Consecration Of Virgins Ceremony And Evangelical Poverty?

[oremus1]

That's right. 
 

 

That she knows how to live a virtuous life.  That she knows the basics of the Faith.  That she knows how to live the life as explained by the entire Rite.  This life must be balanced.  She should know about the vocation to marriage and be able to draw the parallels between the vocations.  In short, she must have the age and prudence necessary to be what the Rite expects her to be: a responsible human being who is a bride of Christ.

 

Straw man.  I never said that.  I was explaining earlier to you that the bare minimum for the person to be consecrated is the imparting of the prayer of Consecration.  Number 4 of the Praenotandae stipulates certain requirements must be verified before a woman is admitted to the Order of Virgins.  One of them is that "by their age, prudence, and their unviersally appproved pattern of life"... they show that they are suitable for this vocation.  Number 5 of the Praenotandae requires that the bishop stipulate how the life is to be led.  This takes time to assess on the part of both the bishop and the virgin.  Of course, this is a moot point and a moot discussion because no bishop in his right senses is going to conduct an illicit consecration if she simply read the rite and showed up.  For all the bishop knew, she could be a prostitute.

 

the reason i ask is because you seem to presume that all CVs should speak multiple languages, have read the rite in at least two languages, have access to theological libraries and have at least a basic degree in theology, be reading many commentaries in other languages to enable them to interpret the rite.

 

in some areas of the USA, the USACV info packet is given to the CV to read through with someone over a period of time. that is the formation. in other areas, even that is alot. i even came across one who had not heard of vita consecrata despite being consecrated for several years.  

 

your idea is unrealistic. while you may be fortunate to have those things, it is not a requirement, and indeed the privilege of a minority. there is therefore no need to be condescending to those who do not. holiness is what matters, not academia, in sanctification.

[cmaD2006]

A reminder: THIS IS NOT DEBATE TABLE.  Please stop the back and forth debating.  If it continues I *will* move this thread into debate table.

 

The discussion until about a page ago was fine.

[abrideofChrist]

the reason i ask is because you seem to presume that all CVs should speak multiple languages, have read the rite in at least two languages, have access to theological libraries and have at least a basic degree in theology, be reading many commentaries in other languages to enable them to interpret the rite.

 

in some areas of the USA, the USACV info packet is given to the CV to read through with someone over a period of time. that is the formation. in other areas, even that is alot. i even came across one who had not heard of vita consecrata despite being consecrated for several years.  

 

your idea is unrealistic. while you may be fortunate to have those things, it is not a requirement, and indeed the privilege of a minority. there is therefore no need to be condescending to those who do not. holiness is what matters, not academia, in sanctification.

 

You are reading things that aren't present in my words.  I was criticizing people who make public statements on the vocation who do not have the proper education and formation when they go against the Rite and the Rite's intention and substitute something of their own creation.   People with influence must know their materials well enough if they are going to make a controversial stance and be able to back it up with something proportionate to the weight of the claim made.  (I know a consecrated virgin who is a very holy woman and who did not go to college.  She has read the Rite very carefully, and that is what has saved her from many errors.)  When you have people who say they have a degree in theology or a background in philosophy who are making fundamental mistakes in theology and philosophy, one must expect a certain level of responsibility for doing due diligence when making pronouncements on the vocation.  I question the prudence of virgins writing on the vocation when they are either unable or unwilling to do the due diligence necessary to pronounce on many aspects of consecrated life.  I am not condescending to those who don't have the education, I am unhappy with those have the educational resources and who decide to take public stances on the vocation and have not done their due diligence to ensure that what they say is correct and in line with the Church's teaching, particularly when it goes against any written part of the Rite!

Edited January 27, 2014 by abrideofChrist

[oremus1]

A reminder: THIS IS NOT DEBATE TABLE.  Please stop the back and forth debating.  If it continues I *will* move this thread into debate table.

 

The discussion until about a page ago was fine.

 

 

Hi there, although this thread has deviated from the original purpose, I am very grateful for all the advice and issues raised. i did not know that the consecration was always invalid if delegated to a priest - and someone is even kindly even looking that up for me. that is much more important that what one will wear for their consecration!

 

So while i do not wish it to be moved, perhaps if one of the mods could rename it a more appropriate name like 'consecration of virgins - general discussion' or such that would be cool :-)

 

continue ladies!

[cmaD2006]

Hi there, although this thread has deviated from the original purpose, I am very grateful for all the advice and issues raised. i did not know that the consecration was always invalid if delegated to a priest - and someone is even kindly even looking that up for me. that is much more important that what one will wear for their consecration!

 

So while i do not wish it to be moved, perhaps if one of the mods could rename it a more appropriate name like 'consecration of virgins - general discussion' or such that would be cool :-)

 

continue ladies!

 

Oremus1:

 

As the mod who focuses primarily on vocation station, I felt compelled to post and ask that the discussion does not continue in a debate like manner.

 

We have had discussions pertaining to consecrated virginity disintegrate into a full fledged debate in the past.  It is quite negative in vocation station, and really, really did put consecrated virginity in a bad light (due to the fact that the back and forth involved consecrated virgins).

----------------------------

So again -- please do *not* continue in a debate like fashion.  If it does again as a moderator I reserve the right to move it into debate table, so that the non-debate culture of Vocation Station is preserved.

Edited January 27, 2014 by cmaD2006

[abrideofChrist]

Yes, ladies, continue on.  Oremus, you have my prayers.  I will no longer participate in this thread. 

[oremus1]

Oremus1:

 

As the mod who focuses primarily on vocation station, I felt compelled to post and ask that the discussion does not continue in a debate like manner.

 

We have had discussions pertaining to consecrated virginity disintegrate into a full fledged debate in the past.  It is quite negative in vocation station, and really, really did put consecrated virginity in a bad light (due to the fact that the back and forth involved consecrated virgins).

