Friday, July 6, 2018

Comments to come...

Just a quick note to say that I am still around, although I haven’t had much time for personal writing lately as my day job (I currently work full-time as canon lawyer in a marriage tribunal) keeps me quite busy.

However, I have read Ecclesiae Sponsae Imago, and am working on writing up my first thoughts.

Overall, though, I think in general this new Instruction is a very positive development for the Ordo Virginum.

So stay tuned!  I’ll also put my first thoughts on this blog’s facebook page once the post is up here.

Monday, January 1, 2018

Understanding Canon Law: An Introduction for Consecrated Virgins

Since consecrated virginity is such a “new” vocation, one challenge today’s consecrated virgins face is ambiguity with respect to how this ancient vocation can find its best lived expression in the modern world. Because of this vocation’s “newness,” finding helpful reading material, or even just accurate general information, can be a challenge. Articles and books written about consecrated virginity tend to be few and far between, and often the authors of secondary sources express a variety of different opinions.

Because of this, today’s consecrated virgins (and likewise, young women discerning this vocation) generally find themselves needing to “do their own work,” or to study the Church’s primary sources on consecrated virginity. In my own life, I am grateful to have had the opportunity to pursue formal studies in canon law and its supporting theology—having an academic background in the sacred sciences has been a tremendous help in many ways, especially in terms of gaining perspective and an appreciation of the background principles of how the Church’s legal system functions.

While of course it’s not possible to pack a whole degree’s worth of knowledge into a blog post, here are some fundamental points of reference for we as consecrated virgins to keep in mind as we seek to better educate ourselves on how the Church envisions our vocation:

1. Not all writings on consecrated virginity are authoritative.

This first point might be obvious almost to the point of being a tautology, I think it’s still worth saying: when trying to discern how the Church calls consecrated virgins to live out our vocation, the resources which should demand most of our attention are those which come from the Church herself.

Not everything that’s written on consecrated virginity can automatically be counted as directly representing the mind of the Church. For example, there are many writings on consecrated virginity which are merely personal reflections or individual opinions (this very blog being an obvious case in point!) But even more “serious” sources, such as pastoral writings from local diocesan bishops or scholarly articles published in academic journals, often ultimately represent just one person’s point of view.

With regard to academic writing, naturally it is prudent to take learned opinions into account, and it is good to respect the education of those who may better versed in a particular topic than we ourselves are. However, one scholar’s interpretation of the vocation of consecrated virginity or of a particular aspect of this vocation is not the same thing as the Church issuing an official clarification of a disputed question. We may profit from a scholar’s writings on our vocation, or we might find that his or her writing helps us better understand the Church’s teachings, or we could even find that scholar’s arguments so persuasive that we adjust our own opinions or our way of life accordingly. But when a scholar writes about canon law or theology in his or her own name, we cannot take that writing as the definitive last word on a given issue.

Incidentally, this is true even if that scholar happens to have an authoritative role within the Church in other contexts. For example, while a bishop may have the ability to establish proper laws or determine certain concrete policies within his own diocese, this does not mean that an individual bishop can issue an interpretation of the law which is binding on the whole Church. Similarly, even if, for instance, a Cardinal at the Vatican published a canonical commentary or a theological treatise on the Ordo Virginum, his thoughts would not become the equivalent of binding law simply by virtue of the fact that he is a Cardinal. In fact, even if the Cardinal who was head of the Congregation for Institutes of Consecrated Life in Rome were to write a paper on the Ordo Virginum, it would only become authoritative if it was published in an official capacity on behalf of the Congregation—but again, not if he were just writing in his own name or on his own behalf.

2. Not all laws are in the Code.

Now that we have considered how not all materials consecrated virginity are authoritative, let’s talk about which ones are.

Often when Catholics think of “the Church’s laws,” the first thing that comes to mind is the 1983 Code of Canon Law. But while the Code is indeed law, and is therefore certainly authoritative, it’s not the be-all and end-all of law in the Church. In fact, the Code itself notes its own limitations in its first few canons. Keeping in mind that there are other sources of law besides the Code, the trick is to know what other sources are “out there” and pertinent to whatever question is at hand.

For example, liturgical laws are binding, but they are not generally covered in the Code of Canon Law.  Relating this to consecrated virgins specifically, we can recall that the Code contains only one canon (can. 604) which explicitly addresses the Order of Virgins. But one other significant source of law for consecrated virgins apart from the Code is the Rite of Consecration to a Life of Virginity itself. In addition to the text of the liturgy and notes on how it should be properly celebrated, the Rite also contains a rather extensive praenotanda. The praenotanda—i.e., the instructions at the beginning of the Rite, which are technically liturgical law—actually give us most of what we know definitively regarding the Church’s specific expectations on consecrated virgins’ way of life.

The Holy See can also issue documents that set out additional or more specific norms than what is included in the Code, whether this be a document created by the Holy Father on his own personal initiative (what we call a “motu proprio”) or one written by the appropriate and duly-authorized offices of the Roman Curia. These kind of “extra” legislative documents from Rome can take a variety of forms. For example, “Apostolic Constitutions” stand by themselves in creating universal laws for the Church (a recent example of an Apostolic Constitution is the document Vultum Dei Quaerere, which sets out updated norms for communities of cloistered nuns), while “Instructions” are documents which authoritatively clarify earlier official writings or which spell out additional and more specific rules.

But alluding to my first point, not all documents from Rome automatically serve as literal, actual laws. For instance, at times a document will be issued in order to clarify a disputed point of Catholic doctrine or theology (e.g., Inter Insigniores on the question of women’s ordination, or Humanae Vitae on the issue of artificial contraception). Although such documents are clearly authoritative, they simply articulate the theological foundations of our laws rather than serving as the black-and-white rules themselves. Similarly, some papal documents, such as Apostolic exhortations like Vita Consecrata, are meant to teach, encourage, and inspire the faithful to greater virtue rather than to set out new or additional juridical norms. But even though these non-legislative documents cannot be taken as law per se, often they have significance to our interpretation of the law, insofar as they can provide helpful background insight as to the “mind of the legislator”—or in other words, insight into the Church’s intentions when drafting laws related to those issues addressed by the non-legislative documents in question.

In addition to legislative documents coming from Rome, there is also such a thing as binding “proper law,” or laws specific to a particular local Church or group of people. The statutes of a religious community are a good example of proper law, as they detail the specific rules which bind specifically those members of a particular community rather than all religious in general. As far as consecrated virgins are concerned, it is possible that local bishops could establish proper diocesan laws pertaining the consecrated virgins of his diocese, provided that these proper diocesan laws would not conflict with the universal laws of the Church.

3. The Church’s laws follow theology.

On a more theoretical level, it’s good for us to keep in mind that, unlike secular civil law, canon law is based on the Church’s theology and doctrinal teachings. That is, we should realize that as a general principle the Church’s laws are not arbitrary rules, nor are they solely a set of utilitarian policies based purely on convenience or expediency. Rather, they are practical responses to what the Church understands as objective supernatural realities.

