Bride Of Christ—another Perspective

[BarbTherese]

Just a random question - what did you think of the debate?

 

 

Thank you for the question.  I don't understand it at all really, which is not to state that the debate is not an important one and for reasons that I have already stated.  To my way of thinking in all things it is Grace that confers and Grace that endows one to carry out what Grace has conferred.  Certainly, the debate to me is disconnected from ordinary everyday life with nothing to add to nor subtract from ordinary daily life; mind you, this is just my understanding which has nothing to recommend it.

 

The important thing to me about having one's say is not so much that one is correct, although this is always nice.  Rather that one has tried to express one's view and a better mind may state the crux of the matter far more clearly - or another may pick up some clue, or have some thought tweaked by what one states.  This is how The Holy Spirit can work rather often.

 

I am a bit disturbed that a seeming striving for some sort of superiority may influence discerners to do likewise.  Pride is ever present and the important thing is to go where one is led by The Gratuitious Grace of The Holy Spirit, or wherever where one is led without concerns about how, when, where or why.  But it can take some sort of spiritual maturity to arrive at that point.

 

At times, not so much in this thread, but in the other thread I have been surprised at the level of what struck me as unkindness possibly motivated by pride or ego and from consecrated women it would seem but then I too can be moved by pride or ego and sometimes into unkindness. 

 

To summarize, such as I do not understand all the hullaballoo taking place on some airy fairy plane disconnected from living out one's journey.  Mind you, airy fairy plan and hullaballoo to me. :)  We do all our sums right but The Lord will not be compartmentalized nor obey our rules. :)  "All things are possible to God".

[BarbTherese]

As a sacramental, the consecration of a virgin, and her spousality enacted by the very Rite itself is NOT dependent upon her ardent desire to be the bride of Christ or her personal feeling that she wants to be the bride of Christ. Sacramentals, like sacraments, can be limited in bearing fruit if the receiver does not dispose herself to cooperate with Divine Grace but this is a far different thing than saying the efficacy of the sacramental itself depends upon personal desire/personal volition/personal feelings.

 

 

Taken from a comment by Laurie in the other thread.  It is indeed vastly different, although an ordinary mind might not grasp the subtlety, although this ordinary mind does in this instance.  Be the above as it may, Divine Graces of the consecration of virgins is not strictly limited to consecrated virgins, for The Lord indeed acts as He May, when He May and in whosoever He May for His own good reasons.  The Consecration of a Virgin is a sign and astatement, if you like, that in this instance He is indeed acting in a certain manner.

[BarbTherese]

Some are called and by The Holy Spirit (the duties of one’s state will often inform) to engage in intellectual debate and musings and these are important in the life of The Church.  I have no such call informed by the duties of my own state in life, rather to engage with very ordinary everyday faces-in-the-pews as it were on a very ordinary, down to earth and practical manner.

We all, however, can be very confident that we are called to engage in the perfection of Charity and love of neighbor.  The fruits of The Holy Spirit are observable phenomena: charity (or love), joy, peace, patience, benignity (or kindness), goodness, longanimity (or long suffering), mildness, faith, modesty, continency, and chastity.

What keeps occuring to me as I read the two threads at times are the words of St Teresa of Avila “Lord spare me your gloomy saints”.  Laughing here – seems to me that St Teresa was long on Joy and short on Long Suffering.

I am long on Words short on Engagement and none are fruits of the Holy Spirit!

 

St Teresa in her Constitution wrote that there were to be no games during Recreation as The Lord would see to it that there would be those in the community who would amuse.  This convinced me I must surely have a Carmelite Vocation.   I lead a quite busy and stressful life rather often for a 68yr old gal and laughter reduces stress - hence I laugh a lot. :)  

 

But their is a place for laughter and a place for seriousness.  Probably I just don't know where what and where should or should not be rather often according to our cultural social boundaries and 'niceties' - what is right and proper and what is to be avoided.  Not due to Bipolar my doctor tells me rather to an eccentric nature or what my brother (psychologist) calls "a free spirit".  I collated references for His Grace, one stated "her spirituality has a lightness to it which must be helpful to those around her".  Not all I do suspect! LOL

[Spem in alium]

Thank you for your response, Barb. I agree with you. Though my question was referring to the Aus. political debate - I probably should have been more clear :)
 

Edited August 11, 2013 by Spem in alium

[abrideofChrist]

Technically, yes, I do think that the charism of being a bride of Christ is ultimately independent of any canonically-defined consecrated state in the Church. But this doesn’t mean that I think the Church’s intervention is unimportant or superfluous. I believe that the consecration of virgins, among other things, confirms this charism in a very profound and spiritually significant way.

