Bride Of Christ

[God's Beloved]

Thank you AbrideofChrist !

 

I often think of the Church as a Sacrament of Salvation to the entire world .For its sacramentality to shine , every color in the rainbow of vocations should shine brilliantly with the particular charism of each state of life / vocation . If all vocations lose sight of their foundational charism  , the rainbow will but have faded , diluted colors .

 

The important thing about sacramentality of the Church is that  the witness of Charisms should bring the change they signify in this world . Think of the sacramentality of the humble actions of our Pope Francis . When he does something , others are inspired to imitate him and this is evangelizing the  Church and the World. He as a religious is sharing the charism of religious life with the world.

 

In today's world people look for points of reference . In consecrated life  every individual and community has the Founder's Charism as a  constant and yet dynamic  point of reference  which has to be adapted to today's world.

 

CV is ancient. It is important to rediscover , redefine its charism and then adapt it to today's world too.

 

In our discussion  i feel we are arriving at clarity about the charism of CV. We couldn't do this ourselves . It helps to do this with the inputs / reactions of persons in other vocations because the charism of CV then goes through a test and  has to be defined and adapted in relation to other vocations in the church too. So some amount of conflict is inevitable but the end result will be greater harmony and visible beauty of various charisms as gift of the Holy Spirit for the mission of the church which is to evangelize.

 

Regarding this i have some thoughts which i shall send via PM. :cheers:

 

 

[God's Beloved]

This is an incredible insight, God's Beloved.  I hadn't thought about it in terms of CVs sharing a "monopoly" on the title of Bride of Christ with the Church but in effect, we do.  We must raise public awareness about our charism and demonstrate that by blurring distinctions we lose sight of these God given charims to different groups in the Church, including the Order of Virgins'.  Thank you for sharing this. 

 

Well , regarding monopoly I mean it in a christian sense of  gift which God has chosen to give to an individual or group of persons for the benefit of the community / church and world.

 

The gift of the title 'Bride of Christ '  or 'virgin,bride,mother'  is not for the CV to possess and lock in a safe for herself . Every gift is given so that it can be a blessing to others . The sacramentality of the charism  has to shine so that baptized members of the church are reminded of their own thirst for union with God who alone can satisfy us fully.

[BarbTherese]

Well , regarding monopoly I mean it in a christian sense of  gift which God has chosen to give to an individual or group of persons for the benefit of the community / church and world.

 

The gift of the title 'Bride of Christ '  or 'virgin,bride,mother'  is not for the CV to possess and lock in a safe for herself . Every gift is given so that it can be a blessing to others . ................edit...........

 

Beautifully stated.

[BarbTherese]

The CV vocation speaks to my own under private vows, since CV's are called to secular life without title or habit - yet unlike me they are a consecrated state in The Church and therefore a witness to and even a role model for me about my own vocation.  The important thing for CV's themselves and for me is therefore how they live out their consecrated lives in the secular world without anything to mark them as different from the rest except the persons that they are.  But how am I to identify them as CV's without distinguishing markings?

 

The CV vocation originally flowed from the laity, from the baptized state in the laity - as a commitment of lay persons to virginity.  They were then isolated from the lay state and transferred into a special consecrated state.  I believe that religious life then flowed originally from the CV consecrated state.  These states in life and The Gift of the Title "Bride of Christ" and "virgin, bride and mother" - a witness and image of The Church and in many instances laity do go out into the secular world embracing it as their 'vineyard', their mission in life, as well s functions in The Church (as I do) and as leaven without any distinguishing marks - although I always wear a silver cross on a leather thong and commitment band on my commitment or wedding finger. 

 

My most important focus is on the person that I am with the cross and ring to state why I am the way that I am.  I am a committed Catholic layperson.  I am not in the consecrated state which initially is a movement of The Holy Spirit taken up by the person and then confirmed by The Church as a person consecrated to God in a permanent state of life.