To be sure, there is such a thing as “positive ecclesial law,” or laws that the Church essentially invents in order to ensure the practical good ordering of the Christian community. The concept of positive ecclesial law is particularly evident in the Church’s procedural law (i.e., the laws governing ecclesiastical trials and other processes) and in some of our sacramental disciplines (e.g., the obligation for Catholics to attend Mass on Sunday), although positive ecclesial law can certainly be found in other areas of the law as well. Yet even though positive ecclesial laws can be dispensed occasionally, or changed and updated by the proper authority as is necessary according to contemporary pastoral situations, positive ecclesial laws still aren’t truly arbitrary. Even the least theologically significant law does at least reflect the Church’s teachings in some important way.

But with that being said, the upshot to all this is that it is not the actual verbatim wording of a particular law which somehow determines the objective nature of the theological reality being referenced, but instead it’s the other way around. This principle of “law follows theology” is perhaps most obvious when we are discussing areas in which canon law and morality overlap—that is, we’re presumably all aware that a legal rule prohibiting an immoral act is not that the thing which actually makes the act immoral, but is rather a reflection of the act’s pre-existing, objective nature. Still, this principle is also applicable to matters of theology and doctrine. For instance, canon law often describes the effects of the sacraments, but it would be absurd to suggest that sacramental grace only exists because the 1983 Code of Canon Law mentions it! (Fun fact: there is an actual term for what happens when people lose sight of this principle and “miss the forest for the trees,” or become legalistic to the point of absurdity. It’s called “legal positivism.”)

It especially is important to remember this principle when considering the Order of Virgins, because it is only possible to interpret the few existing laws by considering the rich theological identity that consecrated virginity already has.

As an illustration of this, we can recall that it is a matter of law that only women are eligible to receive the consecration of virgins. Some have argued that this is unfair to men, whom they believe should also have this vocation path open to them, and they have expressed their hope that the Church will re-write the eligibility requirements so as to allow males to become consecrated virgins. What this sort of argument overlooks, however, is that the restriction of the Rite of Consecration to a Life of Virginity to women is not due to some baseless custom or random historical accident which somehow later became enshrined in the law, but rather because on a foundational theological level the call to be a bride of Christ is an intrinsically feminine reality. The question of whether or not men can become consecrated virgins is not a simple matter of the Pope potentially deciding to change the wording of the law, but is instead a question which relates to the essential nature of the Ordo Virginum.

4. The Church’s laws are often (and at times, necessarily) vague.

Similarly, occasionally consecrated virgins might tend to feel frustrated by how vague the laws pertaining to the Ordo Virginum are, insofar as many, if not most, practical concerns are left untreated, and often even the few specific directives that are given are general enough to admit a wide scope of varying interpretations.

Sometimes, this vagueness is the result of a real and problematic “gap” in the Church’s law. The possibility of a gaps or unintentional gray area in the Church’s law is a well-recognized phenomenon, and it even has its own official technical term: a lacuna, or lacunae in the plural. Lacunae come about because the drafters of the law, being merely human, cannot always foresee every question that might be asked or every situation in which a law might be tested. While the Code itself gives us some directives on how to deal with lacunae as they surface (cf. can. 17), in general these kinds gaps in the law are those questions for which the Church is obliged to work towards finding answers.

Often, too, laws are only refined or further specified in response to abuses. For example, the seminary system and the concept of canonical requirements for priestly formation developed relatively late in the Church’s history, arising out of the Council of Trent in the late sixteenth century in response to the many problems occasioned by a lack of necessary education and vocational earnestness that had become chronic among the clergy of the preceding centuries.

But on the other hand, sometimes the Church’s laws are vague out of necessity, and this can be for several reasons. First of all, the Church’s universal laws must be truly universal. That is, they must apply equally to every country around the world today, despite the wildly different pastoral circumstances that can exist across different nations and cultures. Often, it is the local situations and circumstances which determine the practical ways a particular law can be acknowledged or carried out.

For example, although the Code identifies consecrated virgins as women “dedicated to the service of the Church,” the specifics of how this is to be observed in one’s day-to-day life is still technically left to the discretion of the local bishops. Even presuming that we should interpret “dedication to the service of the Church” in a literal way—that is, meaning that consecrated virgins are categorically called to devote the better part of their time and energy to work which directly and explicitly advances the Church’s mission—there are a number of concrete ways in which this can be expressed. Naturally, determining the most fruitful and suitable ways for the consecrated virgins of a given place to devote themselves to serving the Church is going to depend on a number of factors such as: the specific needs of the diocese, the presence or absence of Catholic institutions, the local cultural expectations for women in general and consecrated women in particular, the overall education level and professional ability of candidates aspiring to consecrated virginity, the attitude of the local civil government towards the Catholic Church, and so forth. Because of all these variables, if the Church’s law were to get overly specific, it might wind up inadvertently legislating against viable and appropriate practical arrangements for consecrated virgins’ serving the Church, thus thwarting the very thing it was intended to promote.

Likewise, because consecrated virginity is such a “new” vocation, some practical questions can only be answered through trial-and-error and lived experience. The question of formation programs for aspiring consecrated virgins is a good example. Currently, beyond the very basic prerequisites for candidates stated in the Rite of Consecration to a Life of Virginity, the Church’s universal law doesn’t state any specific official discernment or formation process for those candidates for the Ordo Virginum. While arguably it would be desirable for the Church eventually to develop some more concrete guidelines, I can imagine that a pre-set and overly specific formation program created at the time of the promulgation of the revised Rite might have done more harm than good. That is, in the long there may be some real benefit in a generation of consecrated virgins and bishops having had the opportunity to reflect on their own insights and lived experience with the Ordo Virginum when determining what kind of formation is most helpful and necessary, rather than having a pre-convinced model imposed before the practical nuances of this vocation were fully understood.

The idea that the Church’s laws might at times be intentionally and appropriately vague brings us to our next point, namely that…

5. The Church’s laws presume good faith and common sense.

One way in which the Church’s legal system is markedly different from secular systems of civil law is that the Church’s law, for better or worse, generally favors trusting the good will and common sense of its subjects. For example, the Code presumes that its adherents already know and accept the basic tenets Christian morality, and thus does not take pains to re-legislate the Ten Commandments. Because of this, most grave sins aren’t technically canonical crimes, as the Church trusts the faithful to avoid sin on account of their sincerely held faith and not merely due to a fear of “breaking the law.”

