Consecrated Virgin In The World - 50 Words Or Less

[Sponsa-Christi]

no-one is saying it is incompatibloe, but you seem to be saying it is obligatory that CVS shoudl work for the church full time, and that they should wear distinguishing garb.

 

the garb was dropped from the revised rite for those in the world. the homily gives ways that the CV's service would manifest itself. so while she MIGHT fulfil these by working full time for the church, she MIGHT ALSO work in a secular occupation and still do these, the propositum of virginity is to facilitate nuptials, and not to better assist her to undertake a particular service to the church. her works are just a fruit of her espousal. it is, afterall, not the 'dedication of a virgin to a life of service to the church'. 

 

so it seems you are desiring to impose obligations where there are none, because you feel that the CV vocation is not enough in itself and needs to borrow from the religious life.

 

also, where you wish her to work full time for the church, where the suggested homily says "Love everyone, especially those in need. Help the poor, care for the weak, teach the ignorant, protect the Young, minister to the old, bring strength and comfort to widows and all in adversity." are you suggesting that the CV fulfil this by working with other religious sisters?

 

if so, if you wish her to dress like one, and work with them, what do you feel is so distinctive about the call to being a CV and not a religious sister - since externally, her life would be more or less the same as one, in order to give 'public witness' and be a 'sign'?

 

I mean this respectfully, but I sort of feel like you’re misreading me a little bit. I’ve already said a few different times that I’m not arguing that consecrated virgins should all be required to wear habits.

 

I do think that the Church calls consecrated virgins to be a “visible,” i.e., public witness, meaning that their consecration should be an open and obvious element of their identity. Because of this, on a secondary and purely practical level, I think wearing a veil or perhaps some other distinctive garb (which is not the same thing as a habit per se) could be appropriate and praiseworthy custom. But saying that something could be praiseworthy is not the same things as saying it should be required, and it’s also not the same thing as saying it is already an obligation!

 

I also think that the Church calls consecrated virgins to dedicate their lives to the service of the Church—which I don’t think would necessarily mean that CVs have to be officially diocesan employees, but rather that they devote themselves as fully as possible to those things that advance the Church’s mission in an explicit way (i.e., that they “spend their time in works of penance and of mercy, in apostolic activity, and in prayer” to quote the praenotanda of the Rite). The works of mercy mentioned in the Rite’s homily can certainly be carried out as an explicit expression of the Church’s mission, whether or not they happen to be done in collaboration with religious. 

 

I believe that consecrated virgins have this call to service because: canon 604 literally says that consecrated virgins are “dedicated to the service of the Church”; because the Catechism and Vita Consecrata also mentions CVs’ call to be dedicated/committed to the service of the Church; and because the Rite itself mentions consecrated virgins’ call to service no less than ten separate times, including in the promises a candidate makes before the bishop (when the bishop asks her: “Are you resolved to persevere to the end of you days in the holy state of virginity and in the service of God and his Church?”) So while I would agree that service is a fruit of a CV's vocation and not the impetus for it, I still think that the Church sees this fruit of service as being integral to the vocation.

 

In all honestly, I’m not simply making these things up out of whole cloth because I want to control CVs, impose non-existent obligations on people, or turn consecrated virginity into religious life. After very seriously studying and praying about these questions, I’ve personally come to a level of moral certainty that these things are objectively what the Church does in actual fact call her consecrated virgins to do. In conscience, I can’t pretend that I somehow don’t think this is what the Church is asking of us—even though, at the same time, I completely respect the consciences of other CVs who might have sincerely come to different conclusions.

 

Even if CVs were to serve the Church full time and wear distinctive clothing, to me this would still be a very different vocation from apostolic religious life. Among other things, CVs wouldn’t have the same vocation to community life that religious have, nor would they be bound to a particular corporate apostolic work, nor would they strive to follow the charism of a particular founder. Also, “living in the world” (i.e., lacking any cloister obligations) would mean that a CV could be more of a direct part of the life of her diocese, and much more practically “accessible” to the faithful.  

