Image:
The consecrated virgin St. Marcellina with her brother, St. Ambrose. St.
Marcellina was encouraged by her brother to help guide younger consecrated
virgins in the fourth century.
One
of the most noteworthy aspects of Ecclesiae Sponsae Imago (ESI), the
2018 Instruction on the Ordo virginum, is its outline of the initial
formation process for consecrated virgins in paragraphs 74 – 107, along with
other references to formation scattered throughout the rest of the text.
This
is an important development, because prior to this none of the Church’s
canonical documents on consecrated virginity so much as mentioned the need for
formation. So in a very strict technical sense, before ESI it was theoretically
possible to argue that the Church didn’t envision any formation at all as being
required for would-be consecrated virgins. (Not that I personally would have tried
to make this argument, of course!)
Prior
to ESI, one would have hoped that reference to parallel situations in canon law
(cf. CIC can. 17), ordinary pastoral solicitude, and plain common sense
would have indicated the need for some sort of formation for aspiring
consecrated virgins. But it is still helpful to have the Church’s vision of
formation substantially clarified in ESI—especially since, before this
Instruction, educated and well-meaning people could have come to different
conclusions on certain points.
I
will write a follow-up post on the steps in the process of formation as
described in ESI, but I think it’s important to start out by discussing some of
the more general questions and principles of formation that ESI articulates. And
so what follows are my own thoughts and personal insights, written primarily from
my perspective as a canon lawyer, but also from the viewpoint of my
vocation as a consecrated virgin.
1.
ESI clarifies the nature of this vocation
In my opinion, the most important
contribution ESI makes to our understanding of appropriate formation for
consecrated virgins is its clarification of the fundamental nature of the Ordo
virginum as, among other things: a visibly public form of consecrated life
(cf. ESI 38 and 67) which is inspired by the Evangelical counsels (ESI 27);
characteristically rooted in the local diocesan Church (ESI 42); having an
essential contemplative dimension (ESI 29) while also being ordered towards
apostolate, ministry, and concrete service of the Church (ESI 39); and which is
meant as a radical gift of a woman’s whole life (cf. ESI 74).
Although
these issues might seem only indirectly related to formation per se, in
reality these kinds of clarifications are foundational to any formation
program. Without wanting to put too fine a point on it, you can’t form someone
for something unless you understand specifically what you are forming them for.
Formation for a life of dedicated service as a public representative of the
Church in consecrated life will naturally have to be very different, and
perhaps much more involved, than the formation required for making something
like a simple private commitment to evangelical chastity.
2.
ESI envisions formation as a personal work
ESI further clarifies how the Church
envisions formation for the Ordo virginum as an integral and “hands-on”
project. That is, a project which certainly involves the aspiring consecrated
virgin taking in new information in an intellectual way, but one which can
hardly stop there. Any kind of serious formation requires real dialogue,
practical discernment, pastoral engagement, and the forming of relationships.
Or to put it more straightforwardly, while things like reading lists and
information packets can be very helpful as supplemental resources (and are
certainly much better than nothing!), the Church via ESI does not see women as
being adequately formed for consecrated virginity by simply reading books,
articles, or other texts.
This
principle is evident throughout ESI’s section on formation. For instance, ESI
92 requires “the Bishop, the Delegate [for consecrated virgins] and the
consecrated women who participate in the service of formation” to become acquainted
with aspirants and candidates for consecrated virginity in a direct way as individual
people, so as to more fully understand their strengths, weaknesses, and overall
aptitude for this vocation. As ESI 98 goes on to tell us: “The obligation of
the Bishop, the Delegate, and the consecrated women who collaborate in the
service of formation will therefore consist in ensuring that the candidate
receives a systematic introduction to the charism and to the features of this
form of life, in accompanying her while she intensifies and deepens her
spiritual life, and in observing how she harmonizes and arranges her lifestyle
in docility to the action of the Spirit.” In a similar vein, ESI 94 speaks of
an aspiring consecrated virgin having regular meetings and communication with
the above-mentioned formation team. And even earlier on in the Instruction, we
are told that: “Consecrated women take an active part in formation initiatives,
in agreement with the Bishop. They collaborate as far as possible in the
formation of aspirants and candidates for consecration.” (ESI 45)
The
importance of accompaniment is a theme that runs throughout this Instruction,
even in sections that do not discuss formation specifically. In my view, this serves
as a salutary reminder to us that, although consecrated virginity is an induvial
vocation (in the sense that this vocation is not dependent on membership in an
organized institute), as Pope Francis notes, ultimately “nobody is saved alone”*
and thus nobody can truly be formed in consecrated life alone. Consecrated
virginity is integrally woven into the fabric of the broader Church, which is a
interdependent community and a spiritual family.
3.
ESI dictates a comprehensive approach
Another striking feature of ESI’s discussion on
formation is how formation is envisioned as a process for fostering the
development of the whole person. While ESI undoubtedly conveys the necessity of
spiritual formation, it does not present formation in the Ordo virginum
as being simply a matter of adopting a new spirituality or more intense prayer
life.
