Consecrated Virgin In The World - 50 Words Or Less

[God's Beloved]

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.

 

Cecilia , this again depends on local circumstances.

 

A CV is dedicated to the service of the church at the time of her consecration. Usually the bishop would proceed with the consecration only after seeing how she serves in the church at the universal , diocesan or parish levels.

 

Situation A : The CV was serving the parish in some ministry , before her consecration , so she is known by the parishioners , at least by the collaborators of the clergy. This has given her the opportunity to interact with people and inform them about her vocation , clearing their doubts and misunderstandings. She needs COURAGE to bear hurtful comments....but if people have 'experienced' her dedication to serve , gradually the negative comments about the vocation will fade away and lead to acceptance of her even with her new status as CV.

 

[ But this is possible only if the CV herself understands her vocation. She cannot convey a meaning she herself does not give to her own vocation . THIS is the problem faced by CV around the world. There is indeed need of some Universal institute to support and help CV form their Identity . If a CV is confident about her vocation, nothing will stop her from living it .God will make a way.]

 

Situation B: The CV has been serving the church at diocesan level , before and after the consecration. She is in her own parish only for Mass and personal prayer.

 

In such situation problems do arise. There can be conflict between the clergy of the parish and herself ...often due to gender-related issues  or the common 'parish-diocese tension'. She may be unable to commit herself to any particular service in the parish on a regular basis.

 

I know about a CV who could only spend one hour everyday in her parish church. Few minutes before and after  Mass she prayed silently in the Church on regular basis. People in the parish noticed 'something' different about this person. They would go to the parish priest to ask whether she is a Sister because of the Way she Prays. The parish priest would not answer [ with the intention that they should themselves do some research or ask her].  This CV dressed like any lay person....no veil or habit ...if fact she even wore some simple jewellery because of the nature of her professional work.

 

[ My interpretation : The CV needs to be seen as a person of Prayer and Union with God. Gradually everything else will be taken care .]

[God's Beloved]

In a 1971 response from the Sacred Congregation for Divine Worship, it was affirmed that
women in secular institutes might use the Rite. The reply does not discuss the potential incongruity
between the public nature of the consecration of virgins and the leaven imagery typical of
secular institutes. There is the similarity of consecrated persons living in the midst of the world
and there is diversity of practice among secular institutes regarding the practice of discretion.
Nevertheless, this appears to be a question which merits further reflection.

 

Source: Holland, Sr. Sharon, I.H.M., “Consecrated Virgins for Today’s Church”, Consecrated
Life, Vol. 24, No. 2 (Chicago: Institute on Religious Life, 2002).

[Cecilia]

God's Beloved, Do you have a time period for the quotation -- on public nature -- and leaven -- incongruity? The book is 2002 -- however I did not know if the comment from Sister Sharon Holland is 2002 or from an earlier time period. It is not important -- I have the quote in text but not information with it. Generally - the Church and consecrated virgins in the world  -- have answered the question about incongruity -- in practice -- how they comport themselves. Generally - a married Catholic woman shares she is married -- and a consecrated virgin in the world -- generally -- is open about her life as Christ's spouse. Both are public vocations - both have the <<public nature>>. Public nature -- or public status -- in the Church is the opposite from private -- discretion is the decision to keep something private that way -- to keep what is private, private. Members of secular institutes make private promises -- private promises that make them entirely consecrated. Private promises -- mean the members are free to not share their identity. Public nature -- of a married woman -- and a consecrated virgin -- means it is ideal to share and be open -- generally. Probably a woman who is in a secular institute -- and is consecrated to virginity -- generally -- would share her consecration as Christ's spouse. The woman could decide -- to her preference -- to share private bonds of poverty and obedience -- or to keep them private.

[Cecilia]

Oremus1, I will ask her -- when we meet. I will take notes -- if she agrees -- so I can share what she says.