 

My consecration is a self consecration under the inspiration of The Holy Spirit and taken up by me, but rather to remain in the lay state of life under this personal consecration or self dedication to God and under the terms of The Apostolate of The Laity; APOSTOLICAM ACTUOSITATEM  .  It is a serious matter with its own duties, rights, responsibilities and accountabilities.  I move out into the secular world very often as The Church does through the laity without any form of requested identification by The Church other than the persons that we are. We move within all fields in the main of secular life and aspire to be as leaven everywhere.  Perhaps I should abandon the cross and commitment band, but am not yet convinced that I should, although reading the USACV website I am doing a rethink.  For it is not me per se that is going to do anything in the secular world, rather The Lord working in me - that is my primary focus.

 

I do think that it might be of importance to wear something or other that does identify one as a person committed to God in the Catholic Faith.  But as I said, doing a prayerful rethink.  What declares or witnesses to the fact that I am who I am through a personal dedication to God in the Catholic Faith............is it simply to be the person that I am, or does the cross and ring (not a wedding band, but wide sterling silver commitment band) contribute something important to that vocation and call identifying me as a committed person to God.  My primary focus however is always on the person that I am and called to be and I a vitally conscious of this everywhere I may be and with inadvertent most often faults and failings that identify for me that it is an aspiration rather than fait accompli - a journey or pilgrimage.  I don't so much let myself down when I fail as I fail The Lord that I seek to serve and His Gospel to which I seek to give witness.  But then The Lord's Permissive will covers all things with "all is well, all is well and all shall be well" (Julian of Norwich).

 

I might be devastated on the feeling level (pride) by my failings - but my Faith tells me that The Lord watches over me in all things and directs and permits to good.

[Benedictus]

I think if the CV vocation was more known and regularly acknowledged somehow within the life of the church then it could be a major source of benefit, especially to young people exploring the essence of vocation in general. But vocation ministry isn't generally at the core of the parish and therefore the outflow of its life spirit is reduced as a result. Many vocations become obscured or seem invisible these days - out of sight and out of mind. I'd like to see more promotion and focus on vocation ministry by people who lead these lives by collaborating together and doing something to guide others who may not understand that what they are drawn towards has an actual recognition within the church.

[Laurie]

Ok, chiming in here, in my haphazard way, as time permits.

 

Br. Patrick Shea, OFM, J.D., J.C.L. Article "Religious (Men and Women)," New Catholic Encyclopedia, 2nd edition.

 

I've only included the first 3 paragraphs. He goes on to discuss religious vows, rights and obligations, recent trends, and religous clerics.

 

RELIGIOUS (MEN AND WOMEN)

A religious is a member of the Christian faithful who follows the evangelical counsels of poverty, chastity, and obedience by profession of vows, living a life in common in an institute of consecrated life in a manner of life approved by the Church. Those who are members of secular institutes, which are also institutes of consecrated life, differ from religious in that they do not necessarily live a life in common and they do not give the same manner of public witness. Members of societies of apostolic life live a style of life that resembles religious, but the former do not profess vows.

 

Before the Second Vatican Council, many religious lived rather similar lives with similar schedules, customs, spirituality, prayer, and the like. With the Second Vatican Council, there came a directive to institutes to rediscover their roots and to return to the charism of their founder or foundress. With the 1983 Code of Canon Law, there came a new emphasis on proper law and subsidiarity. Thus, religious life began to manifest a variety of forms based upon the unique charism, mission, and situation of each religious institute.

 

Nonetheless, all religious in whatever institute they may live do live lives with important elements in common. Most notably, all are bound by the three evangelical COUNSELS: OBEDIENCE, POVERTY, and CHASTITY. The evangelical counsels are a means to the most important goal of a religious, following Christ. While many of the externals and practices surrounding these counsels have changed, their essentials continue to form the foundation of religious life.

 

[Benedictus]

I'm not sure any men have attempted to comment on the use of spouse imagery so far, so let me have a go. For me the language and terms we apply when talking about these things are purely human constructions or symbols that help to convey or explain a spiritual reality. The language we employ will be more appropriate to specific people than others in conveying a deeper truth.

