of religious life for what it actually is.  Certainly when I was discerning the vocation to  a cloistered community (and active communities), I really thought that nuns and sisters were brides of Christ in the fullest sense.  I didn't know any better when I first began to think of religious life as a possible vocation for me. 

 

Most of the religious communities I was interested in joining told me that by becoming a sister or a nun, I would be the bride of Jesus.  I was unpleasantly surprised to find out that this was not strictly true and being a painful thing to hear, I struggled with it for a long time.  I finally realized that if I had a religious vocation, that unless I found a community that did the consecration, I would be totally given over to the Lord, but just not in a fully spousal manner.  it would have been a lot more helpful if I had known that religious life was not fully spousal to begin with and had not been fooled into thinking it was because of what all the sisters and nuns were telling me.  I don't think they were trying to deliberately mislead me because what they were telling me they believed because that is what they had been told.  But what I feel you are trying to ask for is that they continue to call themselves brides of Christ even though it sets people up for the same problem that I experienced. 

 

That's a difficult dilemma and I'm not sure exactly how to answer here... I would hope that more and more Nuns and Sisters will learn more about Consecrated Virginity to be able to inform discerners about it too. Very few in the Church seem to have any idea about it at all really, which I am sure is greatly frustrating. I still think Nuns should to be able to tell women that they are brides of Christ, like the one Prioress told me when she gave me a copy of Verbi Sponsa. But I think along with this of course they need to stress their charism... and help the young women to discern if she is really drawn to that and to life in community. If she seems to be drawn exclusively to being espoused to Christ, the CV vocation should be made known to her.

 

Sorry, these are just ramblings... hmmm. In answer to the bolded part again, I definitely do not think Nuns should ever stop calling themselves brides of Christ. I think that would go against their very nature! And if Verbi Sponsa called them thus... If a community of Nuns ever told me they weren't brides of Christ, I would greatly question the state of their spiritual lives and the community as a whole. Actually, I would run from such a community!! lol But that's getting onto another subject, which I do not intend to discuss here.

 

I don't think I am the only person who wants to know the truth.  I think that it is easier to be told upfront that nuns share in the Church's bridal nature more fully than most other people do, but that there is a vocation compatible with religious life that does make a woman the bride of Christ in the full sense of the word.  Can you see the dilemma here?  That if we use the term bride of Christ for non CV nuns, then we give people the impression that they do achieve the full nuptial union with Christ by religious profession.

 

In answer to this & the above again, I would say there is a great need in the Church to make the vocation of Consecrated Virginity known. I think especially the history... for people to be aware that Nuns are considered the Heirs of these Virgins, and that this is the origin of their bridal spirituality/identity, and things like receiving a ring and veil at Profession. I still think they should be called Nuns for the reasons given, but I see the dilemma here. Again, I think education would be the important thing... to learn about the Rite, it's history, development... All of this I'm very ignorant of myself, and I want to be a bride of Christ! :blush: From this thread I've come to realize how much is on that site, http://consecratedvirgins.org/ (btw, just noticed someone I know in one of the pictures there! I know two CVs in my home diocese :))

 

edit: wait, I see them both! :proud:

Edited July 27, 2013 by Chiquitunga

[Laurie]

I have guests right now & for the near future, so I will be away from this thread for awhile. I've only skimmed the latest posts. At some point I will pop back in with some helpful definitions from Aquinas. Chiquitunga, I think those definitions and explanations from Aquinas will help you see how the word "participate" isn't meant in a weak sense here. It's a very strong sense! Sometimes it's hard because we have modern definitions for our words and that can cloud what the Church means, at times, when she uses the same words. More soon!

[MarysLittleFlower]

I think I have sort of similar questions as Chiquitunga... issues such as:

 

- it was brought up how if nuns were brides of Christ, how can this be true because there are also monks? I was reading the quote from Mulieris Dignitatum and it seems to link the spousal nature of the gift of virginity to femininity... could it be linked to nuns being women?

 

- the idea that a nun's PRIMARY vocation would be that of a disciple doesn't seem to fit with the experience of many of primarily feeling drawn to being a bride of Christ, rather than a disciple only.

