Consecrated Virginity

[Shana]

Has anyone else out there thought about or are discerning now consecrated virginity?

[OnlySunshine]

When I was still discerning, I thought about it for a while, but I don't feel called to that life. I read many documents about it and it's beautiful, though.

[DevotedtoHim]

My diocese doesn't allow it! (Los Angeles) it might be an option for me, but I would have to move. I've read some stuff on it, mostly from the more recent meetings. It seems like they really clarified that one has to be a physical virgin which I am still trying to understand, especially since I have met two CV's who were not virgins in the physical sense, and I guess I think this rule (to me) sort of negates the profound process of Confession and absolution!!! I'm a virgin in every sense, but I don't like the idea that others who may have had a conversion (or made a mistake) face possible discrimination. Just my opinion.

Katherine

[sistersintigo]

Please do continue this thread, AND/BUT tread very gently. Previous threads on this topic have been locked down because debate became too heated....God bless.

[cmaD2006]

[quote name='sistersintigo' timestamp='1291295223' post='2190339']
Please do continue this thread, AND/BUT tread very gently. Previous threads on this topic have been locked down because debate became too heated....God bless.
[/quote]
Really? I've been on the boards for a while (4 years I think?) ... and the threads that were closed were usually due to other issues not specifically pertaining to the topic of CVs. So as long as there is charity chat on .

[SponsaChristi]

[quote name='DevotedtoHim' timestamp='1291277427' post='2190321']
My diocese doesn't allow it! (Los Angeles) it might be an option for me, but I would have to move. I've read some stuff on it, mostly from the more recent meetings. It seems like they really clarified that one has to be a physical virgin which I am still trying to understand, especially since I have met two CV's who were not virgins in the physical sense, and I guess I think this rule (to me) sort of negates the profound process of Confession and absolution!!! I'm a virgin in every sense, but I don't like the idea that others who may have had a conversion (or made a mistake) face possible discrimination. Just my opinion.

Katherine
[/quote]

Dear Katherine,

our church has so many different vocations - and there is this only one that requires a woman to be a virgin in the physical sense... When one door closes (because you are not what you are suposed to be), many other doors will open... No woman has "a right" te receive the consecration - it is grace! Similar: The fact that you are a man doesn´t mean that you can become priest! There are many seminarian friends of mine who hadn´t been ordained although they desperately longed for it...

As a consecrated virgin from Germany, I had the grace to meet Cardinal R. l. Burke who used to be episcopal moderator of the United States Virgins. And he also stated that a woman is consecrated AS a virgin (a virgin reveives the consecration) - she doesn´t "BECOME" (in this sense) a virgin. She has to BE it.

For a better understanding, a look ob this blog could help:
=> http://doihaveavocation.com/blog/archives/136 (Part 1)
[i]"Q. May a “renewed virgin” receive the consecration?
A. A female who has voluntarily and completely experienced sexual pleasure is not eligible for the consecration, for she cannot offer God physical virginity. As St. Jerome put it, in his twenty-second Epistle to St. Eustochium, n. 5 (P.L., XXII, 397), “I tell you without hesitation that though God is almighty, He cannot restore a virginity that has been lost.” Although generous repentance may restore “spiritual” virginity, physical virginity cannot be restored, and both physical and spiritual virginity are required for a valid consecration."[/i]

=> http://doihaveavocation.com/blog/archives/343 (Part 2)

The consecrated virgins from the USA also offer many information on this side:
http://www.consecratedvirgins.org/welcome.html

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

You can confess what you have done wrong, your sins - but that doesn´t restore your virginity.

From http://www.consecratedvirgins.org/q-a/qa-d.html :
" * Is physical virginity necessary in order to receive the Consecration of a Virgin?

Yes. Can someone offer to God what she does not have?"

And this is the point! Again - there are so many and different vocations... you can always make a private vow or something like this with the promise that from this time on you will be devoted only to him... It is not the consecration of virgins, but you can´t pretend to be something that is not the case... A virgin has always been a women who has never voluntarily and completely experienced sexual pleasure... Always! Why should the church today should have chanced that?

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

You even speak of "possible discrimination" - but then the fact that women can´t be ordained would be discrimination as well, would´n it?

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

Again from http://doihaveavocation.com/blog/archives/136
[i]Q. The Rite of Consecration says that a person must never been married, nor have publicly or openly violated chastity. I secretly had a one night stand that nobody knows about 20 years ago. Can I receive the consecration?
A. While it is true that you weren’t married nor lived in public or open violation of chastity (as in the case of cohabiting), your virginity was lost in the one night stand and thus you are unable to validly receive the consecration. Perhaps some other vocational options are available for your prayerful discernment and consideration.
[/i]

I really can´t remember why the other threads about CV´s have been closed...