[Cecilia]

Sponsa Christi, I will put three quotes from you below –

 

Direct quotes from you --

1. It is true that all the baptized are all called to be a Christian witness, but consecrated persons in general are called to do this in a much more radical way
2. I do think that, under ordinary circumstances, CVs should dedicate their lives to the direct service of the Church, that we should be a visible public witness
3. Also, I totally accept that secular institutes members are called to live a “normal,” distinctively secular way of life, and one which does not normally involve a public witness

You agree that members of secular institutes do not live a Christian witness – in a way that looks <<visibly>> different – from other baptized lay people -- #3

 

You think consecrated persons are called to be a witness – in a way that is far more radical than the rest of the baptized – you call this radical witnessing <<public witness>> -- #2

 

You think because consecrated virgins are consecrated, they must live radical, visible <<public witness>> #1

 

Here is the logical conclusion – if you say you agree that members of secular institutes are leaven -- #3 – then you cannot also say that they are consecrated – you must dispute this despite the Church’s teaching. The Church includes secular institutes under the umbrella of the forms of consecrated life – in canon law, the catechism, in  other authoritative documents. If #1 and #2 are true – as you say they are – then you cannot logically hold #3. Because in order to be <<really>> consecrated, members of secular institutes would have to have radical witness, what you call <<public witness>> -- and they would have to visibly look different from the rest of the baptized. But they do not look different. Therefore they cannot be <<really>> consecrated. Or else you have to revise your other conclusion -- that someone who is consecrated must have radical witness and this radical witness must be visible.

[Cecilia]

Sponsa Christi, I will put another quote from you below --

 

Your quote --

 

I think (though admittedly, I’m not 100% sure on this point) that this implicit commitment to the counsels was the reason that consecrated virginity was actually allowed to be classified as “consecrated life” in the first place

 

 

I do not understand how you can say this – the decree of promulgation of the Rite from the Vatican answered your question – I put this quote already in the thread – at the beginning.

 

The revised Rite of Consecration of Virgins for Women Living in the World was published by the decree of the Congregation for Divine Worship on 31 May 1970, after having been formally decreed by the Second Vatican Council. The decree of promulgation explains the development of this venerable and ancient rite in this way:

 

 The rite for the consecration of virgins is one of the most treasured in the Roman liturgy. Consecrated virginity is among the most excellent gifts bequeathed by our Lord to his Bride, the Church. From apostolic times women have dedicated their virginity to God, so adding to the beauty of the mystical body of Christ and making it fruitful in grace. Even from earliest times, as the Fathers of the Church bear witness, mother Church in her wisdom set her seal on this high vocation by her practice of consecrating those who followed it by means of a solemn prayer. This prayer, enriched in the course of time by other ritual elements to bring out more clearly the symbolism of virginity in relation to the Church, the bride of Christ, was incorporated into the Roman Pontifical. [Acta Apostolicæ Sedis 62] (1970).

 

This is indisputable -- <<implicit commitment>> to the evangelical counsels is  not  the reason why the Vatican allowed consecrated virginity to be classified as  <<consecrated life>> in the first place. The Magisterium spells it out. There is no ambiguity – the woman is consecrated by the Church -- by means of a solemn prayer. Consecrated virginity belongs to consecrated life because the Church consecrates the woman by means of a solemn prayer. I do not understand why you question this – the Church’s teaching on how a woman comes to be consecrated could not be made more explicit. It is not – as you suggest – through <<implied>> evangelical counsels. I do not understand why you prefer your own hypothesis – over and against what the Vatican’s decree states.

[Cecilia]

My comment from above I am putting below again -- because I did not see the first time the numbers did not show -- and I cannot edit the one above.

 

Sponsa Christi, I will put three quotes from you below –

 

Direct quotes from you --

 

1.  It is true that all the baptized are all called to be a Christian witness, but consecrated persons in general are called to do this in a much more radical way

 

2. I do think that, under ordinary circumstances, CVs should dedicate their lives to the direct service of the Church, that we should be a visible public witness

 

3. Also, I totally accept that secular institutes members are called to live a “normal,” distinctively secular way of life, and one which does not normally involve a public witness

 

You agree that members of secular institutes do not live a Christian witness – in a way that looks <<visibly>> different – from other baptized lay people -- #3

 

You think consecrated persons are called to be a witness – in a way that is far more radical than the rest of the baptized – you call this radical witnessing <<public witness>> -- #2 -- and you also discuss radical witness as being visible witness throughout other comments you make -- not quoted here.