----------------------------

So again -- please do *not* continue in a debate like fashion.  If it does again as a moderator I reserve the right to move it into debate table, so that the non-debate culture of Vocation Station is preserved.

 

Oh yes, wow i didnt realise it was so controversial! sure ok no more debating. but if you can rename it to a more general title, so that it does not matter that it has gone off topic, that would be good? someone offered to share some research as to the valid minister of the consecration, which while nothing to do with the title, i would greatly appreciate, and it may benefit people searching for the same info, also i would not wish people reading the forum to be mislead by the title of the thread.

Edited January 27, 2014 by oremus1

[God's Beloved]

Dear , I'm writing amidst a lot of other things to do. But this topic is so important. I did spend an hour in the library trying to trace the reference to the CDF statement I had read earlier. I'm really not in the position to give more time since there are other priorities. It is very clear in my country that the consecration cannot be delegated to a priest.

 

The situation you're describing is not different from some other parts of the world. What I read inbetween the lines is that there are some women  who are ex-religious who wish to continue living in the  consecrated state or there are women starting new kind of vocatons with a different charism......BUT THE CHURCH DOES NOT HAVE A RITE FOR THEM....so they are modifying the rite meant only for virgins, to fulfill their need. The bishops without seeing the seriousness of this , are allowing this to happen.

 

The solution to the problem is that the Church could formulate another ceremony for such new vocations or ex -religious. I don't think the Order of virgins which is a beautiful vocation by itself should be strangulated.

 

Oremus1, since you are so keen to continue this discussion, how about sending a PM ...personal message to the persons you wish to invite for doing so....this way the conversation will not be public.

[oremus1]

Oremus1, since you are so keen to continue this discussion, how about sending a PM ...personal message to the persons you wish to invite for doing so....this way the conversation will not be public.

Good idea , many thanks :)

[cmaD2006]

A reminder: THIS IS NOT DEBATE TABLE.  Please stop the back and forth debating.  If it continues I *will* move this thread into debate table.

 

The discussion until about a page ago was fine.

 

 

So again -- please do *not* continue in a debate like fashion.  If it does again as a moderator I reserve the right to move it into debate table, so that the non-debate culture of Vocation Station is preserved.

 

Sorry I felt a further clarification is in order ... those used to VS probably understand what I mean but the problem I had with the thread is the confrontational tone and the debate-like atmosphere that was developing.

 

A reminder that confrontational tones and debates are not permitted in VS, please try to keep it calm.  If anyone was offended by my directness sorry -- it is just my attempt at being like "a Mama Bear trying to protect her Cubs".

[Feankie]

So again -- please do *not* continue in a debate like fashion.  If it does again as a moderator I reserve the right to move it into debate table

 

Bless you!

[oremus1]

As a new phatmasser, it did not occur to me that consecrated virginity was at all a contentious subject. but following this thread, i also saw found this http://www.phatmass.com/phorum/topic/122838-bride-of-christ/page-17

 

now i can understand why this sort of thread ends up in the debate forum. wow :-o

[Cecilia]

Oremus1, a consecrated virgin who lives in the world does not take a vow of poverty. Please read the debate table where I will put a document for you to read.

[Sponsa-Christi]

Hi Cecilia,

 

It is true that consecrated virgins living in the world don't take a formal vow of poverty like religious do. But since we are nevertheless consecrated persons in the Church, there are a lot of reasons to suppose that we should still strive to live in a spirit of evangelical poverty. And so for the most part, I think it's good when we can have charitable discussions about the best ways to live out this spirit of evangelical poverty in our daily lives.

 

Returning to the original topic of this thread, my personal opinion is that aspiring consecrated virgins should avoid lavishness and err on the side of simplicity in planning the material details of their consecration day. E.g., I don't think consecrations should be quite as elaborate as many "normal" weddings are these days.

 

However, avoiding lavishness and luxury is not the same thing as neglecting to celebrate a consecration with the appropriate level of solemnity! A consecrated virgin-to-be who is committed to celebrating with a dignified simplicity can still have a beautiful consecration day with all the customary bridal symbolism. 

[BarbTherese]

Might be off topic a bit.  I recall my confirmation dress and veil, made by my Nana - it was quite plain and very simple.  I was disappointed that it was nothing like the beautiful dress and veil I had for my First Communion.  When I complained to Nana, she replied that The Holy Spirit would adorn my dress for me in the seven Gifts of The Holy Spirit I would receive at Confirmation (wisdom, understanding, counsel, knowledge, fortitude, piety and fear of The Lord).  It made my Confirmation particularly moving for me and in a deeply spiritual way and led to a lifelong devotion to The Holy Spirit.  Whereas at my First Communion thanksgiving, all I could do was apologize to Jesus because I could not get my mind off the great celebration and all the goodies we would have back pre V2 in our Communion breakfast celebration immediately after our First Communion Mass.  Many years later, I realized that with that very real apologetic stance, I was praying.  My Confirmation thanksgiving did manage to aspire to something much deeper because of what Nana had said to me about my dress and The Gifts of The Holy Spirit at Confirmation.  Shortly after my Confirmation and through ardent prayers to The Holy Spirit what everyone called a miracle occurred for me - and to this day it boggles my mind to think about what happened.

 

I think personally were I to have the vocation to Consecrated Virginity (and impossible), I would choose something outstanding in its beautiful simplicity (Leonardo Da Vinci: "Simplicity is the ultimate sophistication").  I do love to see a bride in something that is the essence of simplicity and outstandingly beautiful in that simplicity.  There strikes me as something totally virginal about it.   But then I do not have nor will ever have a call to consecrated virginity and beauty really is according to the eye of the beholder.