Women may express spiritual communion and love for God in ways that correspond to her feminine nature or innate aspirations. But I don't think this is an end in and of itself.  I'm not sure whether my approach is overly mystical or not but I think of my relationship with God (expressed in the Trinity) in terms of communal and reciprocal love.  It isn't purely a matter of imitation or bonding (although this is true as well),even if these are the conventional ways men explain it. I feel it goes beyond that.to a greater drawing of the soul in a manner that language only attempts to convey. So although men won't start using bridal language, or that this would make any obvious sense, (maybe 'Best man of the groom'? :flex2: )  it's worth bearing in mind that the core of the love and draw is, from my experience, more powerful than all these images convey. But at the same time it doesn't diminish them. Hope this makes sense  :paperbag:

Edited August 9, 2013 by Benedictus

[ACS67]

I'm glad you weighed in on this Benedictus!  I appreciated your answer and I agree with it.  Thank you!

[God's Beloved]

I'm not sure any men have attempted to comment on the use of spouse imagery so far, so let me have a go. For me the language and terms we apply when talking about these things are purely human constructions or symbols that help to convey or explain a spiritual reality. The language we employ will be more appropriate to specific people than others in conveying a deeper truth.

Women may express spiritual communion and love for God in ways that correspond to her feminine nature or innate aspirations. But I don't think this is an end in and of itself.  I'm not sure whether my approach is overly mystical or not but I think of my relationship with God (expressed in the Trinity) in terms of communal and reciprocal love.  It isn't purely a matter of imitation or bonding (although this is true as well),even if these are the conventional ways men explain it. I feel it goes beyond that.to a greater drawing of the soul in a manner that language only attempts to convey. So although men won't start using bridal language, or that this would make any obvious sense, (maybe 'Best man of the groom'? :flex2: )  it's worth bearing in mind that the core of the love and draw is, from my experience, more powerful than all these images convey. But at the same time it doesn't diminish them. Hope this makes sense  :paperbag:

 

Benedictus,

 

Thanks for sharing your perspective . I think CV for women is the earliest form of consecrated life in the Church and the Spousal imagery in relationship with Jesus Christ became its essence and charism. The Charism  did not have to define itself in relation to other vocations  like religious life for men, religious life for women , secular institutes etc.

 

In today's world the Spousal imagery has to rethink itself . I agree that such imagery is a means to convey and live a deeper truth about our relationship with God . the Scriptures too used this because no other imagery seemed to convey it to the fullest . The charism of CV however depends on this particular imagery because its sacramentality  touches the deepest recesses of  human love , thus bringing every christian 'in touch with'  his or her own heart, mind, body and soul's thirst for God.
 

[abrideofChrist]

The CV vocation speaks to my own under private vows, since CV's are called to secular life without title or habit - yet unlike me they are a consecrated state in The Church and therefore a witness to and even a role model for me about my own vocation.  The important thing for CV's themselves and for me is therefore how they live out their consecrated lives in the secular world without anything to mark them as different from the rest except the persons that they are.  But how am I to identify them as CV's without distinguishing markings?

 

The CV vocation originally flowed from the laity, from the baptized state in the laity - as a commitment of lay persons to virginity.  They were then isolated from the lay state and transferred into a special consecrated state.  I believe that religious life then flowed originally from the CV consecrated state.  These states in life and The Gift of the Title "Bride of Christ" and "virgin, bride and mother" - a witness and image of The Church and in many instances laity do go out into the secular world embracing it as their 'vineyard', their mission in life, as well s functions in The Church (as I do) and as leaven without any distinguishing marks - although I always wear a silver cross on a leather thong and commitment band on my commitment or wedding finger. 

 

My most important focus is on the person that I am with the cross and ring to state why I am the way that I am.  I am a committed Catholic layperson.  I am not in the consecrated state which initially is a movement of The Holy Spirit taken up by the person and then confirmed by The Church as a person consecrated to God in a permanent state of life.

 

By "distinguishing markings" for CVs, I take it you mean something like a habit?  A lot of people don't realize that our distinguishing marking is the wedding band.  People joined in matrimony wear the wedding band to distinguish their married state from the unmarried in the Church.  Likewise, CVs wear the wedding band to distinguish their nuptial consecrated state from the other faithful.  If married women wore other things in addition to the wedding band, I believe it would be customary for CVs to do so as well because the vocation is essentially spousal.