God bless you on you way to HIM! :-)

[bmb144]

I don't mean to stir the pot but what about women who have had to have their virginity broken medically and not through physical means. Hymen imperfecta that causes problems with certain natural female physical functions usually leads to the hymen being cut by a scalpel. In no way has the woman's virginity been removed by a "pleasurable experience"....having had to go through it when I was 14 years old, I can bluntly say that it was [b]anything[/b] but pleasurable... Where would a women who has been through such an experience stand, particularly if she has remained a virgin in every other way?

Edited December 3, 2010 by In His Light

[abrideofChrist]

[quote name='In His Light' timestamp='1291338766' post='2190499']
I don't mean to stir the pot but what about women who have had to have their virginity broken medically and not through physical means. Hymen imperfecta that causes problems with certain natural female physical functions usually leads to the hymen being cut by a scalpel. In no way has the woman's virginity been removed by a "pleasurable experience"....having had to go through it when I was 14 years old, I can bluntly say that it was [b]anything[/b] but pleasurable... Where would a women who has been through such an experience stand, particularly if she has remained a virgin in every other way?
[/quote]

Virginity is lost only by voluntary sexual intercourse. Necessary medical procedures do not fall under that category. Only fornication and adultery do. God bless you.

Edited December 3, 2010 by abrideofChrist

[bmb144]

Thanks that clarified that point.

[Chiquitunga]

Something I wanted to add here .. there are also such things as private vows .. and one could make a private vow of virginity to a confessor. I know St. Teresa of the Andes did this. And I remember reading somewhere on discerning the vocation to become a CV, that one ought to have lived this out in a private vow first for a numbers of years I think .. though that could have just been a recommendation.

I have thought of this vocation myself, but I am pretty sure the Lord wants me in religious life and in a community. But if for some reason that can't happen, like I get into a car accident and become paralyzed, etc. God forbid, but whatever is His will .. I will definitely be looking into this.

I know a couple CVs personally. The one told me the consecration by the Bishop is powerful! and there are many graces that come with it ..

Edited December 3, 2010 by Chiquitunga

[TradMom]

+Praised be Jesus Christ!

This isssue has confounded me as I also know - personally!!! - Consecrated Virgins were not Virgins in the physical sense. In fact, one was consecrated in a northeast American Church - publicly - by the Cardinal, and she has children (but obviously did not remarry and the kids are older).

I also know two nuns who received the FULL ancient Rite of being Consecrated Virgins, and both were VERY open about not being Virgins in the physical sense.

The nuns received this grace before the last meeting - so I am aware the rules were clarified.

The mother received her grace of a Vocation two months ago. (meaning she was Consecrated 2 months ago)

And not to be absurd, but I do wonder...are lesbians eligible for this state in life? Does sexual intercourse between women, which most likely cannot be considered "sexual intercourse" count? Somebody in our Church hall asked me and didn't have the nerve to write in! I do!

I do hope this thread continues. Not to always be on Katherine's side ALL the time, but I do understand her thoughts.

Pax,
TradMom

Edited December 3, 2010 by TradMom

[SponsaChristi]

[quote name='abrideofChrist' timestamp='1291343979' post='2190530']
Virginity is lost only by voluntary sexual intercourse. Necessary medical procedures do not fall under that category. Only fornication and adultery do. God bless you.
[/quote]

Sorry, I forgot to mention that... Thank you for adding...

Edited December 3, 2010 by SponsaChristi

[SponsaChristi]

[quote name='TradMom' timestamp='1291360891' post='2190585']
+Praised be Jesus Christ!

This isssue has confounded me as I also know - personally!!! - Consecrated Virgins were not Virgins in the physical sense. In fact, one was consecrated in a northeast American Church - publicly - by the Cardinal, and she has children (but obviously did not remarry and the kids are older).

I also know two nuns who received the FULL ancient Rite of being Consecrated Virgins, and both were VERY open about not being Virgins in the physical sense.

The nuns received this grace before the last meeting - so I am aware the rules were clarified.

The mother received her grace of a Vocation two months ago. (meaning she was Consecrated 2 months ago)

And not to be absurd, but I do wonder...are lesbians eligible for this state in life? Does sexual intercourse between women, which most likely cannot be considered "sexual intercourse" count? Somebody in our Church hall asked me and didn't have the nerve to write in! I do!

I do hope this thread continues. Not to always be on Katherine's side ALL the time, but I do understand her thoughts.

Pax,
TradMom
[/quote]


I know that ancient orders normally leave the "choice" for the candidates to either receive the consecration of virgins - and if this is not possible because they are not virgins, they may receive the monastic consecration (I don´t know the correct term in English) - a rite which resembles the consecration of virgins but doesn´t require the fact of physical virginity - and is often also administered by a bishop or cardinal - mostly on the day of the solemn profession.