 

If only CVs are truly brides of Christ:

 

- then the first point doesn't apply

- and with the second, it would maybe point to the nuns' spirituality or the relationship of their soul with God

 

but then in Mulieris Dignitatum, it relates this type of self-gift to spousal love, which leads to the question:

 

- how can someone give a gift that is in the "spousal order", or a "spousal gift" and yet not BE a spouse? 

 

Maybe I'm just having a trouble getting my mind around that. AbrideofChrist, I know you mentioned many times about participation... I need to think about these ideas some more.

[MarysLittleFlower]

okay, something I want to point out here.... 

 

what you quoted from Vita Consecrata on Consecrated Virgins

 

"It is a source of joy and hope to witness in our time a new flowering of the ancient Order of Virgins, known in Christian communities ever since apostolic times. Consecrated by the diocesan Bishop, these women acquire a particular link with the Church, which they are commited to serve while remaining in the world. Either alone or in association with others, they constitute a special eschatological image of the Heavenly Bride and of the life to come, when the Church will at last fully live her love for Christ the Bridegroom."

 

Verbi Sponsa on Nuns -- quoting from Vita Consecrata also

 

"The Church as Bride of the Word shows forth in an exemplary way in those dedicated to a wholly contemplative life the mystery of her exclusive union with God. For this reason the Post-Synodal Apostolic Exhortation Vita Consecrata presents the vocation and mission of cloistered nuns as “a sign of the exclusive union of the Church as Bride with her Lord, whom she loves above all things”, (1) showing how they are a unique grace and precious gift within the mystery of the Church's holiness."

 

The word "image" and "sign" and pretty close. Most likely either of those words are used in documents to describe the other vocation also. Also the "unique grace" here reminds me of the "new grace" of a CV (referenced at beginning of thread, for others) And again, Verbi Sponsa does refer to the nun as "bride of the Incarnate Word"

 

What about this for a hypothesis? That really they (the CV and Nun) can both be rightfully called brides of Christ in an extraordinary way (ordinary being by common Baptism, as we know) However, a CV would posses the title in an even more extraordinary way than a Nun, since it is the very essence of her vocation. This works for me :like:

 

The CV Nun would then be extra-extraordinary!! lol (sorry, getting a little goofy bc of the hour, I'm just going to go to Mass and take a nap :sleep3:)

lol :) I'm trying to think about it all too....

 

I think I need to figure out what is truly meant by "participation" as well!

[Chiquitunga]

I get what "by participation" means ... it's "by virtue of being a member of the Church" aka "because someone is a member of the Church"

 

It's just that that particular word brings an image to my mind of a group of people doing something together... even side by side....that it is like collectively they are being the Bride of Christ... but cannot be an individual level, which is not what it means, and not what Fr. Dubay has said also. The individual soul can be called a bride of Christ by virtue of her Bapstism/membership in the Church.

 

But my mind keeps seeing funny images when I see the word participation... like a group of people all diving into a pool at the same time, lol! but that one individual person could not dive into that pool themselves.... like Christ not looking upon individual souls as His unique and beloved brides, as He does... but just sees those who are "participating" in being the Bride of Christ collectively with everyone else.... and that they are only partially His brides therefore... like they are puzzle pieces that have to be put together in order to make the Bride of Christ. But that is not true! Individual souls are brides of Christ, and He loves them as brides in an individual way. If there were only one baptized person lalive, that person would be fully a bride of Christ. That fact is independent of the fact that there may be other members. 

 

I have guests right now & for the near future, so I will be away from this thread for awhile. I've only skimmed the latest posts. At some point I will pop back in with some helpful definitions from Aquinas. Chiquitunga, I think those definitions and explanations from Aquinas will help you see how the word "participate" isn't meant in a weak sense here. It's a very strong sense! Sometimes it's hard because we have modern definitions for our words and that can cloud what the Church means, at times, when she uses the same words. More soon!

 

Thank you, Laurie! That is very true about our modern use of words and how the Church uses them. Thank Heavens for Latin! :like:  I'm glad to hear it is meant in a very strong sense. I have to be away from the thread pretty soon myself too, so if I don't catch what and when you post (will come back to read it at some point though) I will look into seeing what I can find that St. Thomas has said on Consecrated Virginity too. Thanks again!