 

You make it sound as if consecrated virginity is simply an overflowing of our baptismal grace and that the Church artificially created a consecrated state to separate those dedicated to chastity from other groups of the faithful.  I think we should take the idea that the Marian (virginal) state of the Church is essential to the Church seriously and explore why the Mary is considered the first CV consecrated at the Annunciation.  Consecrated virginity- like other types of consecrated life- is distinguished by a grace that is not the common heritage of the baptized.  Very much unlike other types of consecrated life, however, CVs have as their very identity the spousal nature of the Church herself and make the Church visible to others.  What I have been saying is that unlike religious, CVs have an actual nuptial bond that is created between them and Christ just like human spouses have an actual nuptial bond that is created between themselves.  This is why they ARE brides and don't merely share in the imagery more fully than religious.  Because this is an actual marriage bond, the Church doesn't merely create a fictitious state in life for people who are "officially committed" to serving God just so people can point to the state and say the Church does this arbitrarily.  No, the Church recognizes that an ontological change happened to Our Lady, and mediated a similar ontological change on many virgins and separated them from the laity on account of their actually having a spousal bond with Christ, embodying the Church's identity to Christ.
 

[abrideofChrist]

Thank you AbrideofChrist !

 

I often think of the Church as a Sacrament of Salvation to the entire world .For its sacramentality to shine , every color in the rainbow of vocations should shine brilliantly with the particular charism of each state of life / vocation . If all vocations lose sight of their foundational charism  , the rainbow will but have faded , diluted colors .

 

In today's world people look for points of reference . In consecrated life  every individual and community has the Founder's Charism as a  constant and yet dynamic  point of reference  which has to be adapted to today's world.

 

CV is ancient. It is important to rediscover , redefine its charism and then adapt it to today's world too.

 

Regarding this i have some thoughts which i shall send via PM. :cheers:

 

Hi God's Beloved,

 

PM received.  Thanks.

 

I don't know if I'd be comfortable in using a rainbow analogy since the rainbow is used today to signify sexual "diversity" or perversity, but I do understand your point and agree that each vocation must be understood for what it is.

 

Again, while I think it is important to understand the charism of the consecrated virgins, I am not sure we should use the word "redefine" to describe our understanding of our vocation.  "Redefine" in my way of thinking, has to do with changing our definition of something, which means that that thing has changed in essence or that the definition was seriously wrong in the first place.  I would say "refine" instead.  What the Fathers of the Church said is always true.  CVs are the Bride of Christ.  The point of this thread isn't to redefine "bride" but to clarify what is meant by the term and to make sufficient distinctions to give honor to the essence of other vocations such as religious life for women. 

 

[Laurie]

I've been thinking further about the fact that the consecration of a virgin is a constitutive sacramental, and whether this sacramental brings about an "ontological" change.

 

In addition to the prior comments I made, about the language used regarding the consecration of a virgin being consistent with the language the Church uses in describing an ontological change, another thought has grabbed my attention.

 

The 3 sacraments that bring about an ontological change are received once (baptism, confirmation, ordination--though a man could be ordained a priest and then a bishop, the fullness of ordination in the episcopacy is only received once).

 

The consecration of a virgin is bestowed only once. (And, also as pointed out earlier, there is no way to un-do the consecration once it is done. There is no way in which the CV could be "dispensed" from the consecration, etc. This is likewise the same as baptism, confirmation, and ordination.)

 

The consecration of a virgin (sacramental) seems to me to be consistent with the 3 sacraments mentioned above. The consecration of a virgin is reserved to her diocesan bishop. He may delegate another bishop to perform the rite. If another bishop consecrates her without her own Diocesan Bishop's approval, Cardinal Burke says the consecration is valid (though improperly enacted--that phrase is mine--since the Diocesan Bishop is the one liturgical law indicates is the minsiter of the consecration). Conversely, if a priest who has not been designated by the Diocesan Bishop to consecrate a virgin does so, it is not valid (per an official response from the Holy See to Archbishop Burke). In that instance, the "situation must be sanated by the private imparting of the consecration by the diocesan bishop."

 

Which tells me, once the consecration is validly done, it is done. Once and for all. (There is no mandate that the situation "must be sanated" in the instance where another bishop (validly) confers the consecration, albeit without her Diocesan Bishop's permission/delegation.) And in this it is very similar to the 3 sacraments that bring about an ontological change. E.g., conditional baptism is bestowed when it cannot be known whether a person has in fact been (validly) baptized. It is understood that the baptism conferred by the conditional baptism is only conferred if the person has not been validly baptized. There is no such thing as being validly baptized twice.

