Bride Of Christ—another Perspective

[Sponsa-Christi]

...They are NOT CVs or Religious UNLESS they go through the ceremonies instituted by the Church. 

 

Another point brought up in abrideofChrist's post that I might need to clarify...

 

I do acknowledge that a woman needs to receive the consecration of virgins in order to be a consecrated virgin, and that a nun needs to profess vows in order to be a nun, etc. I'm not saying that someone can acquire a public canonical status solely on the basis of their personal spirituality.

 

What I am trying to say is that: the call to be a bride of Christ in and of itself is distinct from--even if it's very closely related to--the canonical vocation of consecrated virginity. 

 

I think the call to be a bride of Christ is a charism which comes directly from God; and as such, it is not something which is "controllable" by canon law. 

 

(Although right here I would like everyone to note that I am also not, not, NOT saying that the call to be a bride of Christ is reducible to a matter of personal desire or attraction--I think the charism of being a bride of Christ is an objective reality, even if discernment of the presence of this charism has a strong subjective dimension.)

 

But, this charismatic element doesn't mean that the visible intervention of the institutional Church isn't important. Canon law does give us the means to confirm this charism (i.e., through recognizing the vocation of consecrated virginity), and the Church's liturgy gives us the means to seal and deepen the commitment of a CV, to confer certain special graces upon her, and to establish her as a sacred person.

 

A laywoman who discerns that she is called to be a bride of Christ and simply makes a private vow does not have exactly the same vocation as a consecrated virgin--e.g., among other things, she doesn't have the official canonical title "bride of Christ," she doesn't receive the graces specific to the Rite of Consecration, and she doesn't have the Church's formal confirmation of her vocation. 

 

I just don't think these differences mean that we can say for certain that such a woman is NOT actually called to a spousal relationship with Christ in a real sense.

Edited August 12, 2013 by Sponsa-Christi

[Ima Lurker]

Wait, if a person is not raised to the dignity of Bride of Christ through an indissoluble bond, which is given by the bishop and constituted by the bishop, what does this mean?

 

35. The suggested text recalls the baptism of the virgin to be consecrated and declares that,
through the ministry of the Bishop, Christ will anoint her with a new grace and consecrate her to
God by a new title. The text declares: “He binds you, raised to the dignity of bride of Christ, to
the Son of God by an indissoluble bond.”45 The text goes on to relate the spousal nature of the
relationship between the consecrated virgin and Christ to the spousal relationship between the
Church and Christ. The consecrated virgins “constitute a visible sign of the great mystery,
which, while it was announced at the origins of the human race, was brought to fullness by the
spousal union of Christ with the Church.”46

 

Taken from the usacv welcome packet online p55. This packet alone is a wealth of information and it's free to download through the usacv.org!

 

Isn't he saying that the consecration is something new? Something different that isn't just canonical? I'd really appreciate your feedback here. I wasn't going to follow your post but that seems close minded and I really want to find the truth. So thank you for reading and for your response if you have the time.

 

Also, I did find the following to be useful and perhaps others might also find it striking on p33. There's a marvellous comparison table that helps us to see the differences between religious and consecrated virgins. Again, this is through the usacv, see the welcome packet.

 

Thank you and God bless!

 

 

 

 

[BarbTherese]

These threads on consecrated virginity v religious life remind me in tone and subject, genre or ilk, of the argument the apostles were having over who was to be the greatest in The Kingdom of Heaven - and remember that Jesus said "Neither shall they say: Behold here, or behold there. For lo, the kingdom of God is within you." (Luke 17)

 

Here is the argument:

Mark Ch 9

[33] But they held their peace, for in the way they had disputed among themselves, which of them should be the greatest. And sitting down, he called the twelve, and saith to them: If any man desire to be first, he shall be the last of all, and the minister of all. And taking a child, he set him in the midst of them. Whom when he had embraced, he saith to them:

Whosoever shall receive one such child as this in my name, receiveth me. And whosoever shall receive me, receiveth not me, but him that sent me.