 

 

I do believe that the consecration of virgins does effect a real change (right now I’m not 100% sure we can call it an ontological change, although generally I am open to arguments in favor of using this term). But, I don’t think this change is a matter of imparting a special spousal identity "out of the blue" where there absolutely was none before--although I do think this change entails a certain deepening of the call to be a “bride."

 

I am really surprised that a canon-lawyer-in-training would be so dismissive of canonical definitions of states, especially since the Church teaches about the different states in life in documents other than canon law!  Let me give you an example that my canon lawyer friends talk about all of the time.  A lot of people think that a convalidation of marriage is merely a Church blessing and a recognition of their married status.  They believe that the canonical definition of marriage is completely irrelevant, and that it has no bearing on the ontological reality of their supposed nuptial bond's existence.  They believe that they ARE married despite what any canon law says to the contrary because they know they are married and they feel married and they act like married people.  They are in love, they feel greatly attracted to their soul mate!  Now, I would expect that you would argue against such people that there is actually  no ontological bond of marriage between the two who need a convalidation. 
The people who should be having a convalidation would want to think that they are getting a "confirmation" in a "very profound and spiritually significant way" of their marriage.  But the actual truth is that they are UNMARRIED singles who need to get themselves MARRIED.  This is the exact thing happening with the Consecration of Virgins or the Consecration of Religious.  They are NOT CVs or Religious UNLESS they go through the ceremonies instituted by the Church.  This is not a purely nominal legal thing like a marriage license from the state.  It is a constitutive thing like vows in a valid marriage.  Again, this stems from a fundamental misunderstanding of what canon law is about. 

[BarbTherese]

Thank you for your response, Barb. I agree with you. Though my question was referring to the Aus. political debate - I probably should have been more clear :)
 

 

Oh dear!   But again, a very sincere thank you for asking - it is most kind of you :)

 

The political debate for me was all ho hum.  Very boring, more of the usual from our two main politicians.  I was surprised indeed that Kevin Rudd did not do much better than he actually did and it looks as if bringing notes to the debate and referring to them will be an issue and by media.  It is the media, I think, that really dictates the politics of the day through manipulation of public thinking.  We take our information from media and politicians strive to speak to it for this very reason and speak to it and with it in various ways.

I thought that Tony Abbott presented far better on TV than Kevin Rudd which was a surprise.

It would have been better I think as questions presented and then the two actually debate.  To me it wasn't a debate, simply political talks by parties in opposition and we get more than enough of that.

 

Not impressed at all by either really nor do I trust either.  I am going to really have to think and pray about my vote - with Rudd and Abbot it strikes me as between the devil and the deep blue sea without knowing which is which.

Edited August 11, 2013 by BarbaraTherese

[4LoveofJMJ]

Reading this thread has me very confused! Perhaps someone can give me an explenation to some of the question(s) that I have? I don't have any intention of offending anyone. As a women who is looking at her options I just want to be sure I have the facts straight.

It seems to me (from what I have been able to understand) that the only way someone can truly be a bride of Christ is for the person to to become a CV, and that religious life is only a way to devote your life to God through a community with only the idea of being the bride of Christ. Not actually being one (a part that I am still confused about). If a young woman desires to be Christ's bride fully (not just have the idea or wishful thinking of it) yet still live in an active religious community, will she have to become a CV then enter a religious community? Or is there something else? I did see the part in the other thread about a religious sister being able to recieve the consecration rite but that was for nuns in the cloister and I am wondering about ACTIVE religious communities.