 

p. 49 in the pdf, p. 44 if you are going by the page footers

 

http://consecratedvirgins.org/usacv/sites/default/files/documents/VocRes1-1InfoPkt_new.pdfl

 

I assume the term "sanated" is used to mean "to remedy the situation," but I could be wrong there.

[Klarisse]

Klarisse and Ima Lurker,

Sorry about the delay in getting back with you. Life is busy and takes over sometimes!

abrideofChrist, the delay was actually helpful; I encountered the relevant passages in a Catechism class before seeing your reply, which means that I can integrate that information, though it makes this notably longer. Feel free to take time to respond. I intend to severely limit my posting on this thread after this, since to do otherwise would likely be unhealthy, so this will be by far the most complete explanation.

My Views Regarding Spousal Language Use

I think it would be very helpful for people who are discerning their vocations to be told by active religious sisters and non-CV orders that have an emphasis on bridal imagery, that their community has a "bridal spirituality" or "spousal devotion" to Jesus. Currently, when some sisters put in their literature things like becoming a "bride of Christ", this makes a discerner believe that they in actual fact become a bride of Christ in the manner a CV does (without necessarily knowing what a CV is!). ...

...

... At stake here is the fact that virginal consecration constitutes the person a bride of Christ which is different than making a person share in the bridal imagery of the Church in a deeper degree.

...

To wrap up, I don't have a problem with women religious communities telling candidates that they have a bridal spirituality. I do have a problem with them saying that they BECOME brides of Christ because we associate the term with the fullness and complete imaging of the bride of Christ which is limited to CVs! ...

I think the Church as a whole could do much better about acknowledging consecrated virginity as a vocation (along with most other forms of consecrated life.) I am not against making better distinctions, such as reserving the term "consecrated virgin" to talk about those in the Order of Consecrated Virgins unless otherwise specified. For womens' discernment, quite often only religious life, marriage, and single life are presented as possibilities. Vocation prayers will mention the priesthood and usually religious but only sometimes "consecrated life." It seems that girls nowadays are lucky if they meet a religious sister (and know she's a sister) in the USA, even among those who go to Catholic schools, but consecrated virgins are practically unheard of.

When the secular media looks at sisters, any mention of spousal language seems to be latched onto and emphasized by editors; it's sensational. To prevent distortions there, perhaps sisters should try avoiding or limiting it during interviews.

That being said, I think ruling who can use what spousal imagery is almost useless at helping the typical Catholic to distinguish the vocations and would probably cause harm (as seen on this thread) when attempted by a non-authoritative source. Discernment materials and retreats would be the most central place to make changes, including those retreats held by religious institutes if the discernment is for a general vocation. They could add at least some information about consecrated virgins, hermits, secular institutes, and societies of apostolic life in a way that's hard to miss. On this forum, for example, there could be headings under Vocation Resources, A Compilation, even if each only has a few links.

It makes sense that religious sisters should place the emphasis partially on the public profession of the evangelical counsels, since that is one of the four things that distinguish religious life, but so is giving witness to the union of Christ with the Church. I'll go into that more later. They'd also cover that institute's charism and apostolate. Using carefully qualified and impersonal terms doesn't really fit when covering spousal spirituality, though. Naturally, consecrated virgins would tend to place emphasis on offering perpetual virginity, mystical betrothal, and service to the Church in the relevant lifestyle.

For religious, following St. Teresa of Avila's and St. Thérèse of Lisieux's patterns of language would make a lot of sense: Focus mainly on God, using a mixture of titles that prevents pegging Him into too human or self-oriented a definition, with spousal imagery becoming denser in regard to profession.

Monopoly on "Bride of Christ"

This is an incredible insight, God's Beloved. I hadn't thought about it in terms of CVs sharing a "monopoly" on the title of Bride of Christ with the Church but in effect, we do. We must raise public awareness about our charism and demonstrate that by blurring distinctions we lose sight of these God given charims to different groups in the Church, including the Order of Virgins'. Thank you for sharing this.