 

 

 

 

[cmaD2006]

If this thread is going to be a continuation of the previous one then it should just be combined.  I really (really) disliked the tone of the other thread, and was hoping that this one would not turn into another outright debate.

 

Again -- if you are going to keep debating the issue, then PLEASE open up a thread in debate table.  Vocation Station is not meant for debate and it really takes away from what Vocation Station has been over the years -- a supportive place for Vocations. 

[4LoveofJMJ]

That is why I posted here and not on the other thread! I dont mean to turn this into a debate as I am just trying to get answers that will hopefully help in my discernment process. All I want is information on the different types of vocations so that I can decide which road God might be calling me to.

Edited August 12, 2013 by 4LoveofJMJ

[Sponsa-Christi]

I also don't want this thread to turn into a debate, but I think Ima's question in her last post was a good and fair one. That is, does anything new happen in the consecration of virgins? Or in other words: if it's possible for a woman to be a bride of Christ without becoming a consecrated virgin, then what is the point of having the Rite of Consecration?

 

As I see it:

 

- The consecration of virgins is the Church's confirmation of the charism to be a bride of Christ, which is no small thing!

 

- The consecration of virgins actually constitutes the candidate a "sacred person," a change which does not happen when a woman simply makes a private vow.

 

- In the consecration of virgins, the Church herself prays for a special outpouring of the Holy Spirit upon the virgin to be consecrated, and so I think we can say that a woman does receive special graces from the Rite of Consecration.

 

- Similarly, the consecration of virgins gives a woman a chance to make a public commitment to Christ, and to accept publicly His invitation to be His bride. This allows the consecrated virgin to be a public witness in a way that's not possible for someone who is has make a private vow. It's also a chance for the CV to make commitment that's binding and permanent in the "external forum," which means that she now has more accountability for living faithfully as a spouse of Christ.

 

- Receiving the consecration of virgins changes a woman's relationship to the Church. At least theoretically, after being consecrated a CV has new rights and obligations (but I'm worried that getting into exactly what I think these rights and obligations are might spark another debate, so let's leave this aside for the time being...)

 

- Also, I think there are more elements to the vocation of consecrated virginity than simply being a bride of Christ (even thought being a bride of Christ is by far the most central element of this vocation). In becoming a consecrated virgin, a woman is committed specifically to a life of virginity (rather than just simple chastity); to an eschatological witness, and to a life of service to the Church. And, I think she also acquires a special bond with her diocese. 

 

But, by listing all these things, I really am not trying to make anyone who isn't called to be a consecrated virgin feel like their vocation is somehow less "real" or important to our Lord. Consecrated virginity is one very unique vocation among the many beautiful expressions of evangelical life in the Church. 

 

My whole point in starting this thread to begin with is that, if a woman is sincerely and prayerfully perceiving a call to renounce earthly marriage so as to love Christ as her spouse, I don't think she should be disturbed by worries about whether she could ever be a "real bride of Christ" if she can't receive that consecration of virgins.

 

As I said earlier, I think the Church tells us formally who is a bride of Christ, but I don't think she gives us the means to declare confidently who is not one. 

[BarbTherese]

If this thread is going to be a continuation of the previous one then it should just be combined.  I really (really) disliked the tone of the other thread, and was hoping that this one would not turn into another outright debate.

 

Again -- if you are going to keep debating the issue, then PLEASE open up a thread in debate table.  Vocation Station is not meant for debate and it really takes away from what Vocation Station has been over the years -- a supportive place for Vocations. 

 

I think I have finally grasped "Multiquote"

I really agree with CM.  When I first joined Phatmass it was due to the celibate chaste state in the laity being debated as a vocation at all.  That debate has been settled both here and pretty much on CA as well in that it no longer is challenged.  

             The debate over who is or who is not a bride of Christ is confusing since The Church is The Bride of Christ alone (using the definite article in language and upper case "B" for Bride).  All any other vocation can ever be is a bride of Christ (noted on the USACV website using indefinite article "a" and lower case "b") and CV's are a quite vivid to me image of The Bride of Christ, The Church, eschatologically.  But IMAGE OF only in some way always and not literally interpreted since only The Church is The Bride of Christ.  Other forms of spousal relationship extended to all the faithful do not share in the image of a CV, rather in the image of The Church as The Bride of Christ.  And yet that is not quite correct either, each vocation speaks to all vocations and to the world of The Bride of Christ, The Church, as a perfect image of Jesus Himself.