[God's Beloved]

God's Beloved, Do you have a time period for the quotation -- on public nature -- and leaven -- incongruity? The book is 2002 -- however I did not know if the comment from Sister Sharon Holland is 2002 or from an earlier time period. It is not important -- I have the quote in text but not information with it. Generally - the Church and consecrated virgins in the world  -- have answered the question about incongruity -- in practice -- how they comport themselves. Generally - a married Catholic woman shares she is married -- and a consecrated virgin in the world -- generally -- is open about her life as Christ's spouse. Both are public vocations - both have the <<public nature>>. Public nature -- or public status -- in the Church is the opposite from private -- discretion is the decision to keep something private that way -- to keep what is private, private. Members of secular institutes make private promises -- private promises that make them entirely consecrated. Private promises -- mean the members are free to not share their identity. Public nature -- of a married woman -- and a consecrated virgin -- means it is ideal to share and be open -- generally. Probably a woman who is in a secular institute -- and is consecrated to virginity -- generally -- would share her consecration as Christ's spouse. The woman could decide -- to her preference -- to share private bonds of poverty and obedience -- or to keep them private.

 

Cecilia, the article by Sharon Holland in English in the publication " Consecrated life " by the Congr. for Inst. of Cons.LIfe in Rome was perhaps published earlier in another language. I faintly remember....perhaps in Notitiae.

 

The revised Rite itself was formulated around yr 1970 and research clearly mentions that the 'Experts' were themselves not familiar with the vocation and its theology. They had no idea what shape it would take after the promulgation of the Rite for women living in the world. The same happened when the Canon 604 was formulated for the 1983 Code.

 

I have found diverse scholarly opinions on the vocation. The experts who theologized on the vocation of CV from the horizon of Religious life seem to have created a big problem. There weren't CV in the world to do research like we are doing. So I think we can rightly say that there needs to be a new theology on the vocation , a deeper theology on the role of women in the Church as Pope Francis has expressed . We can research and give it a direction. [ but for that we need to be united in spite of our differences].

 

According to Annual Statistics , the number of Secular Inst. members are decreasing instead of increasing around the world. There must have been an instance in 1971 of a member of secular inst. asking for permission to use the Rite. But this could also be because the New Code of Canon law for secular Inst. was not in place to give them their clear identity.

 

Before CV was revived, women outside of religious life had no option but to join secular inst. The secular Inst. were often the continuation of religious life by ex-religious outside a convent....so they even continued wearing a habit.  I myself know secular inst. who DO NOT see their charism as leaven to transform the political , cultural , economic situation in the world. After the new Code of canon law 1983 defined the charism of Secular Inst., few people are joining them.

 

I also know a member of a [missionary] secular institute. For her , secular only means that she is not living in a convent. She is called Sister and she is open about her belonging to an Institute.

 

When I use the term discretion , I refer to CV in situation of persecution.

 

Putting all the facts together , I think CV researchers should not depend on church documents to understand the vocation. We need to go to the early chruch history, the philosophy and sociology that influenced it , define the charism clearly and apply it to today's world. One way is to kind of blind ourselves to the existence of Religous and Secular inst. in the Church. Once we clearly define the essential elements of the charism in today's language / grammar , we need to see how CV relates to other vocations in the church and how we can co-exist.

[God's Beloved]

Cecilia, the article by Sharon Holland in English in the publication " Consecrated life " by the Congr. for Inst. of Cons.LIfe in Rome was perhaps published earlier in another language. I faintly remember....perhaps in Notitiae.

 

 

Cecilia, sorry , my records show that the article by Sharon Holland was first published in INFORMATIONES ,1999 . In fact i had written to Rome in yr 2003 for further clarifications on that article and had received the response, part of which I have shared on this thread.

 

Another point to note : Maybe the Secular Inst. or Member of a Secular Inst. who wrote an application to the Vatican, to allow use of the Rite of consecration for virgins, did not have a clear idea of the charism of Secular Inst. as defined in the New Code of Canon law 1983. Secular Inst. use the Rite only as a ceremony, not as a vocation by itself.

 

So according to me, it would be unfair to define the charism of CV ,based on an instance of permission given to a member of a Secular Inst. to use the Rite.

Edited February 8, 2014 by God's Beloved

[abrideofChrist]

Cecilia, sorry , my records show that the article by Sharon Holland was first published in INFORMATIONES ,1999 . In fact i had written to Rome in yr 2003 for further clarifications on that article and had received the response, part of which I have shared on this thread.