From the evidence presented in this thread, I don't think that it can be assumed that consecrated virgins have a monopoly on being a bride of Christ (which can be a superset of having the title "Bride of Christ.") The most official form of being a bride of Christ also doesn't have to have the cutoff line for being a bride of Christ.

Interestingly, neither canon law nor the Catechism specify a particular title in the definition of consecrated virgins, but both describe mystical espousal and service of the Church as characteristics. The Catechism uses the term "Bride of Christ" in the context of saying that a consecrated virgin is "an eschatological image of this heavenly Bride of Christ [i.e. the Church] and of the life to come." (CCC 923)

An underlying assumption is that being a bride of Christ is something that can only be applied to consecrated virginity. The basis given for that assumption seems to be outlined here:
 

... The definition of consecrated virginity is a spousal relationship with Christ. Full stop. Period. Therefore, its essence must BE to BE a bride of Christ. The definition of a religious is NOT the same. Therefore, a religious cannot by definition BE a bride of Christ.

This logic is off. First, the definition of a religious does not exclude being a bride of Christ. The fact that a nun can be both indicates that. Moreover, religious life is in part distinguished by witness given to the union of Christ with the Church.

Second, being a bride of Christ is not a limited commodity that can only be given to individuals in one type of consecrated life, and therefore the zero-sum logic used here doesn't apply. If we look at the type of betrothal specified for consecrated virgins, mystical betrothal is considered to be something possible outside of consecrated virginity (St. Teresa of Avila and St. John of the Cross.) To give an example of how mystical marriage being part of the definition of consecrated virginity doesn't prevent its presence in other forms of life, let's look at rectangles. All 4-sided 2D shapes with 90° angles are rectangles. Squares are rectangles, but they are only a subset of rectangles.

Third, it is also assumed that mystical espousal to Christ is the definition of consecrated virginity. For religious life, it is assumed that the evangelical counsels or public profession thereof are the distinguishing factor. Neither of these is completely correct.

A mystical betrothal to Christ is part of the definition of a consecrated virgin's vocation, but they are also dedicated to the service of the Church by the consecration: http://consecratedvirgins.org/elements

If we look at the definitions of consecrated virginity and religious life in the Catechism, both refer to a unitive aspect. Consecrated virgins are described as being "betrothed mystically to Christ," and for religious one of the four distinguishing criteria is "witness given to the union of Christ with the Church" (CCC 923 and 925). Additionally, "Religious life derives from the mystery of the Church. It is a gift she has received from her Lord, a gift she offers as a stable way of life to the faithful called by God to profess the counsels. Thus, the Church can both show forth Christ and acknowledge herself to be the Savior's bride" (CCC 926).

Preventing the Use of Certain Language

What is being said is that CV have the right and the monopoly over the title Bride of Christ because this is the VERY CHARISM of OCV and canonically every form of consecrated life has the right to Protect its charism from being diluted . If religious institutes advertize that by joining them one gets the title of Bride of Christ , then this is diluting the Charism of OCV and relativizing it to say the Consecrated virginity belongs to and is part of Religious life.

Similarly , if OCV advertizes that by becoming a consecrated virgin one can call oneself a Religious , then this is diluting the Charism of Religous life which is based on explicit profession of the Evangelical counsels of Obedience, Chastity and Poverty etc and relativizing it to say that Religious life belongs to and is part of the Order of Consecrated virgins.

--If Religious find that some CV is calling herself a Religious then they have the right to ask the CV to Stop calling herself a Religious. But every CV has the right through Baptism to live the evangelical counsels.

--If CV find that an individual Religious is claiming the title of Bride of Christ publicly , then she has the right to ask the individual Religious to Stop doing so. But every individual Religious has the right through Baptism to live her relationship with Christ in a spousal spirituality.

These assertions are not analogous, and it makes less sense in light of the definition of consecrated life if we use like terms. If a CV calls herself a religious, the equivalent going the opposite way would be a non-CV religious calling herself a CV or claiming to be in the Order of Consecrated Virgins. That would be specifying a particular type of consecrated life. Spousal language has yet to be demonstrated to be exclusively in the realm of consecrated virgins, though it has been demonstrated that consecrated virgins should describe their vocation using it.