[Chiquitunga]

want to mention this also, the last time I saw my CV friend she gave me this book (as a gift! not for a birthday or anything :)) St. Therese of Lisieux: Spouse and Victim  I still need to read it! :blush: (it's super short) though from what I skimmed, I can see it is especially about her mystical prayer life but it also mentions her Profession as an espousal. not mentioning this to bring up the argument again (this is no where near a Church document but just the author's thoughts) but I thought I'd mention the book anyway as another interesting source of reflection. I love how my CV friend gave it to me. next time I see her I know I'll be discussing this thread with her. it's much easier to talk to someone in person about this I think, than via the internet. but since we all so far apart, we do our best

 

by the way, And You Are Christ's just came in the mail! :like:

Edited July 27, 2013 by Chiquitunga

[Chiquitunga]

I actually do agree with a lot of abrideofChrist’s arguments here, but I personally have a very hard time saying that women like St. Catherine of Siena, St. Clare of Assisi, St. Kateri Tekakwitha, or Bl. Mother Teresa of Calcutta weren’t really brides of Christ because they weren’t technically consecrated virgins.

 

These are my thoughts as well (which include not only Nuns strictly speaking but Religious Sisters as you mention as well, like Sr. Josefa Menendez)

 

This would fall into the category of pious reflection I think, but even Pope Benedict XVI is saying here that St. Clare of Assisi became (which I stress because it seems to be saying this is something beyond common sponsality in Baptism) a virgin bride. He was speaking only of her entering religious life, and again this is more a pious reflection, but I do think it speaks to something of how the Church (this is a Pope after all) still calls those who forsake marriage in this world to choose Christ as Bridegroom, "brides" in a special way, beyond Baptism. 

 

Yes, he is speaking generally here using the term consecrated virgins later... but still, he is applying this to St. Clare. He is saying she has this nuptial vocation. And again, he is saying she became something, which would imply it was something beyond common sponsality. 

 

I think that the whole reality of a call to be a bride of Christ—that is, the call that some women experience to give themselves entirely to God in such a way that this all-consuming love precludes the spiritual and emotional possibility of an earthly marriage—is ultimately a much bigger and more mysterious thing than simply a matter of whether or not a woman has received the Rite of Consecration to a Life of Virginity.

 

I think that the consecration of virgins is a very special, privileged expression of this more general call. I would even be comfortable saying that it might be the normative expression. I’m also comfortable saying that religious profession by itself isn’t the same thing as a call to be a bride of Christ. But I think that it’s entirely possible that any woman who has offered her life entirely to the Lord could be a spouse of Christ in actual fact, even if canon law doesn’t specifically grant her that title.

 

I do believe that the Rite of Consecration has a real efficacy, or in other words, that it really does do something. Still, I do think that we can allow for the possibility that God might extend His grace beyond His promises in this instance. (After all, even in earthly marriages, it is possible to get a dispensation of form!)

 

One consequence (among others) of the Rite of Consecration is that through it, the Church lets us know for sure who definitely is a bride of Christ. But, I don’t think this translates into the Church conversely letting us say that someone else is definitely NOT a bride of Christ. Even when it’s a case of a woman just making a private vow, I think we need to be respectful and reverent towards the wonders that our Lord might be working in an individual soul…I keep thinking of the old saying: “Fools rush in where angels fear to tread.”

 

(Not trying to call anyone here a fool, BTW.)

 

All of this I agree with completely. Thank you so much, Sponsa Christi, for sharing these thoughts. This brings to mind also how St. Thomas said "God is not bound to the visible sacraments." in the argument that God could Himself give the grace of Baptism to a child who had died before receiving it (this discussion, btw, I do not mean to bring up, there are other threads on PM on this already) I think this is hugely important to consider in this discussion.

[Chiquitunga]

While I think highlighting the parallels and complementarity between priesthood and consecrated virginity generally works exceedingly well in trying to explain and understand this vocation, I think there are a few places where the analogy breaks down—and that this is one of those places.

 

The analogy still works when you consider that man who doesn’t receive Holy Orders isn’t a priest, and a woman who doesn’t receive the consecration of virgins isn’t a consecrated virgin, and that no level of personal spirituality is going to change this.