Often times as well, canon law leaves the practical application of generally-stated principles to the good judgement of individuals. For example, clerics are directed to “foster simplicity of life and are to refrain from all things that have a semblance of vanity” (can. 282 §1) and to “refrain completely from all those things which are unbecoming to their state,” (can. 285 §1) even while the Code does not give us any specific, concrete, black-and-white definitions for what exactly constitutes “vanity,” or what qualifies something as “unbecoming to the clerical state.” Of course, the subjective nature of these canons’ wording leaves plenty of potential rhetorical loopholes for a legalistic cleric to justify at least certain components of a de facto worldly or unbecoming lifestyle. Still, the Code does seriously intend that these admonitions are to be observed and taken seriously, for if they were meant as merely pious devotional aspirations, the drafters would not have not have bothered to include them in the first place! Therefore, the law itself can be understood as trusting individual clerics to be both honest and sensible enough to discern for themselves what specific lifestyle choices are or are not appropriate for their vocation in the cultural context in which they serve.
6. The Church’s legal system prefers to exhort rather than demand.

On an overlapping note, another distinctive feature of the Church’s legal system, especially in our most recent Code of Canon Law, is the law’s preference to exhort rather than demand. That is, although the Church’s law is perfectly capable of binding strictly, it would generally prefer to encourage us to works of prayer, asceticism, and pastoral charity rather than mandating such things under direct pain of sin.

There are a couple reasons for this fundamentally exhortative stance. First of all, recalling once more the necessarily universal scope of the Church’s law, exhortations allow the Church to declare what she desires to be normative, while still making an allowance for unusually difficult circumstances where the norm in all its fullness may not be possible to realize. But perhaps more significantly, this also reflects a certain ideological orientation of the magisterium post-Vatican II—namely, a desire to shepherd the faithful to a more mature understanding and lived expression of their faith. By exhorting rather than compelling, the Church arguably gives the faithful more liberty to grow in virtue, insofar as they are permitted to embrace certain ideals of the Christian life more freely and to assume some of their obligations out of a greater sense of personal responsibility and devotion.

These canonical exhortations can take many a few different forms, and might be thought of as running across a scale of earnestness and seriousness. At the low end of the “earnestness” scale would be instances where the law invites the faithful or certain portions of the faithful to that which is praiseworthy, yet truly optional. One example of this would be how the lay faithful are invited to pray the Liturgy of the Hours in canon 1174 §2. This canon in no way obligates the laity to participate in the Divine Office, nor does it suggest that this is something a layperson really ought to be doing in order to be a practicing Catholic. Rather, it is truly an invitation in the plainest sense of the word. The Church is recognizing that laypersons’ praying the Divine Office is a good thing, and she welcomes the laity to participate in this facet of her liturgical life.

A middle case might be those situations in the law where individuals are clearly asked to do something or to refrain from something, but where the law envisions and tolerates certain foreseeable exceptions. For instance, unlike laypeople who are merely invited to participate the Liturgy of the Hours, in the praenotanda of the Rite of Consecration to a Life of Virginity, consecrated virgins are “strongly advised” (vehementer suadetur) to pray the Divine Office. While this phrasing means that consecrated virgins who are genuinely unable to pray the Office for serious reasons (perhaps such as illiteracy, a severe learning disability, or living in a country where Christians were violently persecuted) would not need a formal dispensation to omit the Office, at the same time it also does not portray the Liturgy of the Hours as something which is truly optional for the Ordo Virginum.

On the most serious end of the spectrum are those places in the law wherein individuals are definitely called to fulfill what is identified as a fundamental obligation of their state in life, but without specifying these obligations in a close enough way so as to make them juridically enforceable. Some of the examples listed above illustrating the law’s presumption of common-sense would certainly also apply here. Similarly, there are also places in the law where an obligation is certainly imposed, but without any stated penalties attached to a failure to fulfill that obligation. For instance, clerics are required to observe celibate chastity in “perfect and perpetual continence” (can. 277). While the law does not impose a specific canonical punishment for every kind of priestly sin of unchastity, this does not mean that clergy are any less required to fulfill the promises they made at Ordination.

7. There is such a thing as “moral obligation.”

An important corollary to these last two points is that the Church’s legal system relies heavily on the concept of moral obligation, especially in those areas that relate to carrying out the duties of one’s state in life.

A moral obligation, as distinct from a legal or juridical obligation, is an obligation which one is in justice bound to observe even without said obligation being spelled out in explicitly in the form of a law. A secular textbook example of a moral obligation would be the obligation to return stolen property even after the stature of limitations for prosecuting the theft has passed. In a Catholic worldview, we might think of moral obligations as those responsibilities which, if we fail to fulfill them, would leave us as having committed a sin even if in a very technical sense we were not disobeying the strict letter of the law.

For consecrated virgins specifically, our most central moral obligation might also be the most obvious one—i.e., the obligation to remain in a perpetual state of dedicated virginity. At the time of this writing, reception of the Rite of Consecration to a Life of Virginity is not actually listed in the Code of Canon Law as an impediment to a valid Catholic marriage, despite the fact that both perpetual religious profession and Holy Orders are identified as such. Although it is exceedingly reasonable to suppose that this omission is merely a problematic lacuna (i.e., a gap that should be corrected), clearly, we can also speak of a consecrated virgin being authentically obligated to a life of virginity based just on the theological nature of her commitment, even without having the verbatim words of a canon to back up this assertion.

8. The Church’s laws are not the fullness of Christian life.

Finally, it’s important to keep in mind that the Church’s laws are not meant to be a step-by-step handbook to growing in holiness, but are instead more like guardrails meant to keep us from falling too far off the road. When seeking to live ones’ vocation well and fully—whether that be one’s baptismal vocation as a Christian or a more specific vocation to a particular state in life, such as consecrated virginity—it is not sufficient merely to follow the letter of the law.

Christian life in general demands a certain generosity of spirit, one that doesn’t merely keep score based on how well one fulfills the most basic requirements. This is doubly true for those Christians called to a life of radical observance of the evangelical counsels in consecrated life. Obeying the Church’s laws is an important first step on the road to a fruitful consecrated life, but it is only the first step. 

Sunday, February 26, 2017

Consecrated Virginity and Religious Life

An old photo of the clothing ceremony of a Redemptoristine nun.
Although the Redemptorists are a relatively modern religious family
whose nuns do not have a tradition of receiving the consecration of virgins,
their “borrowing” from the spirituality of the ancient Ordo Virginum
is evident in the use of bridal imagery and customs. 
In discussions on consecrated life or of women’s vocations in general, one type of question which often arises is how consecrated virginity is different from the more familiar vocation of women’s religious life. For basic instructional purposes, a quick answer to this question would be: a religious Sister is a woman who professes vows within a religious community, and a consecrated virgin is a woman who has received the Rite of Consecration to a Life of Virginity from a bishop.

But of course, a short answer such as this fails to convey the beautifully nuanced distinctions between the two vocations, and it also overlooks the significant “family resemblances” between consecrated virginity and religious life. This kind of purely technical answer also doesn’t answer some of the more probing usual follow-up questions, such as: Why would a woman opt to become a consecrated virgin when she might have been accepted into a number of vibrant religious communities? Why would the Church re-introduce consecrated virginity as a “new,” separate category when we already have such a rich tradition of women dedicating themselves to God as nuns and Sisters? Or why can’t we just regard today’s religious as fulfilling the role of the early Ordo Virginum in the life of the Church today?