The question if the candidate is a virgin in the mentioned sense is to be asked during scrutiny (is this the correct word in English?). And the bishop/cardinal must have known that is not valid when the fact of virginity is not fulfilled...

Edited December 3, 2010 by SponsaChristi

[ontherock4good]

[quote name='SponsaChristi' timestamp='1291364795' post='2190592']
I know that ancient orders normally leave the "choice" for the candidates to either receive the consecration of virgins - and if this is not possible because they are not virgins, they may receive the monastic consecration (I don´t know the correct term in English) - a rite which resembles the consecration of virgins but doesn´t require the fact of physical virginity - and is often also administered by a bishop or cardinal - mostly on the day of the solemn profession.

The question if the candidate is a virgin in the mentioned sense is to be asked during scrutiny (is this the correct word in English?). And the bishop/cardinal must have known that is not valid when the fact of virginity is not fulfilled...
[/quote]

Another point/question on this topic. In studying the vow of chastity, it became apparent to me that the term "virginity" in the strict sense, according to the Church, is defined as being broken whenever one has voluntarily experienced ... how do I say this delicately ... sexual pleasure. This means that intercourse is not the only way to lose one's virginity.

I always thought of consecrated virginity as something that was from that point on, not necessarily that a person was always a virgin (esp. in this culture) - I mean look at Mary Magdalene. Of course, I don't know what all the requirements are, but that was my understanding...

[abrideofChrist]

This is one area in which the vocations of consecrated virginity and religious life differ. Consecrated virginity requires as valid "matter" a woman who has not had voluntary sexual experience (fornication, the marital act, or adultery) and one has had to have been always a virgin. Not all sins invalidate the woman's eligibility for the consecration; just the completed conjugal act (in marriage or out). Consecrated religious life requires a vow of chastity that one will abstain from all sexual experience (including impure thoughts, words, and actions) from that time forward irrespective of one's sexual experience prior to making that vow.


[quote name='ontherock4good' timestamp='1291583201' post='2191084']
Another point/question on this topic. In studying the vow of chastity, it became apparent to me that the term "virginity" in the strict sense, according to the Church, is defined as being broken whenever one has voluntarily experienced ... how do I say this delicately ... sexual pleasure. This means that intercourse is not the only way to lose one's virginity.

I always thought of consecrated virginity as something that was from that point on, not necessarily that a person was always a virgin (esp. in this culture) - I mean look at Mary Magdalene. Of course, I don't know what all the requirements are, but that was my understanding...
[/quote]

[FSM Sister]

[code][/code]This isssue has confounded me as I also know - personally!!! - Consecrated Virgins were not Virgins in the physical sense. In fact, one was consecrated in a northeast American Church - publicly - by the Cardinal, and she has children (but obviously did not remarry and the kids are older).

I also know two nuns who received the FULL ancient Rite of being Consecrated Virgins, and both were VERY open about not being Virgins in the physical sense.
[code][/code]


I don't know how to put a quote from someone else into my own post (can someone explain it to me? I feel like such a dummy!)

Anyway, I wanted to respond to Tradmom's comment.

I wonder if - sometimes - priests, bishops, and even Cardinals misinterpret canon law. Not to be uncharitable, but my experience with most diocesan priests is that they know very little about how religious life works. In a few instances, you almost get the impression that they just do not want to go to the trouble. Here is an off topic example. I know two cases where someone married their first cousin, in the church, in a Catholic wedding, with a priest celebrating the mass. In both cases, the priest (a monsignor, actually) "granted" the couple a dispensation. The first time this happened, the mother of the groom wrote to me and asked me to look it up in canon law. I did, and there is no such dispensation in the '83 code. Was there in the previous code? I don't know - but this Msgr. either thought that there still was, or just flat out lied to the couple (who was already co-habitating, and already had at least one child). It was a pretty big wedding, too. So I wonder if the bishop - or cardinal - who performed this consecration, did so for pastoral reasons. Just a thought - as I don't know (and do not want to know) the identity of the cardinal to which Tradmom refers.

I am very happy that the church is restoring the order of consecration of virgins, and that it is being allowed in more and more diocese. It is especially needed in our western culture, where virginity is seldom talked about and drastically misunderstood!!!

Edited December 6, 2010 by FSM Sister

[ontherock4good]

[quote name='abrideofChrist' timestamp='1291604005' post='2191133']
This is one area in which the vocations of consecrated virginity and religious life differ. Consecrated virginity requires as valid "matter" a woman who has not had voluntary sexual experience (fornication, the marital act, or adultery) and one has had to have been always a virgin. Not all sins invalidate the woman's eligibility for the consecration; just the completed conjugal act (in marriage or out). Consecrated religious life requires a vow of chastity that one will abstain from all sexual experience (including impure thoughts, words, and actions) from that time forward irrespective of one's sexual experience prior to making that vow.



