Cecilia Posted February 3, 2014 Author Share Posted February 3, 2014 Sponsa Christi, Do you have comments on the public witness and eschatological icon items you asked me -- to which I responded? God's Beloved, your comments about the consecrated virgin in the world being both a daughter to her bishop and a mother to all -- especially the needy -- are profound. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sponsa-Christi Posted February 4, 2014 Share Posted February 4, 2014 by advocating the wearing of distinctive garb, the requirement to work full time for the church (rather than, say, an accountant or firefighter), a fixed horarium, in that the CV's life will be 'visibly' consecrated, perhaps actually sponsa is in favour of CV being bestowed on members of apostolic religious sisters, and perhaps she would have preferred this? Right now, I really don’t have an opinion as to whether or not apostolic religious Sisters should be able to receive the consecration of virgins. However, even if this was permitted, it still doesn’t mean that I would have become a Sister instead of a CV! 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, that we should live in a spirit of evangelical poverty, etc. (Though I’ve never thought that we should have a fixed horarium, and I’m not sure where this idea came from.) But even if all CVs did do all these things, to me the vocation of consecrated virginity would still be very different and distinct from apostolic religious life. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sponsa-Christi Posted February 4, 2014 Share Posted February 4, 2014 Sponsa Christi, Another question --what do you think regarding diocesan priests and poverty – they do not take a vow of poverty. In order to live the vocation radically – do you think a diocesan priest should have specific clothes besides his clerics – should he wear sweaters, socks, coats that are only dark colors? Grey, black, brown… Should a diocesan priest report to his bishop how he will live like Christ in a spirit of poverty – is this ideal? Should he not spend more than a certain amount of money on a watch or shoes? Are there self-imposed norms that a diocesan priest should follow that would make him worthy of praise – of a praise greater than diocesan priests who neglect such self-imposed norms? Can we say that all diocesan priests should – ideally -- aim to only have a pair of boots, a pair of dress shoes, and a pair of tennis shoes? That anything they buy should be plain and inexpensive and simple? Should he not spend money on a cap or sweatshirt with a sports logo on it – this might be considered frivolous and unnecessary? Should he only get his hair cut so many times a year? There is nowhere in Church teaching that outlines these things – or restricts diocesan priests in these decisions – however, do you believe to be radically holy and to really live like Christ in a spirit of poverty a diocesan priest should restrict himself in these kinds of ways? If so -- should he wear a symbol that shows the world he takes the spirit of poverty radically seriously – in order to be a witness to others? Possibly might he adopt wearing a rosary from his belt as a witness to others -- to show everyone that he lives radically the spirit of evangelical poverty? I do think that diocesan priests should live in a spirit of evangelical poverty, as per canon 282 §1: “Clerics are to foster simplicity of life and are to refrain from all things that have a semblance of vanity.†And yes, if a diocesan priest does have the occasion to discuss his efforts to live this simplicity of life with his bishop, then I think this would be wonderful! Diocesan priests do wear a symbol of their commitment to the spirit of evangelical poverty—their clerical garb, which is also required in canon law. Since I do understand that diocesan priests with the same vocation often exercise their ministry in very different contexts and circumstances, I wouldn’t try to invent a system of material, concrete rules about precisely what diocesan priest should and should not buy or own. But I’m not trying to do this with consecrated virgins, either! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sponsa-Christi Posted February 4, 2014 Share Posted February 4, 2014 Sponsa Christi, Possibly you confuse publicly identify with public witness. In baptism – and our baptismal promises – all the faithful commit to follow Christ in the spirit of the Gospel and to be a sign of the Kingdom to come. This is the nature of being a baptized Christian. Christians witness Christ to the world. Married couples enter a public status in the Church when they marry. They do so even though a liturgy is not required for the sacrament to take place – and so they may enter a public vocation without having a liturgy. This means there is not necessarily a direct correlation between a public vocation and a public liturgy as you hope. Members of secular institutes – while leaven in the world – are witnesses to the Kingdom. In fact they commit to follow Christ in the spirit of the Gospel <<more explicitly>> than a consecrated virgin in the world – because they are consecrated by promising the evangelical counsels. While not all public states in the Church are necessarily liturgical, all liturgical vocations are public. Liturgy, and the results of liturgy, are never private. So there is a direct correlation in that way. (And even in cases like a secret marriage—which is rarely permitted, by the way—and clandestine bishops, the Church doesn’t regard this “hiddenness†as ordinary or desirable.) It is true that all the baptized and all called to be a Christian witness, but consecrated persons in general are called to do this in a much more radical way. When consecrated virgins promise to be a sign and witness at their consecration, they must be promising something “more†than what they were already committed to at baptism, because you can’t make a promise to do something which you are already bound to do. Also, many canonists do see the mention of consecrated virgins’ stated resolve during the Rite to “follow Christ in the spirit of the Gospels,†as well as can. 604 describing consecrated virgins as “expressing the holy resolution of following Christ more closely,†to be strong implications that CVs are in fact called to embrace the evangelical counsels in at least some form. 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. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sponsa-Christi Posted February 4, 2014 Share Posted February 4, 2014 Sponsa Christi, Do you have comments on the public witness and eschatological icon items you asked me -- to which I responded? God's Beloved, your comments about the consecrated virgin in the world being both a daughter to her bishop and a mother to all -- especially the needy -- are profound. To be honest, I still think that the call to be a “sign†does very strongly imply some level of visibility (I still have a hard time seeing how it couldn't). Maybe a consecrated virgin doesn’t always have to be immediately identifiable to someone passing her in the street, but I do think that consecrated virgins should be very open about their vocation, and so should be “visible†in at least this sense. And as sort of a side note—I’m not trying to argue that wearing a veil is or should be obligatory for all CVs everywhere. I’m only saying that I think wearing a veil in daily life could be very fitting and praiseworthy for consecrated virgins in many situations. It is true that Our Lady is a sign, even though we can’t see her in person in the same was as we see a religious. However, the Church does take care to ensure that Our Lady's life, her vocation, and her person are kept before our eyes through the proclamation of the Scriptures, through the sacred liturgy, and through various traditional Marian devotions. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oremus1 Posted February 4, 2014 Share Posted February 4, 2014 Right now, I really don’t have an opinion as to whether or not apostolic religious Sisters should be able to receive the consecration of virgins. However, even if this was permitted, it still doesn’t mean that I would have become a Sister instead of a CV! 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, that we should live in a spirit of evangelical poverty, etc. (Though I’ve never thought that we should have a fixed horarium, and I’m not sure where this idea came from.) But even if all CVs did do all these things, to me the vocation of consecrated virginity would still be very different and distinct from apostolic religious life. no i thought you were saying you wanted to become a sister AND recieve the consecration (at the moment it is not avaliable to active sisters) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sponsa-Christi Posted February 4, 2014 Share Posted February 4, 2014 no i thought you were saying you wanted to become a sister AND recieve the consecration (at the moment it is not avaliable to active sisters) No, I've always felt called to be a consecrated virgin "in the world." But I never saw living in the world as incompatible with a life of direct service to the Church or with a life of visible public witness. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oremus1 Posted February 5, 2014 Share Posted February 5, 2014 No, I've always felt called to be a consecrated virgin "in the world." But I never saw living in the world as incompatible with a life of direct service to the Church or with a life of visible public witness. 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'? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lilllabettt Posted February 5, 2014 Share Posted February 5, 2014 how are secular priests different from religious priests? They are both called father, both wear distinguishing garb, both are celibate. the difference is that secular priests are living in the world. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
arfink Posted February 5, 2014 Share Posted February 5, 2014 (edited) I thought this was gonna be titled "Consecrated Virgin in the Wild," seeing as the phorum concatenates it to "Consecrated Virgin in the W..." Needless to say, I am very dissapoint. Edited February 5, 2014 by arfink Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cmaD2006 Posted February 5, 2014 Share Posted February 5, 2014 how are secular priests different from religious priests? They are both called father, both wear distinguishing garb, both are celibate. the difference is that secular priests are living in the world. Actually there is a big difference ... religious priests take a vow of poverty. Secular priests do not. Religious priests take a vow of celibacy, but a secular priest is celibate out of obedience to the Bishop. That celibacy could be lifted over time if the Church so chooses (since the Church has traditionally allowed married priests). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lilllabettt Posted February 5, 2014 Share Posted February 5, 2014 (edited) uhhhhh .... it was a rhetorical question. to show that "living in the world" (not taking vows) is not antithetical to the wearing of distinguishing dress or the expectation of being dedicated to full time service to the church. Secular priests do these things - they are not apeing religious life by doing so but living out their call to serve the church "in the world." Edited February 5, 2014 by Lilllabettt Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oremus1 Posted February 5, 2014 Share Posted February 5, 2014 uhhhhh .... it was a rhetorical question. to show that "living in the world" (not taking vows) is not antithetical to the wearing of distinguishing dress or the expectation of being dedicated to full time service to the church. Secular priests do these things - they are not apeing religious life by doing so but living out their call to serve the church "in the world." yes but it is a requirement for priests to wear distinguishing dress and to visiually set themselves apart. whereas this was specifically dropped from this rite for CVs, and there is no comparable obligaition. i dont see why you dont find the wedding ring visual enough.religious life is necessarily corporate, and the garb shows that lady to be part one of several who collectively represent the bride, wheras the CV does this individually. if sponsa wants to be identified as a bride of christ not individually but as one of a group, then i think this would be mpre of a call to some form of community life. she even said somewhere she would like them to live in loosely structured convents. amnd i am not saying CVs cannot work full time for the church, i am saying that i do not believe they are required to. i also do not believe that those who do not work full time in service tot he church are living a lesser calling than those who do. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lilllabettt Posted February 5, 2014 Share Posted February 5, 2014 well, in our culture a wedding ring is not really a visible sign of consecration. It is a visible sign of marriage. You are right that there is not currently any obligation for CVs to wear any kind of distinguishing dress. My point is that wearing distinguishing dress as a CV is no more out of step with the vocation of living consecrated virginity "in the world" than a secular priest wearing distinguishing dress as he lives out his vocation "in the world." So ... the opinion that it would be good for CVs to wear distinguishing dress is not indicative that a person is trying to fit a structure of religious life onto consecrated virginity. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oremus1 Posted February 5, 2014 Share Posted February 5, 2014 well, in our culture a wedding ring is not really a visible sign of consecration. It is a visible sign of marriage. You are right that there is not currently any obligation for CVs to wear any kind of distinguishing dress. My point is that wearing distinguishing dress as a CV is no more out of step with the vocation of living consecrated virginity "in the world" than a secular priest wearing distinguishing dress as he lives out his vocation "in the world." So ... the opinion that it would be good for CVs to wear distinguishing dress is not indicative that a person is trying to fit a structure of religious life onto consecrated virginity. so you are saying you think CVs should wear a habit? why? even those working in secular jobs as e.g. firefighters? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now