And since it seems that so many women are entering the religious life with one of the main reasons being that spousal relationship. Are they being lead astray? If by being a perpetually professed sister does no make you a

[BarbTherese]

_{In both threads, it would be helpful if all questions addressed were answered rather than just being ignored, or perhaps not read at all inadvertently.  I would not know which.}

 

_{As general feedback, very often both threads seem to be consecrated women (I think, no real way of telling) exchanging posts contradicting each other and on a level that the ordinary Catholic probably cannot insight.  To my mind, the real measure of genius or intelligence, whatever, is to make oneself understood to all.   Blinding with science, should it occur, has no purpose to my way of thought other than destructive purpose.  It is very important as Catholics that we do stress any issue which does pertain to ordinary everyday life and with probably many of us striving to evangelize as well as parents to train children, it is important that we can grasp Catholic matters.  Vocations today are a very important and vital issue in The Church.}

 

_{If one vocation in The Church needs to put down another in some sort of "one more, the other less" then immediately I question almost everything that is stated thereafter.  Words keep cropping up like "ontological" and it seems even those concerned with ontology as a subject cannot agree on meaning.  To me the word covers the nature of reality - what is actually real, what is not.  Therefore, to my mind, Grace brings about ontological  (real and actual) change according to the nature of The Grace. Certainly, The Church is guardian and dispenser of the Graces of God; however, again to my mind, it would be a mistake to think that therefore The Lord can be compartmentalized and does not act outside of The Church's actions and decisions etc.}

 

_{Where consecrated virginity is concerned what I know and is internalized from the United States Association of Consecrated Virgins (USACV) website.  All outside that is speculative only for me.}

 

_{(PS Can one prop oneself? or has the Board made a mistake or more likely I hope that someone pressed the wrong prop)}

Edited August 11, 2013 by BarbaraTherese

[BarbTherese]

To our understanding, of course, some Graces are granted to The Church and only to The Church.  And in an ideal sense, our understanding is guided by The Church.  Can The Church make mistakes? In some things yes, in some things no.

It is not much use telling a thinking person they have an obligation to abide by Canon Law and then stating that they do not know what it means without explaining what it might mean to that person or persons - and then be prepared to engage in questions and answers, debate............whatever is the correct term.  Hopefully charitably - with kindness and concern for the other(s).

Edited August 11, 2013 by BarbaraTherese

[4LoveofJMJ]

Bride of Christ, then why do they tell you?

As I have been reading this I keep on thinking of the part in the Diary of St Maria Faustina where she was making her final vows. When Jesus had appeard to her during that time He reffered to her as His spouse. Any ideas as to why He would call her that since she was only a nun and not a consecrated virgin? Or was it because she possibly had the consecration rite along with the usual rite of profession since she was in an enclosed order?

I have not studied theology or philosophy so take it easy on me eh? :p

[Sponsa-Christi]

 

 

I am really surprised that a canon-lawyer-in-training would be so dismissive of canonical definitions of states, especially since the Church teaches about the different states in life in documents other than canon law!  Let me give you an example that my canon lawyer friends talk about all of the time.  A lot of people think that a convalidation of marriage is merely a Church blessing and a recognition of their married status.  They believe that the canonical definition of marriage is completely irrelevant, and that it has no bearing on the ontological reality of their supposed nuptial bond's existence.  They believe that they ARE married despite what any canon law says to the contrary because they know they are married and they feel married and they act like married people.  They are in love, they feel greatly attracted to their soul mate!  Now, I would expect that you would argue against such people that there is actually  no ontological bond of marriage between the two who need a convalidation. 
The people who should be having a convalidation would want to think that they are getting a "confirmation" in a "very profound and spiritually significant way" of their marriage.  But the actual truth is that they are UNMARRIED singles who need to get themselves MARRIED.  This is the exact thing happening with the Consecration of Virgins or the Consecration of Religious.  They are NOT CVs or Religious UNLESS they go through the ceremonies instituted by the Church.  This is not a purely nominal legal thing like a marriage license from the state.  It is a constitutive thing like vows in a valid marriage.  Again, this stems from a fundamental misunderstanding of what canon law is about. 

 

AbrideofChrist,

 

The consecration of virgins, while it is truly spousal, is not exactly the same thing as the Sacrament of matrimony. We can’t take all of the Church’s teachings and laws on matrimony and apply them directly to consecrated virgins. (Among other things…if the Church did see the consecration of virgins as being exactly the same thing as earthly marriage, we wouldn’t be allowed to have any new consecrated virgins, since Jesus already has a prior bond!)

 

Also…I think you might be missing some of the nuances in my earlier posts. I never said that a woman becomes a bride of Christ just by means of mere attraction. I’m saying that attraction might be a sign of a call that’s already there, objectively. I also think that this initial invitation to be Christ’s bride does require some definite response.