 

But, I think you can make somewhat of a distinction between the call to be a bride of Christ and the call to be a consecrated virgin technically speaking. All consecrated virgins are called to be brides of Christ, but I think there could be some brides of Christ who weren’t called to be consecrated virgins. (Kind of like: all squares are rectangles, but not all rectangles are squares.)

 

I think that the general call to be a bride of Christ is a very mysterious mystical reality that we’re never going to be able to define and “pin down” in the same way as the consecration of virgins, religious profession, Holy Orders, or matrimony. I think it’s actually too mysterious for canon law even to try to touch.

 

I believe that the general call to be a bride of Christ is a charism and a special grace that God gives directly to some souls, according to His good pleasure. Sometimes this charism is directly manifested and confirmed through the Rite of Consecration; sometimes it might be expressed in a more indirect secondary way through religious profession. Other times, it might remain more mysterious and hidden in a woman who simply makes a private vow.

 

This I very much agree with also. Thank you very much again for sharing these thoughts!

[MarysLittleFlower]

I get what "by participation" means ... it's "by virtue of being a member of the Church" aka "because someone is a member of the Church"

 

It's just that that particular word brings an image to my mind of a group of people doing something together... even side by side....that it is like collectively they are being the Bride of Christ... but cannot be an individual level, which is not what it means, and not what Fr. Dubay has said also. The individual soul can be called a bride of Christ by virtue of her Bapstism/membership in the Church.

 

But my mind keeps seeing funny images when I see the word participation... like a group of people all diving into a pool at the same time, lol! but that one individual person could not dive into that pool themselves.... like Christ not looking upon individual souls as His unique and beloved brides, as He does... but just sees those who are "participating" in being the Bride of Christ collectively with everyone else.... and that they are only partially His brides therefore... like they are puzzle pieces that have to be put together in order to make the Bride of Christ. But that is not true! Individual souls are brides of Christ, and He loves them as brides in an individual way. If there were only one baptized person lalive, that person would be fully a bride of Christ. That fact is independent of the fact that there may be other members. 

 

 

Thank you, Laurie! That is very true about our modern use of words and how the Church uses them. Thank Heavens for Latin! :like:  I'm glad to hear it is meant in a very strong sense. I have to be away from the thread pretty soon myself too, so if I don't catch what and when you post (will come back to read it at some point though) I will look into seeing what I can find that St. Thomas has said on Consecrated Virginity too. Thanks again!

I see what you mean about the word participation.... :)

 

want to mention this also, the last time I saw my CV friend she gave me this book (as a gift! not for a birthday or anything :)) St. Therese of Lisieux: Spouse and Victim  I still need to read it! :blush: (it's super short) though from what I skimmed, I can see it is especially about her mystical prayer life but it also mentions her Profession as an espousal. not mentioning this to bring up the argument again (this is no where near a Church document but just the author's thoughts) but I thought I'd mention the book anyway as another interesting source of reflection. I love how my CV friend gave it to me. next time I see her I know I'll be discussing this thread with her. it's much easier to talk to someone in person about this I think, than via the internet. but since we all so far apart, we do our best

 

by the way, And You Are Christ's just came in the mail! :like:

yay! :) that sounds like a good book about St Therese, she's one of my favourite Saints :)

 

 

 

 

These are my thoughts as well (which include not only Nuns strictly speaking but Religious Sisters as you mention as well, like Sr. Josefa Menendez)

 

This would fall into the category of pious reflection I think, but even Pope Benedict XVI is saying here that St. Clare of Assisi became (which I stress because it seems to be saying this is something beyond common sponsality in Baptism) a virgin bride. He was speaking only of her entering religious life, and again this is more a pious reflection, but I do think it speaks to something of how the Church (this is a Pope after all) still calls those who forsake marriage in this world to choose Christ as Bridegroom, "brides" in a special way, beyond Baptism. 

 

Yes, he is speaking generally here using the term consecrated virgins later... but still, he is applying this to St. Clare. He is saying she has this nuptial vocation. And again, he is saying she became something, which would imply it was something beyond common sponsality. 