 

You think because consecrated virgins are consecrated, they must live radical, visible <<public witness>> #1

 

Here is the logical conclusion – if you say you agree that members of secular institutes are leaven -- #3 – then you cannot also say that they are consecrated – you must dispute this despite the Church’s teaching. The Church includes secular institutes under the umbrella of the forms of consecrated life – in canon law, the catechism, in  other authoritative documents. If #1 and #2 are true – as you say they are – then you cannot logically hold #3. Because in order to be <<really>> consecrated, members of secular institutes would have to have radical witness, what you call <<public witness>> -- and they would have to visibly look different from the rest of the baptized. But they do not look different. Therefore they cannot be <<really>> consecrated. Or else you have to revise your other conclusion -- that someone who is consecrated must have radical witness and this radical witness must be visible.

 

 

Edited February 6, 2014 by Cecilia

[Sponsa-Christi]

 

Here is the logical conclusion – if you say you agree that members of secular institutes are leaven -- #3 – then you cannot also say that they are consecrated – you must dispute this despite the Church’s teaching. The Church includes secular institutes under the umbrella of the forms of consecrated life – in canon law, the catechism, in  other authoritative documents. If #1 and #2 are true – as you say they are – then you cannot logically hold #3. Because in order to be <<really>> consecrated, members of secular institutes would have to have radical witness, what you call <<public witness>> -- and they would have to visibly look different from the rest of the baptized. But they do not look different. Therefore they cannot be <<really>> consecrated. Or else you have to revise your other conclusion -- that someone who is consecrated must have radical witness and this radical witness must be visible.

 

A few points in response to this:

 

1. There is actually still some debate among theologians and canonists as to whether, or in precisely what sense, secular institutes can be properly considered “consecrated life.” While secular institutes are usually classified alongside other forms of consecrated life, there are a few different aspects of a secular institute vocation which would seem to be inconsistent with this. For example, can. 711 says that profession in a secular institute does not change one’s lay status, which seems to suggest that secular institute members don’t enter into a formally consecrated state of life. Also, the Catechism identifies consecrated life with a public profession of the evangelical counsels (cf. CCC 944), and there is some question as to exactly how public secular institute members’ vows actually are.

 

2. However, if for the sake of argument we go ahead and suppose that secular institute members are in fact officially consecrated in the fullest and in every sense of the word, we can still say that secular institutes live fully secular lives in the world as part of their very unique and distinctive proper charism. That is, it would be better to consider a public witness as sort of the “default” state of consecrated persons in general, with the hidden witness of secular institutes being the exception. (I think it’s more reasonable to presume this scenario as opposed to vice-versa, where we would propose that discretion about one’s vocation is the normal call of publicly consecrated persons, with the public witness of religious being the great exception to the rule.)

 

3. But, even if we completely set aside this “argument from category” (wherein we propose that consecrated virgins are called to a public witness by virtue of the fact that consecrated virginity is a public state of consecrated life), I still think there is enough in the Rite and in the documents that explicitly pertain to consecrated virginity to justify a belief that consecrated virgins are called to a life dedicated to the service of the Church and to a life of radical public witness.

[God's Beloved]

I had written to the Congregation for Consecrated life in Rome several years ago :

 

Prot.n.SpR 862-4/2003

 

Question : The charism of cons.virgins is to be an eschatological image of the Heavenly Bride and the life to come when the Church will at last fully live her love for Christ the Bridegroom. The charism of Secular Inst. is to transfigure the world from within, acting like a leaven within the cultural , economic and political life. Hence it would be improper for a member of a Secular Inst. to wear clothing which would identify them as a consecrated person.However , Cons.virgins are called to be an image of the Church's love for Christ. Would it be proper if the local circumstances demand , to wear clothing which would idenitfy one as a consecrated person or be addressed as 'Sister' even though one does not live in  a religious community ?

 

Response :  The life of virginity lived in the world gives public witness in everyday life, in some self-supporting work and in her service to the Church. It is not quite the same as the style of a secular institute , because the virgin's consecration is public , yet it is secular in the sense that she is not a religious.

 

The use of the veil , provided for in the Rite , is decided on in the local circumstances with the Diocesan Bishop. the same would be true regarding any other identifying clothing and / or the use of the title Sister.

 

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

 

However , the Church's understanding about the vocation of CV is getting refined over the years.....so I still think it is worth it to continue discussion on these topics. I shall put some practical scenarios in the next post so readers can decide what the vocation of CV would demand.

[God's Beloved]

Scenario 1 :

 

The local church has  a practice of renewal of vows / commitment  by the extra-ordinary ministers of the Eucharist at a special Mass every year. During one such Mass , the lay ministers are asked to occupy reserved seats in the parish Church to increase visibility. There are two religious institutes in the parish ...so the religious Sisters are also asked to  occupy reserved seats for the same reason [ although they would not renew any commitment since EM is supposed to be part of their calling ]. the entire parish congregation prays for them .