 

Finally, drawing a distinction between a charismatic gift and the canonical categories through which this charism might be manifested is not the same thing as dismissing the importance of the various canonical forms of consecrated life.

 

[BarbTherese]

Truth without Love can only ever be half the truth.

[Ima Lurker]

Reading this thread has me very confused! Perhaps someone can give me an explenation to some of the question(s) that I have? I don't have any intention of offending anyone. As a women who is looking at her options I just want to be sure I have the facts straight.

It seems to me (from what I have been able to understand) that the only way someone can truly be a bride of Christ is for the person to to become a CV, and that religious life is only a way to devote your life to God through a community with only the idea of being the bride of Christ. Not actually being one (a part that I am still confused about). If a young woman desires to be Christ's bride fully (not just have the idea or wishful thinking of it) yet still live in an active religious community, will she have to become a CV then enter a religious community? Or is there something else? I did see the part in the other thread about a religious sister being able to recieve the consecration rite but that was for nuns in the cloister and I am wondering about ACTIVE religious communities.

And since it seems that so many women are entering the religious life with one of the main reasons being that spousal relationship. Are they being lead astray? If by being a perpetually professed sister does no make you a

 

This, and why bother becoming a Consecrated Religious at all since the only thing that matters is what we "feel" in our hearts? 

 

I was so excited when this thread started, I love thinking outside the box but this is strikingly Protestant thinking, to rely on emotions (I think this, I feel that). We Catholics don't rely on feelings to bring us to the Truth because we have the Magisterium of the Church. There are a NUMBER of beautiful documents from our Catholic Church officials pertaining to this vocation. I've been reading everything I can come across trying to understand it better! 

 

I know there are different degrees that we can give ourself to Christ. It's why I entered Religious life so many years ago, to be His in a very special way. I left because I knew that it was not what He called me to be. Now I'm a mom and a wife. I won't pretend that I've given Him everything when I haven't. As a Nun with first Profession, I thought I had given EVERYTHING. But I hadn't. I'm glad I know this. Anything that leads me to the Truth leads me to Christ and that is never a bad thing! I'm not less of a person for not giving everything. I know He loves me completely. Just as there are different choirs of angels, there are different degrees of giving here on earth. 

 

As a child, I learned from St. Therese that He fills our cup completely, whether we be a thimble or a tumbler. No need to be jealous of tumblers! 

 

I won't post here again, I know I'd not be welcome here though it appears that the original thoughts are all feelings and I've certainly posted mine along with everyone else here.

 

Thank you for reading. Sorry if I've offended, we're all children of God, I'd never want to hurt ANY of His children. :) 

 

Peace and prayers! 

[Sponsa-Christi]

4loveofJMJ,

 

The Church hasn't given us a definitive explanation of the the question we're addressing here, and right now there are two different threads with two different opinions of what it means to be a "bride of Christ" vis-a-vis consecrated virginity vs. religious life.

 

My opinion is that the call to be a bride of Christ is ultimately a direct gift from the Lord, which is confirmed and manifested in a privileged way through the consecration of virgins. However, since the call to be a bride of Christ is ultimately a free gift of God, I think it's also possible that nuns and Sisters who have not received the consecration of virgins, and also perhaps some women who have simply made a private vow, might still be brides of Christ in a full and real way. 

 

If I'm understanding her correctly, abrideofChrist is arguing that, drawing from principles of Sacramental theology, we should see becoming a bride of Christ as the direct consequence of receiving the Rite of Consecration to a Life of Virginity. According to her, because consecrated virgins assume the identity of "bride of Christ" as the result of an ontological change which can be enacted only by the Rite of Consecration, women who have not received the consecration of virgins are not brides of Christ in an essential way (but only through participation in the common baptismal call to be a "bride.") The other thread where abrideofChrist elaborates on her opinion is here: http://www.phatmass.com/phorum/topic/122838-bride-of-christ/ 

 

I hope this helps?

[abrideofChrist]

I would add to Sponsa Christi's analysis of my position that consecrated people participate in reflecting the bridehood of Christ more than other baptized people.  I even quote from a papal document to that effect.  See this post.  You will note that according to my post and to the Pope, that religious nuns share more in the reflection of the Church than religious sisters or brothers...  Therefore, even the Church talks about participating in her bridehood for religious in a way that is deeper than for baptized persons.  The real crux of the issue is not a deeper bridehood but an essential one.