While it is possible to find some simple compare-and-contrast charts online, I think a proper appreciation of both vocations and demands some more in-depth consideration. To that end, in this post we will look at this question in four separate sections dealing with: 1. what consecrated virginity and religious life have in common; 2. elements which are specific to consecrated virginity; 3. elements that are unique to religious life; and finally, 4. a brief consideration of why these distinctions are important in the first place.

We can start by considering first of all…

I. What religious life and consecrated virginity have in common

- A common historical origin. Consecrated virginity is the oldest recognized form of consecrated life in the Church today, arguably dating from Apostolic times. Before the existence of religious life as we understand it today, women who desired to dedicate their lives entirely to Christ would resolve to persevere in a life of perpetual virginity. At some point during the Church’s first few centuries a solemn liturgical ritual for the consecration of virgins was established, which eventually would become our Rite of Consecration to a Life of Virginity.

Based on various Patristic writings, it seems that the members of the ancient Ordo Virginum lived (or were at least called to live) a relatively contemplative lifestyle focused on prayer, penance, and study. The Church Fathers frequently exhorted consecrated virgins to associate with each other for the sake of mutual support, and often this translated into consecrated virgins sharing residences. Naturally, in a common living situation it is simply to be expected that some sort of practical organization occur, and eventually “Rules” came to be written for houses of consecrated virgins. Such Rule-governed houses for consecrated virgins can rightly be considered some of the earliest precursors to women’s religious life, although this form of living was still different from our modern concept religious life in many key respects.

- The possibility of a dual vocation. Continuing with our historical considerations, we can note that in the Roman Catholic Church the earliest instance of “religious life” according to today’s definition of the term would be the Order of St. Benedict. Originally a hermit, St. Benedict wrote a rule for the fruitful and healthy running of a cenobitic monastery sometime around the year 530 A.D., with his sister St. Scholastica subsequently starting a female branch of the Order. The biographer Pope St. Gregory the Great describes St. Scholastica as “consecrated to God from her earliest youth,” which strongly suggests that she was a consecrated virgin even prior to the beginning of her monastic life. Eventually, western women’s monasticism would evolve from a regular way of life for (presumably) already-consecrated virgins to a vocation where women would receive the Rite of Consecration to a Life of Virginity only after making their final monastic vows.

A Carthusian nun receiving the consecration of virgins

As European civil society became less organized and more chaotic following the final collapse of the Roman Empire, the practice of consecrating virgins living “in the world,” or outside of monasteries, gradually became less and less frequent until it was functionally obsolete. Still, cloistered women’s monastic life continued to flourish during this time, and it remained the venerable custom of some religious Orders, most notably the Benedictines and Carthusians, to offer the privilege of receiving consecration of virgins to their solemnly professed nuns. This custom was maintained up through the time of the second Vatican Council, and remained in place even after the 1970 revision of the Rite of Consecration re-established the non-monastic Order of Virgins.

So to sum up, since the very beginnings of organized monastic life it has always been possible for a woman to be both a religious and a consecrated virgin, and this remains the case today. In those religious communities which maintain the practice of the consecration of virgins, a nun may receive the Rite of Consecration to a Life of Virginity either at the time of her solemn profession of religious vows or at some point afterwards.

And incidentally, because of the essential compatibility of the two vocations, is also at least theoretically possible for an already-consecrated virgin “living in the world” to discern a later vocation to religious life. In this sense, one helpful parallel for understanding the relationship between the consecration of virgins and religious profession might be the relationship between Holy Orders and religious profession for male religious who are also priests. That is, while religious life and priesthood—like religious life and consecrated virginity—are two distinct vocations, it is possible that one may be called to both.

- A shared spiritual heritage. As women’s religious life continued to grow and develop from the time of the early Middle Ages and on through the centuries, many practices originally associated specifically with the Ordo Virginum were “borrowed” by women religious, even within Orders which did not have a tradition of using the Rite of Consecration to a Life of Virginity. Elements such as bridal imagery in profession ceremonies, the formal reception of the veil, and committing oneself to the evangelical counsels in the presence of the local bishop often remained as customs in women’s religious life in general.

While this borrowing is especially evident in cloistered contemplative Orders, echoes of the consecration of virgins can be found even in many modern, non-cloistered “active” women’s religious communities. For example, many active Sisters receive a “wedding” ring at their final profession. Some active communities invite the local bishop to preside as the main celebrant at their profession Masses, even though the presence of the bishop isn’t strictly necessary since it is the religious superior who receives a Sister’s vows. And of course, the veil which is a part of most Sisters’ habits was originally a sign of consecrated virginity.

- Belonging in the same basic category of “consecrated life.”  As a result of Vatican II, the Church saw some developments and clarifications to the theology of consecrated life, particularly in terms of understanding “consecrated life” as an inclusive category. While in the centuries prior to Vatican II the Church tended to use the terms “religious life” and “consecrated life” practically as synonyms, the 1983 revision of the Code of Canon Law acknowledged consecrated life as an umbrella category encompassing a variety of distinct forms.  While “religious life” technically speaking was recognized as one specific form among others, the Code also explicitly acknowledged non-monastic consecrated virginity as a form of consecrated life in its own right in canon 604. Other vocations identified in canon law as forms of consecrated life include secular institutes, societies of apostolic life, and diocesan hermits.

While these distinctions highlighted the variety of the different expressions of committed evangelical life in the Church, the acknowledgment of “consecrated life” as an inclusive category also served to underscore the fundamental unity of the various forms of consecration. While there are still some overarching theological and canonical gray areas that have yet to be worked out (e.g., in some contexts the exact nature of secular institute members’ consecration still remains somewhat of an open question), the Church has clarified that consecrated virgins and women religious should be regarded as equally “consecrated.”

- Overlap in theological identity. Consequently, given that consecrated virginity and religious life are both rightly considered forms of consecrated life, the Church’s teachings on the essential theological nature and purpose of consecrated life can be understood as applying to consecrated virgins as well as women religious.

For example, both consecrated virginity and religious life involve a call to live as an “eschatological sign,” or a living anticipation of the kind of life all the faithful in heaven will enjoy. Likewise, both vocations are considered to be charismatic gifts of the Holy Spirit for the good of the Church as a whole. And membership in the Ordo Virginum, like religious life, is a fully public state of consecrated life, meaning that consecrated virgins as well as women religious are called to a public evangelical witness.

Now moving on to consider the vocation of consecrated virginity specifically, we can reflect those things which are…

II. Unique elements of consecrated virginity

- The call to be a bride of Christ. Consecrated virginity is most fundamentally a call to a spousal relationship with Christ. That is, the call to live as a bride of Christ is a central and non-negotiable aspect of a vocation to the Order of Virgins, and consecrated virgins are the only ones whom canon law explicitly describes as “mystically betrothed to Christ.”