 

 

All of this I agree with completely. Thank you so much, Sponsa Christi, for sharing these thoughts. This brings to mind also how St. Thomas said "God is not bound to the visible sacraments." in the argument that God could Himself give the grace of Baptism to a child who had died before receiving it (this discussion, btw, I do not mean to bring up, there are other threads on PM on this already) I think this is hugely important to consider in this discussion.

 

 

Interesting that you mentioned St Clare... I was thinking about her this morning.

 

I don't know if the movie is accurate about this... but in the movie "Clare and Francis" from Ignatius Press, St Clare talks about her vocation. At one point, she says that she wants to give herself to God as a bride gives herself to a bridegroom. When she runs away to become a nun, - the monks are singing "Veni Sponsa Christi". In the church, St Clare says: "I Clara, daughter and handmaiden of Our Lord God the Heavenly Father, take Jesus Christ as my Spouse, and vow to Him my life according to the perfection of the Holy Gospel".

 

(I had to look up the DVD just now lol).

 

I was curious about whether this is based on documents of what St Clare actually said, and if we have any record of what she said or what the early Poor Clares used in their Rite? Or it hasn't changed over time? Does anyone know? :) I just thought it was interesting and I'm wondering if there's more information about this... I'm not using the movie as a Church document, I just thought of that part :)

Edited July 28, 2013 by MarysLittleFlower

[Chiquitunga]

I believe that is true... that she made a private vow of viriginity then. I'm ashamed I am so ignorant of this! That makes more sense then in light of what Pope Benedict XVI was saying. I was forgetting this fact... I often think of that moment in her life as when she was first entering religious life/her investiture, as her daughters carry on to this day, and forget that she also made a private vow at that moment. I need to go get some resources on St. Clare to confirm this....

 

in the meantime I found something else to add to this thread, before I go, will post it here shortly

[Chiquitunga]

okay, a couple more posts here for now.... something I wanted to share first, in all of this research for posting in this thread, I did happen to find in one of the booklets I have from a recent Solemn Profession and Veiling at a Discalced Carmelite Monastery, that the prayer of Consecration after the Profession of Vows is from the CV Rite....... "Loving Father, chaste bodies are your temple..."  I would have had no idea about this if it weren't for this thread, so I want to thank you abrideofChrist!! I have discerned it would be best to first ask this Carmel about it though before sharing anything more about this on the internet. :like:

[Chiquitunga]

also, about St. Clare, I cannot find a good resource on her life to say whether for sure made a private vow in that moment or not, it doesn't say in Butler's Lives of the Saints nor in a book I have a St. Francis and St. Clare, but I've seen it written in a few places online. I do not have very much on the life of St. Clare specifically though. Maybe someone else does... but it does seem that she made some kind of private vow and most likely at that time

[Chiquitunga]

okay, yesterday a friend alerted me to another good resource for reflection on all of this, the book Walled About With God by 

by Dom Jean Prou, OSB - fifth Abbot of the Abbey of Saint-Pierre de Solesmes and Abbot-President of the Solesmes Congregation from 1959 - 1992.  Many pages are missing in the preview on amazon, and I think this one would be very much worth buying and reading further into. But you can read quite a bit in the preview here. Especially page pgs 186 - 204 are relevant to our discussion. It looks like pages 188 - 192 might be especially insightful, but they are missing.

 

The book quotes St. Thomas Aquinias on pg. 194 on Consecrated Virgins, and then it says of nuns...

 

"Nuns, however, certainly display the spousal character of this rite in its strongest form, whether they receive the consecration of virgins or monastic consecration. Every consecrated woman is a bride of Christ and a figure of the Church. Active religious sisters and members of secular institutes, however, also perform many visible activities which may distract them from this fundamental role of being Christ's bride. On the other hand, the nun is neither more nor less than a nun; she has no other function than to love Christ with nuptial love, to seek Him, to cling to Him with jealous exclusivity so as to be 'one spirit with Him.' For this reason, a nun is a vivid expression of the mystery of the Church, whatever rite of consecration she may have received."

 

Being a bride of Christ for enclosed Nuns is their identity and mission. I believe this is also confirmed by Verbi Sponsa, as I wrote in my other posts. 