 

We are all called into spousal relationship, or Unity with Jesus, holiness.  Not just some of us.  If I state "I am called into Unity with Jesus", I am in fact stating "spousal relationship".  Who is entitled to bear the title "bride of Christ" is simply an argument over titles, entitlement and suspect.

Not only this but rather regularly the differences of opinion expressed in these threads are quite theological in nature and probably beyond many who are trying to discern their vocation.

That is why I posted here and not on the other thread! I dont mean to turn this into a debate as I am just trying to get answers that will hopefully help in my discernment process. All I want is information on the different types of vocations so that I can decide which road God might be calling me to.

 

If I were discerning, I would go to the USACV website and ignore the theological debates taking place here.  No matter the title one will or will not bear as a CV, I can't see it as an issue in discernment.  Discernment ideally is about where The Lord is calling one to serve, not about titles.  Ideally one serves wherever one is called - titled or not.  There is something of romanticism in this title debate if "bride" becomes more important than "disciple" somehow and not my premise at all.  Jesus has told us that the closest relationship to Him is the "one who does the Will of My Father in Heaven".  Any argument settled surely.

The USACV website states that the CV is not to bear any title at all, nor initials after her name.

I also don't want this thread to turn into a debate, but I think Ima's question in her last post was a good and fair one. That is, does anything new happen in the consecration of virgins? Or in other words: if it's possible for a woman to be a bride of Christ without becoming a consecrated virgin, then what is the point of having the Rite of Consecration?

 

As I see it:

 

- The consecration of virgins is the Church's confirmation of the charism to be a bride of Christ, which is no small thing!

 

- The consecration of virgins actually constitutes the candidate a "sacred person," a change which does not happen when a woman simply makes a private vow.

 

- In the consecration of virgins, the Church herself prays for a special outpouring of the Holy Spirit upon the virgin to be consecrated, and so I think we can say that a woman does receive special graces from the Rite of Consecration.

 

- Similarly, the consecration of virgins gives a woman a chance to make a public commitment to Christ, and to accept publicly His invitation to be His bride. This allows the consecrated virgin to be a public witness in a way that's not possible for someone who is has make a private vow. It's also a chance for the CV to make commitment that's binding and permanent in the "external forum," which means that she now has more accountability for living faithfully as a spouse of Christ.

 

- Receiving the consecration of virgins changes a woman's relationship to the Church. At least theoretically, after being consecrated a CV has new rights and obligations (but I'm worried that getting into exactly what I think these rights and obligations are might spark another debate, so let's leave this aside for the time being...)

 

- Also, I think there are more elements to the vocation of consecrated virginity than simply being a bride of Christ (even thought being a bride of Christ is by far the most central element of this vocation). In becoming a consecrated virgin, a woman is committed specifically to a life of virginity (rather than just simple chastity); to an eschatological witness, and to a life of service to the Church. And, I think she also acquires a special bond with her diocese. 

 

But, by listing all these things, I really am not trying to make anyone who isn't called to be a consecrated virgin feel like their vocation is somehow less "real" or important to our Lord. Consecrated virginity is one very unique vocation among the many beautiful expressions of evangelical life in the Church. 

 

My whole point in starting this thread to begin with is that, if a woman is sincerely and prayerfully perceiving a call to renounce earthly marriage so as to love Christ as her spouse, I don't think she should be disturbed by worries about whether she could ever be a "real bride of Christ" if she can't receive that consecration of virgins.

 

As I said earlier, I think the Church tells us formally who is a bride of Christ, but I don't think she gives us the means to declare confidently who is not one. 