Of course, as was mentioned above, many women’s religious communities that do not use the Rite of Consecration to a Life of Virginity still have a venerable tradition of employing bridal imagery in their profession ceremonies and broader spiritual life. However, on a canonical level bridal spirituality is more or less optional for religious, in the sense that the incorporation of such spiritual imagery is entirely dependent on the specific charism of a particular community. Therefore, it is entirely possible to be a fervent religious, following Christ in the evangelical counsels, without necessarily understanding this as a specifically nuptial call. While a consecrated virgin by definition is called to relate to Christ as her Spouse, a woman religious might legitimately feel called to see her commitment to Christ in other terms—perhaps such as relating to Christ primarily as a friend, brother, or teacher.

(For a more detailed discussion of this concept, see my earlier post: “Who Can Be Called a Bride of Christ?”)

- A vocation only for women. Consecrated virginity is the only vocation in the Catholic Church which is restricted to women. Just as only men are called to Holy Orders and the priesthood, only women can receive solemn consecration to a life of virginity.

This makes consecrated virginity intrinsically different from religious life as a category. Although individual religious communities are either male or female, religious life in general is open to both men and women. Furthermore, in our current canon law, the laws governing religious communities for the most part apply equally to both male and female communities, which indicates that unlike Holy Orders or consecrated virginity, a vocation to religious life per se is not directly connected to one’s gender.

- A requirement of literal virginity. Consecrated virginity is also unique among the various forms of consecrated life recognized by the Church in that it is the only one to have literal virginity as a prerequisite. A religious vow of chastity is future-oriented in that it is a commitment to live in evangelical chastity from that point forward, regardless of whatever sins have been committed and repented from previously. In contrast to this, a candidate for the Ordo Virginum professes her resolve to continue on in the state of virginity in which she has already been persevering throughout the entire course of her life.

- A “passive” rather than “active” consecration. A woman becomes a consecrated virgin when she receives the Rite of Consecration to a Life of Virginity at the hands of a bishop. It is true that a candidate for consecration makes public promises during the course of the Rite, and that in doing so she actively states her resolve to persevere in a life of virginity and service to the Church. Still, the defining element in the consecration of virgins is not the making of these public promises, but rather the reception of the central consecratory prayer. Technically speaking, the consecration of virgins is a solemn constitutive blessing, which makes a virgin a sacred person through no action of her own—similar to the way in which a Church building is made into a sacred place when it is consecrated.

On the other hand, religious are consecrated through their active profession of religious vows. While there is certainly a “passive” dimension in religious profession insofar as a religious’ vows must be received by the competent authority in the Church, religious can be described as essentially consecrating themselves by means of their promises to God.

As a consequence of this dynamic, it is possible for the Church to dispense a religious from her vows in certain rare cases, because the Church has the power to release members of the faithful from the obligation to fulfill promises they have previously made. But since a consecrated virgin is made consecrated not through her own promises but rather through the solemn constitutive blessing of the Rite, it is not possible for the Church to “un-consecrate” her. Therefore, while the Church might be able to release a consecrated virgin from some of the non-essential obligations of her state, her consecration itself is absolutely permanent.

- A special connection to the local Church. As the Rite of Consecration identifies consecrated virgins as the “spiritual daughters” of the diocesan bishop who are admitted to consecrated under his authority; and given that the Rite also envisions consecrated virgins as those who  often “take part in the good works of the diocese”; we can rightly describe consecrated virgins as belonging to their home dioceses in a special way.

While religious undoubtedly contribute a great deal to the dioceses where they are present, a religious’ first and most primary bond is always with her religious Order or community. As a result, an apostolic religious might be sent on mission to any number of places according to the needs of her institute, but a consecrated virgin is free to remain as a more stable presence within a particular local Church.  And while a religious is called specifically to those works of the apostolate which harmonize with her community’s charism, whether or not these apostolic words directly relate to the perceived needs of any particular diocese, a consecrated virgin is able to serve the local Church in whatever ways her bishop discerns is most necessary.

- A special affinity with the early Church.  As noted above, the Ordo Virginum can trace its origin back to Apostolic times, pre-dating the development of religious life by several centuries. Our earliest reference of consecrated virgins as forming a distinct group within the Church goes back to St. Ignatius of Antioch’s greeting to the “ever-virgins called widows” in the Church at Smyrna written around 100 A.D., and there are references to a specific liturgical ritual for the consecration of virgins in the fourth-century writings of St. Ambrose. Our current text of the Rite of Consecration to a Life of Virginity contains several antiphons traditionally attributed to St. Agnes, and the virgin-martyrs listed in the Roman Canon are generally considered to be members of the Ordo Virginum.

Because of this, the spirituality of consecrated virgins today might rightly be called the spirituality of the early virgin-martyrs. While naturally the virgin-martyr saints can and do inspire the spirituality of many women religious as well, religious primarily share in the charism of their own proper founders who lived in later periods of the Church’s history.

III. Unique elements of religious life

Turning now to religious life, we can note that religious life is different from consecrated virginity in that religious life necessarily involves…

- A call to follow the spirituality of a particular founder or foundress. In our modern understanding of religious life, religious are considered the spiritual sons or daughters of a particular founder or foundress. The Church currently speaks of the founders of religious communities as having been granted the charism—i.e., a special gift of grace from God for the good of the Church as a whole—of a foundational spirituality and unique purpose within the Church. When a religious joins her specific Order or congregation, she is accepting a call to share in the specific charism that was originally rooted in a particular time and place with a particular person or group of persons.

Although I believe we can indeed regard the Ordo Virginum as having a distinctive spirituality of its own, consecrated virginity was not literally “founded“ in the same way as a religious family, but rather developed organically along with the infant Church. Therefore, we might say that a consecrated virgin is called to a more universal or even “generic” vocation than a religious Sister would be.  

- The following of a rule and constitutions. Just as religious are called to follow in the footsteps of a particular founder, they also commit to following a particular rule and constitutions (with constitutions being a more concrete interpretation of a Rule’s broader spiritual vision). In fact, the very term “religious” comes from a Latin word meaning “to bind,” as religious freely bind themselves to observe a Rule.

We might think of a Rule as being somewhat like an instruction book for growing in holiness. As a consequence, religious life as a vocation is much more oriented towards the guidance and personal spiritual benefit of the individual religious than membership in the Ordo Virginum would be.

That is, a stated purpose of many religious communities, and an implicit mission of all of them, is to provide actively for the sanctification of their members. While it is certainly to be hoped that the reception of Rite of Consecration to a Life of Virginity would contribute to a newly-consecrated virgin’s personal holiness, the Ordo Virginum as a state is not fundamentally ordered to the same kind of personal spiritual assistance as religious life according to a Rule would be.