Now, if a consecrated virgin claimed that by her consecration, she is called to live the evangelical counsels, she would have every right to do so. The public profession of said counsels has been held as the defining characteristic in religious life, but it is one of four (CCC 925). The Catechism states that "it is the profession of these counsels, within a permanent state of life recognized by the Church, that characterizes the life consecrated to God." This is immediately after mentioning chastity in celibacy, poverty, and obedience (CCC 915). Moreover, Archbishop Burke has acknowledged the counsels' role in a USACV information packet cited at the bottom of this page: "Their comportment, modesty in dress, simplicity in lifestyle all betoken their living of the evangelical counsels."

It is similar for religious sisters and brothers. One of the defining characteristics is witness given to the union of Christ with the Church, which is spousal. Different religious will do this differently, obviously, and the sentence "the Church can both show forth Christ and acknowledge herself to be the Savior's bride" may very well be based on the assumption that men will represent Christ's union with the Church and women the Church's union with Christ (CCC 926).

The position that religious should not use certain spousal language requires a leap in logic from this angle. However, the local bishop and the Magisterium as a whole have authority to step in. To my knowledge, this has not been done.

The Church's Precedent for Religious Claiming to Become Brides of Christ

To wrap up, I don't have a problem with women religious communities telling candidates that they have a bridal spirituality. I do have a problem with them saying that they BECOME brides of Christ because we associate the term with the fullness and complete imaging of the bride of Christ which is limited to CVs! Let me put this in a different way to be absolutely clear. Is it not true that when I posted my original posts, almost everyone believed that nuns ARE the brides of Christ? Is this not why there is so much animosity on this thread? Is it not true that the heart of the difficulty in accepting this is because for so long, nuns and sisters have been identified by the title of Bride of Christ even though it turns out that this title is conferred by the Church ONLY on CV nuns and CVs living in the world? This is why I believe that people NEED to know the difference so that they can examine their hearts and see if they are called to be a bride of Christ in the full way as opposed to being a bride of Christ in a participating way. We don't have a problem with this for men since we have long been catechized as to the difference between the common priesthood and ordained priesthood. Now we just have to catch up when it comes to the common bridal relationship with Christ and the consecrated bridal relationship with Christ.

The logic used here doesn't work when asserting how religious may not refer to themselves for multiple reasons that don't require picking through definitions of consecrated life, too. These are the reasons that would stand out really obviously to someone with general exposure to Church documents, and most of these have already been cited by others but dismissed with logic similar to that countered above. As a result, the quoted position will be hard to sell to religious short of their local bishop, superior, or the Magisterium (i.e. an authoritative source) ordering them to watch their language. The Magisterium's actions seem to render such an order contradictory, though.

One reason is that many church documents and church-approved profession ceremonies, including the Catechism, use spousal imagery specifically for religious life. A matter of degree can be debated, but it doesn't change the presence of this language. Though not phrased as such, this implies explicit approval.

A second is tradition. This has literally been going on for centuries, and the Church has had many opportunities to correct the language used if a correction were necessary, including when it appears in saints' writings. As a result, there appears to be implicit permission. Saint Clare goes further in a letter to Bl. Agnes of Prague: "because You are the spouse and the mother and the sister of my Lord Jesus Christ" (http://www.franciscanbrothersminor.com/FBM/1st._Letter_to_Agnes_of_Prague.html). Saint Francis introduces another perspective, which I've only seen him use, though it's quoted in the Rule of St. Clare "and have taken the Holy Spirit as your spouse" (http://ourladyofthepearl.com/Documents/Rule_St_Clare.pdf).

Another reason is that the doctors St. Teresa of Avila and St. Thérèse of Lisieux used spousal imagery in the context of religious professions. That's an even stronger form of implied permission. The examples that I gave in my last post were all taken from translations of their works. I filtered out mystical espousal on St. Teresa's part by focusing on her poetry for other sisters' professions. St. Thérèse said "Mary's nativity! What a beautiful feast on which to become the spouse of Jesus!" (Story of a Soul, Manuscript A, page 77, the first side). In St. Teresa's poetry, one of the poems titled "En Una Profesión" or "For a Profession" starts with the sentence "Since our Spouse / Wants us in prision, / Let us glory / Glory in religion." Those are only one example each, but others are scattered about.