 

Question :

Where do you think  a CV should sit .....among the parish congregation , or the lay ministers or among the religious sisters ?

 

[ This is a real life situation ]

[God's Beloved]

I plan to present many such real life scenarios for discussion.

 

I also shall share how a CV can give publicly visible witness to her identity and vocation .....WITHOUT wearing any distinctively identifying clothing or titles......

[oremus1]

I had written to the Congregation for Consecrated life in Rome several years ago :

 

Prot.n.SpR 862-4/2003

 

Question : The charism of cons.virgins is to be an eschatological image of the Heavenly Bride and the life to come when the Church will at last fully live her love for Christ the Bridegroom. The charism of Secular Inst. is to transfigure the world from within, acting like a leaven within the cultural , economic and political life. Hence it would be improper for a member of a Secular Inst. to wear clothing which would identify them as a consecrated person.However , Cons.virgins are called to be an image of the Church's love for Christ. Would it be proper if the local circumstances demand , to wear clothing which would idenitfy one as a consecrated person or be addressed as 'Sister' even though one does not live in  a religious community ?

 

Response :  The life of virginity lived in the world gives public witness in everyday life, in some self-supporting work and in her service to the Church. It is not quite the same as the style of a secular institute , because the virgin's consecration is public , yet it is secular in the sense that she is not a religious.

 

The use of the veil , provided for in the Rite , is decided on in the local circumstances with the Diocesan Bishop. the same would be true regarding any other identifying clothing and / or the use of the title Sister.

 

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

 

However , the Church's understanding about the vocation of CV is getting refined over the years.....so I still think it is worth it to continue discussion on these topics. I shall put some practical scenarios in the next post so readers can decide what the vocation of CV would demand.

 

 

This is so awesome that you did that. May I ask, how long did it take for you to get a response? and are those sort of responses collated and published anywhere acc essible to the public?

 

Scenario 1 :

 

The local church has  a practice of renewal of vows / commitment  by the extra-ordinary ministers of the Eucharist at a special Mass every year. During one such Mass , the lay ministers are asked to occupy reserved seats in the parish Church to increase visibility. There are two religious institutes in the parish ...so the religious Sisters are also asked to  occupy reserved seats for the same reason [ although they would not renew any commitment since EM is supposed to be part of their calling ]. the entire parish congregation prays for them .

 

Question :

Where do you think  a CV should sit .....among the parish congregation , or the lay ministers or among the religious sisters ?

 

[ This is a real life situation ]

 

if she is an EM, she should sit with the EMs.

 

ideally she should walk out of the church and pray for the Lord to have mercy on those who are EMs, and the grave abuses of EMs outlined in Redemptoris Sacramentum. In the words of the Lord to Barnabas Nwoye "It gives me great agony to see people recieving Communion in the hand". More so, one would assume, to see laypeople handing out Holy Communion to others. the CV should pray for an increase in the sacred priesthood, and have no part in this quasi protestant ceremony.

 

I plan to present many such real life scenarios for discussion.

 

I also shall share how a CV can give publicly visible witness to her identity and vocation .....WITHOUT wearing any distinctively identifying clothing or titles......

 

 

This would be really brilliant!!! :-)

[abrideofChrist]

This is so amesome that you did that. May I ask, how long did it take for you to get a response? and are those sort of responses collated and published anywhere acc essible to the public?

 

 

if she is an EM, she should sit with the EMs.

 

ideally she should walk out of the church and pray for the Lord to have mercy on those who are EMs, and the grave abuses of EMs outlined in Redemptoris Sacramentum. In the words of the Lord to Barnabas Nwoye "It gives me great agony to see people recieving Communion in the hand". More so, one would assume, to see laypeople handing out Holy Communion to others. the CV should pray for an increase in the sacred priesthood, and have no part in this quasi protestant ceremony.

 

 

 

This would be really brilliant!!! :-)

 

CVs are some of the most suitable for handling the Eucharist as extraordinary ministers.  Remember that for many centuries of the Church, hermits and others would carry the Eucharist upon their persons.  This was not considered an abuse.  Certainly in the absence of ordinary ministers, it is most fitting for CVs to bring Communion to the homebound and sick.