- Community life. Religious life is also, by its very nature, a call to live in community with other religious. Community life for religious is not only the shared vision and purpose that comes about from belonging to an intentional group, but it also includes the day-to-day sharing of a truly common life lived under the same roof. Because of this, religious give a unique witness to the value of fraternal charity.

I do think it’s important to note that consecrated virginity is certainly not anti-community, as consecrated virgins are part of the larger community which is their diocese. Consecrated virgins also can and do form associations, and they are even free even to share residences with other consecrated virgins if they wish. Still, unlike women religious, a consecrated virgin is consecrated as an individual and is not required to observe any form of common life.

- A more radical and explicit call to poverty and obedience. Community life also allows religious to observe the evangelical counsels of poverty and obedience in a much more concrete way than most consecrated virgins are able to do.

While a consecrated virgin is called to live in a spirit of evangelical obedience in terms of accepting the guidance of her bishop, a bishop will not have exactly the same role in her daily life as the community superior of a woman religious. This allows religious to live out the virtue of obedience in a much more intense and immediate way.

Likewise, while a consecrated virgin is called to observe the virtue of evangelical poverty through a simple way of life, consecrated virgins are capable of owning personal property and administering their own financial resources. This is very different the religious vow of poverty, which obligates a woman religious to hold all material goods in common with her Sisters in community, and which therefore for most intents and purposes prevents her from owning anything herself. Sharing all good in common also gives individual religious a level of freedom from material concerns which is meant to foster an interior prayerful serenity, whereas consecrated virgins (like the laity and secular clergy) need to be proactive in all the mundane tasks involved in prudently providing for their own practical needs.

- Separation from the world. Religious life has its roots in the eremitic monasticism of the Desert Fathers, and this heritage rightly influences, to at least a certain extent, all forms of religious life today, from cloistered contemplative life to the most active apostolic communities.

The Church’s earliest monks and nuns “left the world” by retreating to deserted places, which often meant literal deserts. This was for the very pragmatic purpose of freeing themselves from the distractions of day-to-day life in human society for the sake of being free to focus on spiritual things. Yet, this iconic “fuga mundi” also had a more symbolic dimension of renouncing all things for the love of God.

Eventually, literal deserts were replaced by the metaphorical “desert” of the architectural enclosure of a monastery building. With the advent of apostolic women’s communities, various community customs and practices (such as restricted home visits, keeping silence at certain times, carefully selection in media consumption, always leaving the convent with a companion, etc.) came to act as a sort of substitute for the strict cloister observed by nuns.  Even today, while many apostolic religious have a great deal of engagement with human society outside of their community, religious are always called to maintain at least a core spirituality of separation from the world.

While I would argue that, in keeping with our vocation to be eschatological signs, consecrated virgins are called to embody a profound sense of detachment from even the good things of this world, virgins consecrated according to canon 604 are not called to the same concrete and radical separation from the world that religious are. This naturally gives consecrated virgins a greater freedom to relate to the ordinary faithful in their diocese, but it also means that they have to contend with many of the same temptations and distractions as anyone else who “lives in the world.”

IV. Why is all this important?

So what should we take away from these distinctions?

First of all, I believe that a failure to appreciate the ways in which religious life is different from consecrated virginity can cause unnecessary spiritual difficulties for women religious. For example, it would be wrong for a nun or Sister who was not a virgin to suffer from a crisis of conscience in this regard, since she should be at peace knowing that God is pleased with her resolve to life in chastity from the moment of her profession forward.

Expecting women’s religious life to fulfill the role of the Order of Virgins also has the potential to hinder women religious from fulfilling their charism in even practical ways. Many examples of this can be found in the history of the Church in the United States, when at certain points women religious were often expected to abandon the work for which they were founded in order to attend to what the local bishop determined as the more pressing needs of the diocese. Often this took the form of, for instance, a teaching community adding nursing to their apostolate; but at times even solemnly-professed cloistered nuns were pressured to abandon their fully contemplative life in order to engage in an active apostolate. While consecrated virgins might legitimately be at a diocesan bishop’s disposal in this regard, the charism of a religious community generally has certain restrictions which cannot be disregarded without putting the very identity of the community at risk.

Similarly, wrongly conflating the two vocations could conceivably lead to the imposition upon consecrated virgins of certain characteristic obligations of religious life (i.e., those obligations to which consecrated virgins are not necessarily called), such as making it a strict requirement for consecrated virgins to live in community or compelling consecrated virgins to adopt the spirituality of a particular religious Order.

But conversely, there is also, in my opinion, a real danger that a less-than-fully informed understanding of the relationship between religious life and the Order of Virgins could lead to consecrated virginity being mistakenly understood as a sort of “watered down” version of religious life. Without an appropriate understanding of the distinctive dignity of consecrated virginity, it can be easy to overlook the lofty goals to which consecrated virgins are indeed called by virtue of their vocation.

To be more specific, confusion regarding the differences between consecrated virginity and religious life can lead to wrongly allowing certain concessions for consecrated virgins—that is, “concessions” which might be perfectly acceptable for religious, but which would cut at the heart of a vocation to the Ordo Virginum. Examples of this could include encouraging struggling consecrated virgins to seek a “dispensation from their vows”; advising non-virgins to discern a vocation to consecrated virginity; suggesting that select private devotional prayers could take the place of some or all of the Liturgy of the Hours for a consecrated virgin; guiding a consecrated virgin to find her primary spiritual “home” within a lay ecclesial movement rather than within her parish and diocese; or de-emphasizing the importance of a nuptial spirituality in a life of consecrated virginity.

But on the other hand, while it is important to understand the ways in which consecrated virginity and religious life are distinct from each other, I would also propose that it’s equally critical to keep in mind the deep affinity that actually does exist between to the two forms of consecrated life. That is, regarding the Order of Virgins and religious life as two entirely unrelated entities can cause us to lose out on a great deal of spiritual richness and theological insight, which could prevent all of us consecrated women from living out our respective vocations to the fullest.

For example, the spousal call of consecrated virgins represents, in at least an analogical way, the goal of total union with Christ towards to which all the observances of religious life are ultimately directed. Even if not every woman religious will personally experience the grace of relating to Christ in explicitly spousal terms, this does not mean that religious should automatically dismiss traditional bridal imagery as outdated sentimentalism. Rather, I would say that refection on religious life’s overlapping history with the Ordo Virginum can provide nourishing food for thought for Sisters in all kinds of communities.

Likewise, while consecrated virginity is much less structured than religious life, it is crucial not to fall into the mistaken assumption that consecrated virgins are therefore somehow not called to devote themselves quite as radically to the Lord as women religious are. We should keep in mind that, when lived properly, the consecration of virgins should require just as much of a complete self-gift as the profession of religious vows. While consecrated virgins (and those responsible for their formation and guidance) should be careful to avoid attempts to fit themselves into the “mold” of religious life, with careful discernment the lives of fervent women religious can still be very instructive to those of us called to consecrated virginity. At a time in history when the restored Ordo Virginum is still very much “finding itself” in terms of practical lived expressions in day-to-day life, we consecrated virgins should not be afraid to look to our Sisters in religious life for inspiration in living out a life informed by the evangelical counsels. 