 

Another point to note : Maybe the Secular Inst. or Member of a Secular Inst. who wrote an application to the Vatican, to allow use of the Rite of consecration for virgins, did not have a clear idea of the charism of Secular Inst. as defined in the New Code of Canon law 1983. Secular Inst. use the Rite only as a ceremony, not as a vocation by itself.

 

So according to me, it would be unfair to define the charism of CV ,based on an instance of permission given to a member of a Secular Inst. to use the Rite.

 

I would tend to disagree with this conclusion.  The reason why the Vatican allows the consecration to be given to secular institutes is they are non-religious, or "women living in the world".  Their vocation as women being as leaven does not interfere with the vocation of being a virgin, bride, and mother that the CV is.  Please remember that secular priests are also able to join secular institutes -- and members of secular institutes are allowed to be ordained.  The priesthood is compatible with different lifestyles, religious and secular.  However, a priest cannot be a religious and join a secular institute because the vocations of religious life and secular institute life are diametrically opposed when it comes to the "public witness" of religious life vs. the "leaven" witness of sec institutes.  This has nothing to do with the nature of the priesthood itself, which is compatible with either lifestyle and the in-between lifestyles of simply diocesan priests who are not in any consecrated life form.  The most important thing Cecilia highlighted in her quotes is that the Vatican has defined that the vows for the evangelical counsels DO NOT require separation from the world in and of themselves.  The spirit of "evangelical poverty or obedience" must then be understood to be something that is NOT by its nature separated from the world, particulary when it is applied to women who have taken no vows or promises.

[oremus1]

I would tend to disagree with this conclusion.  The reason why the Vatican allows the consecration to be given to secular institutes is they are non-religious, or "women living in the world".  Their vocation as women being as leaven does not interfere with the vocation of being a virgin, bride, and mother that the CV is.  Please remember that secular priests are also able to join secular institutes -- and members of secular institutes are allowed to be ordained.  The priesthood is compatible with different lifestyles, religious and secular.  However, a priest cannot be a religious and join a secular institute because the vocations of religious life and secular institute life are diametrically opposed when it comes to the "public witness" of religious life vs. the "leaven" witness of sec institutes.  This has nothing to do with the nature of the priesthood itself, which is compatible with either lifestyle and the in-between lifestyles of simply diocesan priests who are not in any consecrated life form.  The most important thing Cecilia highlighted in her quotes is that the Vatican has defined that the vows for the evangelical counsels DO NOT require separation from the world in and of themselves.  The spirit of "evangelical poverty or obedience" must then be understood to be something that is NOT by its nature separated from the world, particulary when it is applied to women who have taken no vows or promises.

 

I agree and welcome the comments from Cecilia and aBride and yourself.

 

If you think about it, a married person can join many secular institutes and give witness to her married state, so why can't a CV? Perhaps the CV would be called to be open about her state as a CV yet discereet about her membership of the institute??

 

I also agree with the person who posted that we cannot depend on current documents to understand the vocation. we must look to the history, IN DETAIL. there we can find things like

 

a) in the 3rd C there were laws prohibiting priests from bestowing the consecration

b)the CV was given a flammeum to wear on her 'wedding day' like married women - the flammeum was not worn everyday

c) the understanding of the indissolubility of the bond by the CV by reference to the nuptial nature, rather than the vowe3d nature.

 

there are plenty more. currently one would be hard pressed to find these explicitly stated in the intro of the Rite or indeed in the current magesterial documents, rather, they require much interpretation etc. while one might say, "one should stick to the Rite and not deviate unless you have fluency in multiple languages and a doctorate in canon laws", the fact is that OUR BISHOPS and clergy and superiors are deviating from these things without realising they are incorrect so it is down to normal people to expolain it to them. normal women without access to multiple theological libraries or many advanced degrees and fluency in many languages.

 

my question (unrelated) can anyone suggest to me a few examples of parallels with CVs and the priestly ordination and the vocation of priests?

 

you may know the Rite evolved from ordination and marriage. but why?