 

The Rite of Consecration states that The Holy Spirit is indeed acting without doubt and calling the person into a certain way of life or vocation.  Can The Holy Spirit act outside an official rite of The Church - of course He can.  Who has the right to bear the title of a "bride of Christ" (indirect article) - only CV's in The Church can bear this title.  Does this mean that only CV's are brides of Christ - not necessarily.  And the reason why we can't all share in that title to me is obvious.  It is an eschatological image created in The Church under the Inspiration of The Holy Spirit.

 

if The Church is The Bride of Christ, then we all share in that imagery in some way with a call to witness, reflect, image The Church in some way, while all may not share indirectly in the title of The Church which in Her fullness is eschatological in nature.

 

791 The body's unity does not do away with the diversity of its members: "In the building up of Christ's Body there is engaged a diversity of members and functions. There is only one Spirit who, according to his own richness and the needs of the ministries, gives his different gifts for the welfare of the Church."²²² The

un

ity of the Mystical Body produces and stimulates charity among the faithful: "From this it follows that if one member suffers anything, all the members suffer with him, and if one member is honored, all the members together rejoice."²²³

 

Finally, the unity of the Mystical Body triumphs over all human divisions: "For as many of you as were baptized into Christ have put on Christ. There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither slave nor free, there is neither male nor female; for you are all one in Christ Jesus."

 

 

I am hoping someone better than I can say it all far better and more concisely.

[BarbTherese]

Note: "bride of Christ" is a description of the CV, not a title for CV's in The Church.  The Church alone bears the title "Bride of Christ" and The Church is all the baptised. 

[4LoveofJMJ]

 

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.

But, by listing all these things, I really am not trying to make anyone who isn't called to be a consecrated virgin feel like their vocation is somehow less "real" or important to our Lord.

 

My whole point in starting this thread to begin with is that, if a woman is sincerely and prayerfully perceiving a call to renounce earthly marriage so as to love Christ as her spouse, I don't think she should be disturbed by worries about whether she could ever be a "real bride of Christ" if she can't receive that consecration of virgins.

After reading what you all have put I think I finally understand what you are getting at. That only a consecrated virgin can only have in the fullest sense the title of a bride of Christ. But I also agree with the quotes ^ that becoming a cv is not the only way to have a spousal relationship with God. I mean in a way the vows of a religious sister or nun are almost marital in nature. By vowing chastity to God she is saying that she will never be sexually intimate with another man, by vowing obedience she is saying that she will be submissive to God just as any wife is towards her husband, and by taking a vow of poverty she is telling God that she will always trust in God to take care in supporting her material needs just as any human husband might. By keeping these things in mind you can not help but think of having a spousal relationship with God. But with becoming a cv you need to be a virgin. With religious life it is not a requirement just as virginity is not a requirement for marriage. 

 

Just my thoughts! :)

[4LoveofJMJ]

 

We are all called into spousal relationship, or Unity with Jesus, holiness.  Not just some of us.  If I state "I am called into Unity with Jesus", I am in fact stating "spousal relationship".  Who is entitled to bear the title "bride of Christ" is simply an argument over titles, entitlement and suspect.

 

Discernment ideally is about where The Lord is calling one to serve, not about titles.  Ideally one serves wherever one is called - titled or not.  There is something of romanticism in this title debate if "bride" becomes more important than "disciple" somehow and not my premise at all.  Jesus has told us that the closest relationship to Him is the "one who does the Will of My Father in Heaven".

Honestly while I was reading this thread I felt like by not having the "title" of a bride of Christ then I was just fooling myself thinking that Jesus was my spouse if I had entered the religious life! And to be honest this upset me quite a bit.

Edited August 12, 2013 by 4LoveofJMJ

[BarbTherese]

Honestly while I was reading this thread I felt like by not having the "title" of a bride of Christ then I was just fooling myself thinking that Jesus was my spouse if I had entered the religious life! And to be honest this upset me quite a bit.

 

I did not desire at all to be upsetting, rather trying to clarify and trying not to use incorrect theological wording in the process. 

 

The CV is described by The Church as "a bride of Christ" - don't let anything upset you.  No matter your vocation, you are called into a spousal relationship with Jesus.  The call by Him into religious life as the lifestyle in which to take up that spousal relationship and develop it in holiness -  is a very special call indeed, a very special relationship to Him and a witness to the Universal Church and the world.