Tuesday, February 23, 2016

My Writing in Other Places

Unfortunately, I’ve been letting the blog slide a quite bit lately (though I do hope to have some new posts up soon.) Part of the reason for the lack of posts here is that I’ve been busy with other writing projects. Here are some articles of mine, which I think will be of special interest to “Sponsa Christi” readers, that have recently been published in other places:

The Oldest Form of Consecrated Life Is Also the Newest,and It’s Growing! (February 11, 2016, on – Some of my reflections on the recent international symposium for the Ordo Virginum held in Rome to celebrate of the closing of the Year of Consecrated Life.

In Lieu of Female Deacons, a Proposal (November 11, 2015 in Crisis Magazine) – Wherein I opine that, rather than spending time and resources discussing the possibility of instituting some sort of female diaconate, it might be more fruitful if the Church focused instead on promoting and supporting the Ordo Virginum, as consecrated virgins could easily fulfill many of the perceived pastoral needs which tend to prompt discussion of women deacons.

The Vocation of Consecrated Virginity (February 18, 2015 for Leonie’s Longing) – Some information and advice for former religious Sisters who may be considering becoming consecrated virgins.

For more frequent links and short updates, you can also check the facebook page I created for this blog.

Sunday, July 26, 2015

Consecrated Virginity versus Secular Institutes

It’s already well-known to readers of this blog that, as the Order of Virgins is a form of consecrated life which has been only fairly recently re-introduced into the life of the modern Church, there are still a lot of open questions regarding the more concrete aspects of how this vocation is to be lived out. For instance, we might ask: what is the life of a consecrated virgin supposed to “look like?” How does she present herself in public? What sort of formation should she have had? How is her relationship with her bishop and her diocese supposed to function? And what exactly does it mean for her to be “dedicated to the service of the Church?”

One way that canonists often try to resolve these kinds of ambiguities is by looking for parallel situations in the Church. When we find ourselves needing to contend with gaps in the Church’s law—whether the lacunae pertain to consecrated virginity specifically, or to any other challengingly vague circumstance in the life of the Church—we can begin to address these gaps by considering other approved ways of life (or circumstances with adequate legislation) which are fundamentally similar in some important respect. Then once we have identified how the Church approaches these better-understood situations, we can adapt and apply the rules governing those situations to the circumstances which are still in question.   

To this end, I’ve noticed many commentators tend to assume that secular institutes provide the closest parallel to the Order of Virgins, based primarily on the fact that both secular institute members and consecrated virgins “live in the world.”* However, I believe that looking at secular institutes as the interpretive key for understanding the revived Order of Virgins is a mistake, for several reasons:

1. The Church is still somewhat unclear on the canonical and theological nature of secular institutes

One reason why I believe secular institutes really do not provide a good model for understanding consecrated virginity is because, at this point in time, there is still a lot about secular institutes which the Church can’t yet fully categorize or articulate.

The Church does give us a basic working definition of secular institutes in canon 710 of the Code of Canon Law. Here, a secular institute is identified as: “…an institute of consecrated life in which the Christian faithful, living in the world, strive for the perfection of charity and seek to contribute to the sanctification of the world, especially from within.”

We know that, like religious, secular institute members make a profession to observe the evangelical counsels (cf. can. 723 §1). But unlike religious, the vows of secular institute members are not considered “public.” Secular institute members are also similar to religious in the sense that they are consecrated specifically as part of a particular community with its own founder and charism. Yet in contrast with religious, they usually do not share a household or live together. Secular institute members are often described by the Church as called to be a “leaven in the world,” (cf. CCC  929) and as such they generally work in secular jobs and refrain from adopting any special dress, titles, or customs which would outwardly distinguish them as consecrated persons.

However, even in light of these basics, there is still a great deal of variety among the different secular institutes. For example, secular institutes can vary widely in how they understand the practice of “discretion.” Some institutes encourage their members to share their special ecclesial identity openly whenever it could be pastorally helpful (at least one secular institute even has special identifying dress which members wear in some circumstances), while other institutes have the tradition of keeping their members’ vocation much more hidden. Some secular institutes have a very strong emphasis on the “secularity” and specifically “lay” character of their vocation, while other institutes were at least originally founded with the intention of their members living what was essentially a modified form of religious life. In many secular institutes, the members may only see each other once or twice each year; but on the other hand, some secular institutes do allow for or encourage a certain level of common life among their members.

But perhaps more significant to my point here, the Church’s writings on secular institutes are often confusing, or even seemingly self-contradictory. For example, the Church describes secular institutes as being institutes of consecrated life, with the subsequent implication that members of secular institutes are thus truly consecrated. The Church also describes consecrated life as being a different state from that of laity (cf. can. 588 §1). However, in canon 711, secular institute membership is described as something which “does not change the member’s proper canonical condition among the people of God, whether lay or clerical.” So it would seem to be currently a bit of conundrum as to how secular institute members can be truly consecrated, and truly lay (i.e., not having changed their canonical condition to “consecrated”) at the same time!

A similar confusing gap in the Church’s understanding of secular institutes is the question of precisely what kind of vows secular institute members make.** Secular institutes are distinct from religious institutes in that their vows are not public. And since their vows are not public, then it would seem to follow logically that their vows would therefore have to be considered private. One characteristic of private vows per se is that they are a personal initiative, and not something officially received in the name of the Church. Yet it would seem that secular institute members’ vows are indeed received in the name of the Church when they are received by the moderator of their institute. Some commentators have tried to resolve this inconsistency by calling secular institute members’ vows “semi-public”—but this is also problematic, since “semi-public vows” are not a concept which is actually mentioned anywhere in our current canon law.

Naturally, since secular institutes are a newer form of consecrated life, it is understandable that there are still questions which have yet to be resolved, and so these observations of mine are certainly not meant to undermine the life and vocation of current secular institute members.  However, it does still stand to reason that all these unanswered questions would make secular institutes a less-than-helpful interpretive key for other forms of consecrated life.

2. Secular institutes have many fundamental differences from consecrated virginity

Even apart from the above-mentioned ambiguities, when we consider what we actually do know about secular institutes, it becomes clear that secular institutes are structurally, fundamentally different from the Order of Virgins.

For one thing, as was just noted, secular institute members’ profession of the evangelical counsels is private (or at least less-than-fully public), whereas consecrated virginity is very much a public state of consecrated life. In fact, we could go so far as to say that a woman enters into the Order of Virgins in the most public way possible, via a liturgical ritual to which all the faithful are to be invited. This element alone carries implications which make secular institutes inappropriate a parallel for understanding the Order of Virgins.