[God's Beloved]

I would tend to disagree with this conclusion.  The reason why the Vatican allows the consecration to be given to secular institutes is they are non-religious, or "women living in the world".  Their vocation as women being as leaven does not interfere with the vocation of being a virgin, bride, and mother that the CV is.  Please remember that secular priests are also able to join secular institutes -- and members of secular institutes are allowed to be ordained.  The priesthood is compatible with different lifestyles, religious and secular.  However, a priest cannot be a religious and join a secular institute because the vocations of religious life and secular institute life are diametrically opposed when it comes to the "public witness" of religious life vs. the "leaven" witness of sec institutes.  This has nothing to do with the nature of the priesthood itself, which is compatible with either lifestyle and the in-between lifestyles of simply diocesan priests who are not in any consecrated life form.  The most important thing Cecilia highlighted in her quotes is that the Vatican has defined that the vows for the evangelical counsels DO NOT require separation from the world in and of themselves.  The spirit of "evangelical poverty or obedience" must then be understood to be something that is NOT by its nature separated from the world, particulary when it is applied to women who have taken no vows or promises.

 

ABC, I have known several secular Inst, missionary inst, lay associations and movements with private vows etc.I know them in and out and would not doubt their commitment to the Lord .I agree with you that the living of the evangelical counsels does not require separation from the world.

 

At first glance it does seem  CV is compatible with their vocations -but deeper analysis shows that the institutes have their own founder's charism which can dilute the vocation of a CV.

 

My concern is that  CV are going thru a phase that Secular Inst have been thru several decades ago , when ex-religious joined secular inst. with the sole motive of continuing their religious life as individuals. They did not embrace the charism of Secular Inst. Result : Decline of Secular Inst.  It may help to do research on Secular Inst. to see how the same issues can be prevented in OCV.

[abrideofChrist]

I agree and welcome the comments from Cecilia and aBride and yourself.

 

If you think about it, a married person can join many secular institutes and give witness to her married state, so why can't a CV?

 

A married person can join some secular institutes but NOT as a full fledged consecrated member.

 

 

I also agree with the person who posted that we cannot depend on current documents to understand the vocation. we must look to the history, IN DETAIL. there we can find things like

 

a) in the 3rd C there were laws prohibiting priests from bestowing the consecration

b)the CV was given a flammeum to wear on her 'wedding day' like married women - the flammeum was not worn everyday

c) the understanding of the indissolubility of the bond by the CV by reference to the nuptial nature, rather than the vowe3d nature.

 

 

The documents and the Rite are very specific as to who the minister of the Rite is:  the diocesan Bishop or his bishop-delegate.  There is no doubt about this in the mind of the Church.  The only doubt that arises come from people who want to go against the rule and make up their own reasons for doing so.

 

The Rite says "bridal insignia".  To anyone who has a grammar school education, bridal means bridal and does not mean a coarse cloth or a black cloth or whatever color cloth a religious might wear for a veil.  One doesn't need to go back to history to be able to read the words "bridal insignia".

 

The indissolubility of the bond is mentioned two or three times in the Rite itself.  Only people who are comfortable ONLY in vowed consecrated life forms twist themselves into pretzels over this.

 

[oremus1]

ABC, I have known several secular Inst, missionary inst, lay associations and movements with private vows etc.I know them in and out and would not doubt their commitment to the Lord .I agree with you that the living of the evangelical counsels does not require separation from the world.

 

At first glance it does seem  CV is compatible with their vocations -but deeper analysis shows that the institutes have their own founder's charism which can dilute the vocation of a CV.

 

My concern is that  CV are going thru a phase that Secular Inst have been thru several decades ago , when ex-religious joined secular inst. with the sole motive of continuing their religious life as individuals. They did not embrace the charism of Secular Inst. Result : Decline of Secular Inst.  It may help to do research on Secular Inst. to see how the same issues can be prevented in OCV.

 

do you have any statistics to support that CVs are the fastest growing form of consecratedlife? i read this alot , i think the usacv says this also, does anyone know where this advice came from?