 

I was just coming back to this thread to state that I liked your comparison of religious life with marriage which was sent to my Inbox by Phatmass.  For me, however, the evangelical counsels are more about walking in the footsteps of Jesus Himself in poverty, chastity and obedience as His disciple and indeed His spouse.

 

You are not fooling yourself at all in thinking of Jesus as your Spouse in religious life - not at all in my book.  He IS your Spouse!

[Sponsa-Christi]

This is a minor technical technical point, but I do think CVs share the title "bride of Christ" with the Church. This is not unimportant, because an official title like this does have a kind of witness value for the wider Church. I think that under this title, CVs can "image" the Church in a unique and special way for the benefit of the entire people of God.

 

But, a canonical title is NOT the same thing as a lived reality! I do thing there are many women in the Church who have been given the charism to relate to Christ as their spouse in actual fact--even though, since they are not CVs, the Church doesn't officially call them "brides of Christ" in the exact same way. 

 

So once again: even if a woman has not received the consecration of virgins, I believe it's still entirely possible that she could still be a bride of Christ in a true and real way.

[Sponsa-Christi]

Another sort of auxiliary point (which I am intending to make in a spirit of respectful dialogue):

 

I don't think it's true that everyone is called to be a bride of Christ in the same way we've been using the term here. It is true that baptism calls everyone to be "bride" in a more abstract sense, and that the advanced stages of contemplative prayer (which is also a universal call) are also often described using "bridal" imagery.

 

However, I think there's another, more literal sense of the term "bride of Christ," which describes a woman renounces who earthly marriage in order to offer her heart entirely to Christ.

 

We do know for sure that consecrated virgins are called to be "brides of Christ" in this specific way. And in this thread, I'm making the case that the call to relate to Christ as one's spouse is a charism that God also gives to some women who might not have received the Rite of Consecration to a Life of Virginity.

 

But, the call to be a bride of Christ in this sense is NOT something which is applies to all of the baptized. For example, I don't think men are called to be a bride of Christ in this way, because the call to be "bride" is an essentially feminine reality. I also don't think married women are given this specific "bridal" charism, because they already have earthly husbands.

 

And, I think there are some nuns, Sisters, and other celibate women in the Church who, while they might have been called to follow Christ in the evangelical counsels, have not been given the charism to relate to Christ specifically as their spouse (e.g., perhaps they see their relationship to Christ more like that of a brother or as a friend...). In this case, I think we should respect the spiritual experience of these women, and not "impose" a specifically bridal spirituality on them. 

 

I do think these distinctions are important. However, it goes without saying that even though different people within the Church are given different vocations, we are all called to holiness and a close union with Christ.

[BarbTherese]

This is a minor technical technical point, but I do think CVs share the title "bride of Christ" with the Church. This is not unimportant, because an official title like this does have a kind of witness value for the wider Church. I think that under this title, CVs can "image" the Church in a unique and special way for the benefit of the entire people of God.

 

I agree that CV's share the title Bride of Christ with The Church - as a "bride of Christ".  Rather than a title, I think of it as a description of the vocation.  According to the USACV website, CV's have no title nor initials after their name.

 

But, a canonical title is NOT the same thing as a lived reality! I do thing there are many women in the Church who have been given the charism to relate to Christ as their spouse in actual fact--even though, since they are not CVs, the Church doesn't officially call them "brides of Christ" in the exact same way. 

 

I agree with the above also.

 

So once again: even if a woman has not received the consecration of virgins, I believe it's still entirely possible that she could still be a bride of Christ in a true and real way.

 

Agree.

 

 

Another sort of auxiliary point (which I am intending to make in a spirit of respectful dialogue):

 

I don't think it's true that everyone is called to be a bride of Christ in the same way we've been using the term here. It is true that baptism calls everyone to be "bride" in a more abstract sense, and that the advanced stages of contemplative prayer (which is also a universal call) are also often described using "bridal" imagery.