A fourth is the teaching of Pope John Paul II and possibly other popes, though this example is from him. He said things like these concluding words in a general audience on the topic of consecrated women: "We hope and pray that many women religious, possessing the heart of a bride of Christ and showing it in their lives, may also help reveal to all people the Church's fidelity in her union with Christ her spouse and enable them to understand it better: fidelity in truth, in charity, and in yearning for universal salvation." (http://www.vatican.va/holy_father/john_paul_ii/audiences/alpha/data/aud19950315en.html)

[God's Beloved]

Interestingly, neither canon law nor the Catechism specify a particular title in the definition of consecrated virgins, but both describe mystical espousal and service of the Church as characteristics. The Catechism uses the term "Bride of Christ" in the context of saying that a consecrated virgin is "an eschatological image of this heavenly Bride of Christ [i.e. the Church] and of the life to come." (CCC 923)

 

Dear Klarisse,

 

Thanks for your sharing !

 

I've just skimmed through the recent posts .Need to allow them to sink in , reflect , before responding. However one point I'd like to comment on in this post  :

 

Canon 604 # 1 mentions the term " when the diocesan bishop consecrates them according to the approved liturgical rite "

There was no canon on consecrated virginity lived in the world  in the previous code of canon law because this particular consecration was given only in a few monastic women's communities if they had the tradition .

 

After the Second Vatican Council the rite was revised . When the New code of canon law [yr1983] mentioned it in canon 604   , this vocation was still very new in today's world . The canon law  refers to the " approved liturgical rite " for specifics of the vocation . Hence the requirements , the nature of the vocation , the title of Bride of Christ etc.  which are clearly expressed in the approved liturgical rite in the Roman Pontifical , acquires the Force of Law .

 

 

Since consecrated virginity lived in the world was hardly present before Vatican II , religious life was the only form of consecrated life known by the Hierarchy and Laity . So the spousal imagery referring to the Church was freely applied to religious life in general . A careful reading of most 'authoritative' sources even before Vatican II  will indicate that the spousal imagery firstly referred to the Church and then how religious life reflects  this or participates in this . The Essence was still applied to the Church while religious life was said to participate in this.

 

There has been rapid expansion of various new modes of communication only during the last 15 yrs . Hence the Hierarchy, the Theologians , Religious , Laity hardly studied consecrated virginity as a unique vocation , or consecrated virginity in relation to other forms of consecrated life. Even today , the hierarchy who were schooled in old terminology of Religious life , apply the term Religious to All forms of consecrated life  , because they had neither the time nor the necessity to go into details of the identity of each form of consecrated life. Consecrated virgins themselves being very few until the last 10 yrs , did not know and still do not know their own identity . Many got into the order of virgins after leaving religious life , or embraced the vocation as a fall-back option . CVs  were and are known to refer to themselves as religious in some parts of the world.

 

Very few theologians have tried to understand the different and unique Charisms of each form of consecrated life. Vita Consecrata  opened the door for doing so.

 

Seeing how religious life and in fact consecrated life in general is fading away in most parts of the world, it is necessary for each to go back to the roots of the charism of the founders. Church docs will be clearer only when the theology of CV develops further 'in relation to' the newer forms of consecrated life that have emerged during  last 1500 yrs.

 

More responses to what you have written at some other time...... but it is my personal request  --please do continue sharing your thoughts on the thread. Such discussions can help refine the understanding of charisms and also act as corrective to each other in the positive sense.

 

Thanks!

[abrideofChrist]

Klarisse,

 

As God's Beloved points out, the authoritative source for the title of Bride of Christ is the Rite of Consecration itself.  Klarisse, I do not get the impression you really understand what it means to be a consecrated virgin.  The essence of her vocation is to BE a Bride of Christ.  Can you agree to that?  The definition of her vocation is to Be a bride of Christ.  Can you agree with that?  If you can't, please quote from the Rite of Consecration of Virgins to support your position.  When we are done with this, we can move on to the next point, which is discussing the essence of religious life.  Until then, let's establish some common premises.  :)