 

re your question aboev. it is sad that in many areas the CV vocation is used as a fallback when religious life doesnt work out, an easy way to wear a habit and be known as sr as it were. rather than a distinct vocation in its own right. i think this can only be prevented if there is a mandatory 3 year period between leaving the community and becoming a cv. i know some instances were it was just a couple of months. this way the person has time to adapt to life in the world, and discern whether they want to be a cv or not, and how that is a different vocaiton.

 

i also think that having clearer universal norms as to the living of cv life, no habits, no being called sr, no mandatory horariums and convent-like communities, and clarity on what it is would be helpful. it would be good if many of the studies of the vocation in history are made avaliable publically in english - at present normal people only have the usacv materials, some dubious publications by canon lawyer CVs, and the Rite. then of course the many theological opinions. but if rene metz historical studies, as well as some of the good spanish and italian ones were freely avaliable inenglish which refer to more concrete things, i think it would be easier. ii'd like there to be a document by the magisterium distinguishing this vocation from the religious, like the one cited on secular institutes.

 

i think that there should be age limits on the vocation too, like how religious institutes often accept people from 25 - 40. this would also stop the vocaiton being used a s a fall-back vocation 'well i was X age and unmarried' 'i was too old to join a convent' 'i left my convent and am too old to discern anything else'. surely a vocation is something you devote your life to, rather than an affirmation of a life you ahev already lieved. a younger peorson is therefore more likely to discern the cv vocation from many choices, and renounce all other choices, and understand why they did this. rather than vocational discernment ebing a process of evolution. i have heard of a few instances where women were in their 70+ ages and were consecrated very quickly before they might die. many dicese try to impose the average age of consecration (45 - 65) as a norm, and refuse to consecrate women under that. i think that if you are to renouce marriage, you should be of marriageable childbearing age as the norm.

 

these are some ideas to protect the charism of the cv from being a fallback esp of rleigious life. we also need vicar of religious who are educated in the vocation!

[Lilllabettt]

The Rite says "bridal insignia".  To anyone who has a grammar school education, bridal means bridal and does not mean a coarse cloth or a black cloth or whatever color cloth a religious might wear for a veil.  One doesn't need to go back to history to be able to read the words "bridal insignia".
 

 

I think it is a  bit of a stretch to say that the words "bridal insignia" imply anything about fabric choices. That is a little much.

[Sponsa-Christi]

 

The Rite says "bridal insignia".  To anyone who has a grammar school education, bridal means bridal and does not mean a coarse cloth or a black cloth or whatever color cloth a religious might wear for a veil.  One doesn't need to go back to history to be able to read the words "bridal insignia".

 

 

Actually, the heading for the part of the Rite where the veil, ring, and breviary are given is titled: "Presentation of the Insignia of Consecration." (In the typical Latin edition, it's: "Insignium consecrationis traditio.")

[oremus1]

A married person can join some secular institutes but NOT as a full fledged consecrated member.

 

 

 

The documents and the Rite are very specific as to who the minister of the Rite is:  the diocesan Bishop or his bishop-delegate.  There is no doubt about this in the mind of the Church.  The only doubt that arises come from people who want to go against the rule and make up their own reasons for doing so.

 

The Rite says "bridal insignia".  To anyone who has a grammar school education, bridal means bridal and does not mean a coarse cloth or a black cloth or whatever color cloth a religious might wear for a veil.  One doesn't need to go back to history to be able to read the words "bridal insignia".

 

The indissolubility of the bond is mentioned two or three times in the Rite itself.  Only people who are comfortable ONLY in vowed consecrated life forms twist themselves into pretzels over this.

 

 

the problem is not so much CVs that dont understand this, but rather bishops and important people who try to reinterpret it. or the many ex-religious who try to twist it to suit their own ideas, the important people alloow it without knowing better, and then suddenty it becomes a case of "well, the last 10 virgins were consecrated by their parish priest in their local church, so i dont see why you are asking for it to be by a bishop in the cathedral. dont you know the rite is rather long and the bishop is very busy?". or large groups of ex-religious who WANT to wear habits and trouser suits instead of bridal insignia, which they say went out at Vat II (for religious), those large vocal groups become the informal national association and pass on those norms to the bishops and improtant people who do not know better. and re indissolubility, surely it says that re the profession of solemn vows? all important people always point to that.