[God's Beloved]

I would like to have responses from many people in different states of life and vocations.

 

Questions to consider :

1. What would best express the identity and vocation of the CV ?

2. What will avoid causing misunderstanding about the Nature [ essence ] of the vocation of CV ?

3. Are there some problems with the situation itself ...where officially it has been announced before Mass that Lay ministers supposed to "renew their commitment"  should occupy particular pews and Religious sisters who do not have any renewal of commitment -should occupy another set of pews ?

 

The only categories used in the diocese  where this situation takes place are Clergy, Religious and Laity.

[God's Beloved]

I guess such a situation as described above -is uncommon in the West due to declining numbers of religious. The local circumstances differ from one diocese to another and that's the reason the Church has clearly defined the essentials of the charism and allowed pastoral flexibility regarding externals according to local circumstances.

 

This is how I would like to respond to Scenario 1

 

1. Supposing that the CV was consecrated by the bishop in the same parish church a few months ago, the parishioners are aware from the Rite of consecration that she is now living some kind of  new vocation ....that she is a bride of Christ and dedicated to the service of the church. The Rite clearly mentioned that . The Rite was the ONLY SOURCE for the lay people to get any idea what CV is about.

 

2. Since CV is a rare vocation , the church uses the older terminology to define categories -----clergy, religious, laity.

According to church history, CV were a Socio-liturgical category in the church. They had reserved seats in the church to avoid distraction and help to focus on prayer. This practice  has been continued by Religious institutes even today in many dioceses . This was originally the right of CV in church tradition. So it is clear that the CV should not sit among the parish congregation in this particular Scenario.

 

3. Since she is a CV and dedicated to serve the church with motherly love , she is also an EM . She does not have to annually renew any commitment to serve ...like the Lay ministers have to do. Also , she is no more a Lay person . So it is clear that she should not sit among the Lay Ministers in this particular Scenario.

 

 

The CV has only two options --either to be absent from the ceremony ----or occupy the pews reserved for religious who will not renew any commitment ...but will still be prayed over by the parishioners.

 

 

I had mentioned in the previous post :

Questions to consider

1. What would best express the identity and vocation of the CV ?

2. What will avoid causing misunderstanding about the Nature [ essence ] of the vocation of CV ?

 

 

I think if she occupies the pews reserved for religious , she is giving public witness to her consecrated status and dedication to the service of the church. If she does not sit among them , she will cause misunderstanding about he Nature [ essence ] of the vocation of CV to be virgin, bride , mother.

 

What does Church tradition say about the witness of CV in the world ?

a. there were CV in early church whose consecrated status was known only to the christian community but they observed discretion among the pagans.

b. there were CV who gave clearly visible public witness to their vocation in the early church , even embracing martyrdom for doing so among the pagans.

 

To me it seems the CV in today's world is allowed to live her vocation in discretion in the secular world. But in the church community her vocation needs to be clearly, visibly public. This does not mean that she should wear a habit or use a title Sister. If she does so , she will be identified as a religious.

 

A CV in today's world is called to publicly give witness to her identity and vocation as virgin, bride , mother. BUT  she is NOT called to publicly give visible "witness" of her " living in the world " to transform the "world" as a member of a Secular Inst . is " called " to do.

 

Her vocation as virgin, bride , mother is explicit ....she is called to give public witness to this identity.

 

Her 'living in the world' is in the sense that she does not live in a monastery or convent.....she is not called to explicitly stress or focus her attention on the world in which she lives... in the sense of focusing on transforming the political economic, temporal aspects.It is not a 'necessary' aspect of her vocation.....but as a citizen with civil rights and duties she has to respond to her existential situation in the world as an evangeliser. There cannot be universal rules imposed on CV to be obligated to do so like a member of a Secular Inst would be obligated to do so.

 

 

In the Scenario described above , the CV can give publicly visible witness to her vocation simply by occupying the pews reserved for religious.

She also gives public witness to the fact that she is a consecrated person but not a religious , by sitting among them but NOT wearing a habit.

 

 

 

[oremus1]

I guess such a situation as described above -is uncommon in the West due to declining numbers of religious. The local circumstances differ from one diocese to another and that's the reason the Church has clearly defined the essentials of the charism and allowed pastoral flexibility regarding externals according to local circumstances.