Another very significant canonical difference is that consecrated virginity is a non-institutional form of consecrated life, in the sense that virgins are consecrated as individuals rather specifically as members of a special group or community. A consecrated virgin remains under the direct authority of her bishop, and her only “institutional” affiliation within the Church is her connection to her diocese. Likewise, consecrated virgins do not have a special call to follow the charismatic spirituality of any particular founder or foundress.

In contrast, secular institutes are by definition institutional. One becomes consecrated as a secular institute member specifically by joining a community which is a secular institute. A secular institute member has his or her profession of the evangelical counsels received by the moderator (the word used in lieu of “superior” for secular institutes) of their institute, and the concrete ways in which they observe the counsels is determined by the constitution, customs, and spirituality, of their particular institute. And like religious—but unlike consecrated virgins—secular institute members are called to live out the unique charism handed down to them from the founder or foundress of their institute.

Additionally, there are many essential elements of the vocation to consecrated virginity which the Church does not ascribe to secular institutes, and vice-versa. For example, only consecrated virgins are explicitly identified as “brides of Christ.” While bridal spirituality is absolutely central to the vocation of a consecrated virgin, it would seem to be, at most, optional for a woman secular institute member.

On the other hand, while secular institute members are given a specific mission “to order temporal things according to God and to inform the world by the power of the gospel,” (can. 713 §2) and are explicitly directed to “lead their lives in the ordinary conditions of the world,” (can. 714) this sort of language and “leaven” imagery is never used in magisterial documents to describe the Order of Virgins. In fact, consecrated virgins are arguably given the very opposite vocation of serving as an “eschatological sign of the world to come” (cf. the praenotanda of the Rite of Consecration).

3. The issue of anachronism

There is an issue of anachronism. Today’s Order of Virgins was intended as a revival of an ancient Patristic form of consecrated life, (cf. Vita Consecrata, 7) whereas secular institutes are almost overwhelmingly a twentieth-century development.

Secular institutes are the newest form of consecrated life in the Church. While it could be argued that various earlier associations in the Church history served as precursors to today’s secular institutes (the earliest Ursuline Sisters and French Daughters of the Heart of Mary are often cited as examples of this), secular institutes as such were not formally recognized and endorsed by the Church until 1947, when Pope Pius XII promulgated the Apostolic Constitution Provida Mater Ecclesia. What’s more, the central defining charism of secular institutes—i.e., an apostolic mission to order the sphere of temporal affairs in accord with Christian values—is very recent development in the life of the Church. It was virtually unheard of before the twentieth century to have a distinctive spirituality ordered specifically around the call to be “leaven in the world.” (That is, prior to the twentieth century, it’s difficult to find any examples of the Church promoting “ordinary Christian life in the world” as a vocation to be embraced through a special, recognized form of dedicated evangelical life. “Leaven” imagery, being scriptural in origin, was of course still used before the modern era. However, this tended to be a description of Christian life in general, rather than as a distinctive charism in its own right.)

Of course, the “newness” of secular institutes should not be automatically written off as a bad thing. It is very reasonable to believe that the Holy Spirit would inspire a new form of consecrated life to meet the specific needs of the modern world, just as different forms of religious and consecrated life were inspired at different points in the Church’s history to meet the needs of the Church and human society as a whole.***

However, this newness does make secular institutes an unhelpful parallel for understanding consecrated virginity, which was meant as a restoration of the ancient, Patristic-era Order of Virgins. To say that consecrated virgins should look to secular institutes for guidance in understanding consecrated virginity would be to anachronistically superimpose a distinctively modern charism onto what is really an ancient vocation.

One other point…

To address one final point, I’ve occasionally seen it argued that, because secular institute members are at least officially permitted to receive the Rite of Consecration to a Life of Virginity,**** we can deduce that secular institute members and consecrated virgins “living in the world” are meant to be living similar ways of life. Or in other words, because a vocation to consecrated virginity and a vocation to a secular institute can theoretically co-exist in the same person (just as a nun in certain religious Orders could have a twofold vocation to religious life and to consecrated virginity), we should therefore assume that the Church intended non-monastic consecrated virgins to a live fully secular lifestyle in the strongest sense of the term. According to this train of thought, since a secular institute member can supposedly live out her distinctly secular vocation even after receiving the consecration of virgins, it must thereby follow that consecrated virginity isn’t something which could conflict or overshadow this call to a strongly secular way of life.

The first observation I have here is that, even after researching this topic fairly extensively, I am not aware of any actual documented cases of a particular secular institute encouraging its members to seek the consecration of virgins. So to being with, it would seem that the issue of a woman needing to harmonize her twin vocations to consecrated virginity and secular institute membership is a primarily hypothetical one at this point in time.

But more substantially, to me this line of reasoning also seems to be based on some not-yet-justified assumptions. Namely, how do we know that secular institute membership should be the “dominant” spirituality in a woman who is called to both vocations? Why should we think of consecrated virginity as merely a possible facet of a vocation to secular institute membership, rather than the other way around? Instead, might it possibly make more sense to think of secular institute membership as being more like a secondary support to a “primary” vocation to consecrated virginity?

To look at one potential parallel on this, we do have examples of diocesan or secular priests (i.e., priests “living in the world”) who are also secular institute members. In a few cases, these priest-secular institute members are actually incardinated into their institute. However, most of the time, priests who are members of secular institutes are diocesan priests who are incardinated into their diocese in the normal way. While they share in the spirituality and limited community life of their institute, these priests still owe their primary obedience to their bishop, and remain dedicated to priestly ministry in their dioceses.

Even if they belong to a secular institute which includes lay members, such priests still fulfill their specifically priestly obligations, and continue to dress and present themselves publicly as priests. That is, such priests do not strive to live as laypeople, even though most secular institutes put a heavy emphasis on “lay spirituality.” Secular institute membership among the clergy is seen as an affirmation and support of their priesthood, rather than a negation of the “specialness” of their priestly vocation.

Similarly, I think the theoretical possibility of female secular institute members becoming consecrated virgins might say more about the nature of secular institutes than it does about the nature of consecrated virginity. And so I would go so far as to argue that—insofar as consecrated virginity and secular institute membership aren’t de jure incompatible—consecrated virgins who are members of secular institutes should see consecrated virginity as their principal vocation, and should give this primary vocation pride of place in terms of the way they order their exterior lives.


* For example, Sr. Sharon Holland, IHM makes this very point in her famous article “Consecrated Virgins for Today’s Church.”

** And to make this even more confusing, some secular institutes profess the evangelical counsels not through vows, but rather through some other “sacred bond”—i.e., a commitment which is technically something other than a vow per se.

*** Earlier examples of different forms of consecrated life developing in order to respond prophetically to the needs of the Church and contemporary society could include: organized monasticism arising just in time to preserve western culture and learning after the fall of the Roman empire, or the foundation of the mendicant Orders in the Middle Ages serving to bring renewal to the comfortably-established medieval Church.

**** Sr. Sharon Holland also discusses this in “Consecrated Virgins for Today’s Church.”