 

"Let us add that, for nuns, solemn vows involve nuptial consecration, which reserves them for Christ their Spouse in a more complete way. In this they follow the model offered by the Church, His Immaculate Bride. All this entails more radical measures to ensure their purity, which is a sign of the Church's own purity." (pg. 197)

 

There is also a something here on the spiritual maternity of Nuns. 

 

Again, there is a lot more in the book, and parts that are missing, so are we are not getting the full context of everything here. I plan to get get a copy of this or check it out at a library... and also that One Bride book too.

 

I still believe what I had written before about a difference between the Rite of Consecration to a Life of Virginity and the Rite of Religious Profession. But I wonder now about this difference for a cloistered contemplative Nun... These words here I have to take into account and reflect upon further. They weren't just written by anyone, but the Abbot and President of the Benedictine Congregation of Solemnes. I also believe wholeheartedly what Sponsa Christi wrote, which I quoted above. And I believe personally that the Lord could very well espouse someone fully to Himself at their Religious Profession. Again,  "God is not bound to the visible sacraments." ~ St. Thomas Aquinas

[abrideofChrist]

I still believe what I had written before about a difference between the Rite of Consecration to a Life of Virginity and the Rite of Religious Profession. But I wonder now about this difference for a cloistered contemplative Nun...

 

 

Please recall that the Consecration to a Life of Virginity is reserved to nuns, or in your words, "cloistered contemplative Nun".  If this were identical in essence to Religious Profession, then it would have been suppressed. 

 

Earlier you had quoted from a prayer for Carmelite nuns beginning with "Loving Father chaste bodies...".  Having gone to the Solemn Profession of Carmelites (active and cloistered) and of other Religious Orders (I visit communities often), I can tell you that many active and contemplative communities traditionally "borrowed" from the Rite of Consecration to boost their identity as "brides" in their prayers.  That is fine as all consecrated women participate in the Church's nature as Bride.  If they totally borrow and the Consecration prayer to a Life of Virginity IS recited in whole by a bishop at a Carmelite's Profession of vows, then she becomes a Consecrated Virgin Nun (if she is a virgin).  If, on the other hand, parts of the prayer are taken from the Consecration, then the Nun receives a Religious Consecration. 

 

In the book you quote from, the author is explaining the cloister and he carefully explains how the Profession of Vows and the Consecration of Virgins are NOT the same thing.  He discusses how a SOLEMN vow of chastity is a higher bond than a simple vow of chastity that active sisters make.  Nowhere does he say that Profession and Consecration are ESSENTIALLY the same.  He even talks about consecrated virginity and how it is the most complete image of Church as Spouse.  Right there he is making a statement that theologians understand to be describing the essence of the Rite of Virginal Consecration (vs. Religious Consecration). 

 

Later on he goes into the whole thing about monastic profession and the spousal dimension of consecrated women. His purpose was not to distinguish the differences between monastic profession and consecrated virginity but to talk about the spousal dimension of monastic nuns, whether they received the consecration or not.  Which is perfectly fine and only means you need to turn elsewhere if you want a discussion of the essential differences.  It's like he first gives a definition of an orange.  Then he turns his attention to other fruits (different forms of consecrated life) and then focuses on fruits that are orange colored.  He's not trying to say that this is what makes an orange an orange or an apricot an apricot.  He's lumping them together, which again is fine because he is not trying to make distinctions.  Let me repeat, he is focusing on the participation of the Church's spousal nature that the cloistered nun has.  Had he chosen, I know that the good Benedictine could have easily defined the essential differences of consecrated virginity and monastic profession.  He just chose not to.

 

Note that the Abbot wrote about cloistered communities, having dropped the Virginal Consecration, admitted widows to their communities.  This is important to understanding the Virginal Consecration, because the Church Fathers discussed how a widow is a Bride of Christ but not in the fullest sense.  In other words, she participates in the nature of the Church as Bride but does not image her perfectly.  This means that a widow who can receive Monastic Profession cannot mirror the Church perfectly.  Again, we have established that a nun can receive the Virginal Consecration above the Monastic Consecration.  So there has to be a difference. 

 

You earlier said you thought of participation as something external and not individual.  How do you perceive the difference between our participating in the Priesthood of Christ by baptism and men being priests of God via ordination?