 

This is how I would like to respond to Scenario 1

 

1. Supposing that the CV was consecrated by the bishop in the same parish church a few months ago, the parishioners are aware from the Rite of consecration that she is now living some kind of  new vocation ....that she is a bride of Christ and dedicated to the service of the church. The Rite clearly mentioned that . The Rite was the ONLY SOURCE for the lay people to get any idea what CV is about.

 

2. Since CV is a rare vocation , the church uses the older terminology to define categories -----clergy, religious, laity.

According to church history, CV were a Socio-liturgical category in the church. They had reserved seats in the church to avoid distraction and help to focus on prayer. This practice  has been continued by Religious institutes even today in many dioceses . This was originally the right of CV in church tradition. So it is clear that the CV should not sit among the parish congregation in this particular Scenario.

 

3. Since she is a CV and dedicated to serve the church with motherly love , she is also an EM . She does not have to annually renew any commitment to serve ...like the Lay ministers have to do. Also , she is no more a Lay person . So it is clear that she should not sit among the Lay Ministers in this particular Scenario.

 

 

The CV has only two options --either to be absent from the ceremony ----or occupy the pews reserved for religious who will not renew any commitment ...but will still be prayed over by the parishioners.

 

 

I had mentioned in the previous post :

Questions to consider

1. What would best express the identity and vocation of the CV ?

2. What will avoid causing misunderstanding about the Nature [ essence ] of the vocation of CV ?

 

 

I think if she occupies the pews reserved for religious , she is giving public witness to her consecrated status and dedication to the service of the church. If she does not sit among them , she will cause misunderstanding about he Nature [ essence ] of the vocation of CV to be virgin, bride , mother.

 

What does Church tradition say about the witness of CV in the world ?

a. there were CV in early church whose consecrated status was known only to the christian community but they observed discretion among the pagans.

b. there were CV who gave clearly visible public witness to their vocation in the early church , even embracing martyrdom for doing so among the pagans.

 

To me it seems the CV in today's world is allowed to live her vocation in discretion in the secular world. But in the church community her vocation needs to be clearly, visibly public. This does not mean that she should wear a habit or use a title Sister. If she does so , she will be identified as a religious.

 

A CV in today's world is called to publicly give witness to her identity and vocation as virgin, bride , mother. BUT  she is NOT called to publicly give visible "witness" of her " living in the world " to transform the "world" as a member of a Secular Inst . is " called " to do.

 

Her vocation as virgin, bride , mother is explicit ....she is called to give public witness to this identity.

 

Her 'living in the world' is in the sense that she does not live in a monastery or convent.....she is not called to explicitly stress or focus her attention on the world in which she lives... in the sense of focusing on transforming the political economic, temporal aspects.It is not a 'necessary' aspect of her vocation.....but as a citizen with civil rights and duties she has to respond to her existential situation in the world as an evangeliser. There cannot be universal rules imposed on CV to be obligated to do so like a member of a Secular Inst would be obligated to do so.

 

 

In the Scenario described above , the CV can give publicly visible witness to her vocation simply by occupying the pews reserved for religious.

She also gives public witness to the fact that she is a consecrated person but not a religious , by sitting among them but NOT wearing a habit.

 

yeah actually i completely agree. by sitting with the religious yet nor being called Sr or wearing a habit etc, she is witnessing to her vocation and the fact she is not lay. i bet she gets asked to move though. i think she witnesses to her unquie charism BETTER without the habit or Sr or other trappings of religious life. because she is not a religous!!

 

you didnt like my suggestion then. ...

[Cecilia]

God’s Beloved, Blessings to you. Your inquiry to the Vatican I saw many years ago – you put it online on another website – it aided my understanding. It was the answer I sought -- to whether diocesan bishops could permit daily veils – it also matches Raymond Cardinal Burke’s comments -- that the consecrated virgin in the world is generally less like leaven – though he does not think daily veils are ideal and does not think consecrated virgins in the world should be visibly different as religious are. Of course also he does not deny the Vatican provides that women in secular institutes may receive the consecration.

[Cecilia]

God’s Beloved, Here is a side comment. Possibly it would be good if twice a year – the pastor would introduce the consecrated virgins and have her stand – so the parish can see her. It would aid the faithful to know who she is – that she is among them – to introduce her. Because the consecrated virgin does not look different – generally – a pew for her may be nice – but she would still need to be introduced. To address the ceremony you mention -- I think she should sit with religious sisters ideally – ideally the pastor is well educated – and he knows how to correctly teach the faithful who the consecrated virgin is – and why she and the sisters share a pew.