 

so when you have ms jane-bloggs age 30, normal non-theological person, asking for what is explicitly in the rite then being told 'sorry none of the ones in this country have ever had that', and jane, being normal and only havoing the usacv english materials, cannot defend her position and being pressured into an a)invalid consecration by a priest or b) to reject bridal insignia out of evangelical poverty or c) being advised not to recieve the veil or bridal insignia which went out at VII or d) being told that it is dissoluble upon request, you can see there are major problems which a normal person cannot overcome.

 

that is the problem.

[abrideofChrist]

ABC...

At first glance it does seem  CV is compatible with their vocations -but deeper analysis shows that the institutes have their own founder's charism which can dilute the vocation of a CV.

 

My concern is that  CV are going thru a phase that Secular Inst have been thru several decades ago , when ex-religious joined secular inst. with the sole motive of continuing their religious life as individuals. They did not embrace the charism of Secular Inst. Result : Decline of Secular Inst.  It may help to do research on Secular Inst. to see how the same issues can be prevented in OCV.

 

We are approaching this differently.  The consecration of virgins is separate from the consecration of the priesthood or the consecration of a religious.  The conscecration of the priesthood is compatible with either the consecration of a religious or the consecration of a secular institute, but both consecrations cannot co-exist in the same person.  Likewise for CVs.  The consecration of virginity is different from but compatible with the consecrations of religious and secular institutes.

 

The consecration of the priesthood has its own set of obligations and identity.  The consecration of religious life or secular institute life is not a dilution of the priesthood, it is a restriction of his rights the ability to do things as a person and as a priest that he is freely giving up in order to embrace a particular charism with its framework of rules and regulations meant to help attain salvation via particular charismatic pathway. 

 

A diocesan priest is free to be a billionaire if he so chooses.  He can make decisions as to where he vacations, how he chooses to spend his free time - at the golf course, visiting parishioners, volunteering at another diocese, taking on apostolates, playing chess, hiking with friends, or a number of other things-, patronize favorite charities, etc. 

 

When a man is a priest member of a religious institute - a "religious priest" - he has to follow a rule, his vow of poverty restricts his ability to own or administrate personal finances, there may be significant restrictions on vacations, he might not be able to choose where he goes on retreat, the apostolates he engages in must be corporately sponsored by his institution, etc. 

 

Likewise for the priest member of a secular institute.  The vow of poverty will restrict him in ways a diocesan priest is not restricted.  Perhaps some of his salary from the diocese goes to the institute.  Maybe most of his apostolate is restricted to the corporate mission focus of his institute rather than apostolates of his own choosing.  His "free time" will be more closely regulated.  He may have mandatory institute days of recollection.  At the same time, he will have a lot more freedom than a religious priest, because the nature of his secular vocation demands this.

 

Like it or not, the diocesan priest is ordained for ministry.  There are some things which are required of the priest by law.  Other than the obligations laid out by the law, the bishop does not have the authority to "order" him by virtue of obedience to do anything.  Thus, a bishop cannot dictate the haircuts of a priest, whom he can make out his will to, mandate days of recollection, determine that all his priests must read YZ book, forbid golfing, or tell him where he must take a vacation.  The bishop can't even force a priest to say daily Mass!  Most priests are concientious and actually go way beyond what they are required to do in performance of their duties.  Nevertheless, there are a very small minority of freeloader priests I know who do the bare minimum - show up for the scheduled Mass  or Confession and take the emergency calls - and that's about it.  The rest of the time they're doing whatever it is that takes their fancy.

 

The virgin is consecrated to be a virgin, bride, and mother.  Her primary duty is spousal and maternal.  All else flows from this.  She is a woman of prayer, penance, and service.  But these all take different forms and that's fine because this is an individual vocation, not a corporate communal one with a specific corporate framework as in a secular or religious institute.  She can channel her spousal and maternal duties into the confines of religious or secular institute life, but is not required to restrict herself in this way.

Edited February 8, 2014 by abrideofChrist