 

However, I think there's another, more literal sense of the term "bride of Christ," which describes a woman renounces who earthly marriage in order to offer her heart entirely to Christ.

I agree with these statements also.  I think we do need to remember that Jesus was fully God and Son of God even in His Humanity on earth.  Now He is in Heaven in His Glory, His Dual Nature, One God, is fully Present in a new way.  A Glorified way.   A CV is an eschatological image of The Church.  The Poverty of Jesus on earth is now expressed in Perfection Glorified.

All the baptised are called to the evangelical counsels, expressed according to their own vocation.  Undoubtedly turning away from earthly marriage to embrace God alone has to be a superior way of life theologically.  Speaking however in quite earthly type of manner, a married person may embrace God more than one who is vowed to do so and embrace Him alone.  A married person may achieve a more perfect holiness than a person in any other vocation.  This fact cannot detract from the superiority of chaste celibacy on the canonical vocational level.

 

We do know for sure that consecrated virgins are called to be "brides of Christ" in this specific way. And in this thread, I'm making the case that the call to relate to Christ as one's spouse is a charism that God also gives to some women who might not have received the Rite of Consecration to a Life of Virginity.

Agree.  I picked this up from your opening post.

 

But, the call to be a bride of Christ in this sense is NOT something which is applies to all of the baptized. For example, I don't think men are called to be a bride of Christ in this way, because the call to be "bride" is an essentially feminine reality. I also don't think married women are given this specific "bridal" charism, because they already have earthly husbands.

I agree with this also.  The problem can be in speaking or writing about it explaining it so that it does not seem to place female over male and consecrated chaste celibacy as being more than consecrated marital chastity.  Although on the theological level, chaste celibacy is superior.  Does this mean that a married woman cannot attain as great or greater holiness than a consecrated religious?  No it does not.  God calls as He may to what He may and it is in part the fulfilment of the duties within our particular vocation that contributes to holiness.

 

And, I think there are some nuns, Sisters, and other celibate women in the Church who, while they might have been called to follow Christ in the evangelical counsels, have not been given the charism to relate to Christ specifically as their spouse (e.g., perhaps they see their relationship to Christ more like that of a brother or as a friend...). In this case, I think we should respect the spiritual experience of these women, and not "impose" a specifically bridal spirituality on them. 

Absolutely - The Lord calls as He may and though our human finiteness may not sight it for the very best of reasons.

 

I do think these distinctions are important. However, it goes without saying that even though different people within the Church are given different vocations, we are all called to holiness and a close union with Christ.

 

Amen

The problem creeps in and perhaps especially in a Vocations Forum such as on Phatmass that the grading of the various vocations theologically can trigger thinking of "more important" "more Loved" etc. etc. according to one's vocation.  Nothing can be more superior than God's Will.  Nothing!  As Jesus pointed out to us, the closest to Him in every way are those who "do the Will of My Father in Heaven" and this was the whole life effort, desire and striving of Jesus Himself on earth and in Heaven.

[cmaD2006]

 

The problem creeps in and perhaps especially in a Vocations Forum such as on Phatmass that the grading of the various vocations theologically can trigger thinking of "more important" "more Loved" etc. etc. according to one's vocation. Nothing can be more superior than God's Will. Nothing! As Jesus pointed out to us, the closest to Him in every way are those who "do the Will of My Father in Heaven" and this was the whole life effort, desire and striving of Jesus Himself on earth and in Heaven.

 

I can't prop this enough.

 

I've come to the conclusion that the highest vocation is simply following God's will.  That is a person's highest vocation -- wherever that may lead.  If one is willing to follow Christ regardless of the cost (be it in whatever state of life) then one's heart is in the right place.

 

And hopefully at the end of the race you will hear "well done oh good and faithful servant," since following God's will will lead to sanctification.

 

I'm not taking away the importance of vocation and choosing wisely, but the whole "xyz is a higher vocation" or "being a abc is a higher calling" (statements that have been made in the past in VS) misses the point.  The point is seeking God's will in one's life, for that will lead to happiness, sanctification, and eventually to an eternal life in the presence of the Christ the Bridegroom.