[/quote]


So are you saying that someone who has had a voluntary sexual experience, as long as it was not intercourse, can be a consecrated virgin? Sorry to harp on this, but I'm just a little confused. I would also want to be able to explain it clearly to someone who's thinking about the vocation (ie: whether they are eligible for it or not)

[Shana]

[quote name='ontherock4good' timestamp='1291617458' post='2191166']
So are you saying that someone who has had a voluntary sexual experience, as long as it was not intercourse, can be a consecrated virgin? Sorry to harp on this, but I'm just a little confused. I would also want to be able to explain it clearly to someone who's thinking about the vocation (ie: whether they are eligible for it or not)
[/quote]

I've been hesitating to reply because there are a lot of gray areas. My friend who is a consecrated virgin wrote a post relating to the topic of virginity as it relates to this vocation recently on her blog about consecrated virginity:

[url="http://sponsa-christi.blogspot.com/2011/01/charism-of-virginity.html"]http://sponsa-christi.blogspot.com/2011/01/charism-of-virginity.html
[/url]
Be sure to take a look at the comments as well as someone asked a very similar question as yours and this was Jenna's response which I honestly think is the the best one you're going to find online (trust me I've researched this issue) :

"In my own personal OPINION, a "half-virgin" or a "technical virgin" probably should not receive the Rite of Consecration, since I think this would count as having lived in "public or flagrant violation of chastity."

But I hesitate to emphasize this point, since it can be really easy for women to become scrupulous about chastity. I don't believe that comparatively minor sins against chastity would make a woman ineligible to receive the Rite; however, there are a lot of "gray areas" and it's next to impossible to "draw the line" in the abstract. Practically speaking, I think it would be easier to discern eligible vocations to consecrated virginity in real life with actual candidates, since women tend to know for themselves whether or not they are really virgins (i.e., whether or not they still have their whole heart, so that they can give themselves whole-heartedly to someone)."


I think she hits it right on the head here in saying that it is next to impossible to draw the line in the abstract and that it would be easier to discern this matter in real life with actual canidates.

Also, I do think her advice should be heeded is that if you are having issues with your own personal discernment of your matter it would be wise to not consult the internet as you will confuse yourself and get all worked up.

If someone is personally having issues in discerning this you can PM me and I may be able to give you some advice.

Edited February 10, 2011 by Shana

[Chamomile]

So... I'm going to throw this out there because I've always wondered it, and this seems like the right place to ask it.

I've come across many writings about religious life that stress virginity. Especially in Poor Clare literature. Also on the main page for the Franciscans of the Immaculate in American: [url="http://marymediatrix.com/"]FI Sisters[/url]. Scroll down, and you'll see it says "Consecrated Virginity for Mary."

Are there some religious orders or communities that do require one to be a physical virgin? In some of the Poor Clare information I've read, there's such an emphasis on virginity that it seems one would have to be. Yet I don't think this is the case (even though they retain the Rite of Consecration in their vows, I think?).

Also, I just flipped on EWTN for a second and caught part of the homily. It was given by a Dominican, and he was speaking about marriage. He then started speaking about the spousal love of a vowed religious for God, and he exclusively used the word "virginity" instead of chastity. As in, he spoke of being called to "a life of virginity."

If consecrated virginity is [i]never[/i] a requirement for religious life, I don't understand why this term is used to refer to the chaste state of religious life. To me, there is an actual difference between virginity and chastity. Although I have run across a quote, I think by St. Bernard, that says something like, a long period of chastity is a second virginity... part of me says that confuses the definition of virginity. And our society really doesn't need to be confused about what constitutes sexual purity versus impurity.

So... why the use of "virginity" when it seems "chastity" would suffice? Is there an issue in translation? If it's meant to heighten chastity to a spiritual virginity, why not use the term "spiritual virginity"? Or how about using "celibacy"? I'm a convert, so did I miss something about the way the Church speaks of one's sexual past versus present/future?

If anyone could provide some insight into this, I would be grateful. I've always found it confusing, and I don't know who to bring these questions to.

And prayers for you, Shana, as you discern! I think Consecrated Virginity is an amazing vocation, and you would be such a witness in that life.

[CatherineM]

We have a couple CV here in this diocese, and had at least one back home in St. Pete. One of the CV's here is an old testament professor at my school. She's leaving at the end of the term though. She took additional training as a Chaplain, and is basically taking over as the head one for the Catholic health system here.