For
example, ESI 87 refers to the importance of human formation, noting that
formators should be attentive to an aspirant’s or candidate’s “realistic
self-knowledge,” her “capacity to establish healthy, serene and generous
relationships with [both] men and women,” her professional development, and her
responsible use of “goods, of social media and of her free time.”
ESI
also indicates that intellectual formation is a requirement for aspiring
consecrated virgins. This is particularly clear in ESI 102, which states: “When
her practical circumstances and her personal abilities allow, the candidate
will be encouraged to attend courses of study at theological colleges,
institutes of religious science or similar institutions. In no case should an
adequate theological preparation in the areas of biblical studies, liturgy,
spirituality, ecclesiology, and moral theology be omitted.”
This
shows us that a call to consecrated virginity is not meant merely as a private interior
change, but is intended as a vocation which encompasses a woman’s entire life
and all the dimensions of her personality.
4.
ESI provides a formation timetable
Prior to ESI, there was no universal consensus
regarding exactly how long discernment and initial formation for consecrated
virginity should last, or how this time period should proceed. I personally
have heard of cases where, on the one hand, a woman first expressing her
interest in the Ordo virginum was consecrated a mere few months later;
and on the other, where a woman remained in a vague and unstructured “discernment”
period that lasted for the better part of ten years. I am of the opinion that neither
of these situations were just or fair to the women involved. Yet as much as I
hate to admit it, prior to 2018 both of these scenarios were technically permissible
since before the Instruction was published the length and manner of formation fell
into what was a near total lacuna, or an almost complete gap in the law.
But
now, thankfully, the Church has given us a canonical framework for how
formation for consecrated virginity should proceed. In a nutshell, it is now a
requirement that potential consecrated virgins have a “preparatory period,”
which I think in English we could also call an “aspirancy,” which should last from
one to two years. (ESI 92). This is to be followed by what ESI calls the
“formation program,” but which as an English speaker I would call a “candidacy,”
lasting two or three years. (ESI 97)**
Even
though ESI speaks of the need to personalize formation to the individual, (ESI 77)
it is still important to observe the timeline of formation which the Church
presents to us in ESI. This is a matter of both prudence and justice.
It’s
a matter of prudence, because among other concerns, a too-short formation
period could lead to women being consecrated before they’re truly ready. Or
conversely, a formation period that is too long could undermine the need for a
candidate to make a confident decision with respect to her vocation.
Adherence
to a defined formation timeframe is also a matter of justice, because a lack of
clarity on when a candidate’s consecration may occur is, essentially, a lack of
clarity whether her consecration is even likely to happen at all. This denies
the candidate her right to discern seriously and make firm decisions about the
overall the course of her life. For instance, loosely-organized “formation”
that drags on for many years without a clear goal or direction, and which might
eventually end with the bishop deciding against consecration, deprives the
woman of the time she might have used more fruitfully in discerning other forms
of consecrate life, or even marriage and family life.
5.
ESI addresses the question of age
As I mentioned in an earlier post, ESI’s
clarification on the appropriate age for discerning a vocation to consecrated
virginity is significant, because it affects our understanding of the essential
nature of this vocation. That is, is this a call that a young woman can embrace
and then build her life around, or is a vocation meant for only for older women
who have a proven history and established lifestyle?
Prior
to ESI, the only time a Church document mentioned the age with respect to the Ordo
virginum was in the praenotanda of the Rite of Consecration to a Life of
Virginity, which includes the stated requirement that candidates: “by their
age, prudence, and universally approved character…give assurance of
perseverance in a life of chastity dedicated to the service of the Church and
of their neighbor.” But
this is general enough to admit several different interpretations.
For instance, it could be read as something along the lines of: “Don’t
consecrate a teenager!” Yet others had interpreted this to mean that
consecrated virginity was meant as a sort of “second half of life” vocation,
for women who were at least thirty-five years old, or even much older.***
But
ESI 82 helpfully clarifies that consecrated virginity is indeed a vocation that
young women are invited to discern. It states that the “hard” lower age limit
for entering formation is eighteen; with a “soft” or merely customary lower age
limit for actually receiving consecration being twenty-five years of age. Or as
ESI itself puts it: “In no case can the preparatory period begin before the age
of eighteen years,” and “Ordinarily consecration is not celebrated before the
candidate has reached her twenty-fifth birthday.”
This
same paragraph also states that “for admission to consecration the usual age
for marriage in the region must be taken into account.” Interestingly, this
line includes a footnote drawing a parallel with canon 1072 in the Code of
Canon Law, in which pastors are directed to dissuade youths from marrying
before the age which is accepted as normal in their own cultural context.
In
my reading of ESI 82, I understand these passages as indicating that while
nobody under the age of majority can embark on a formal path of formation for
the Ordo virginum, it may still be possible in some cases for a woman under
the age of twenty-five to receive the consecration of virgins. For example, if
an exceptionally mature eighteen-year-old woman begins a five-year formation
program and completes it fruitfully, her bishop may legitimately decide to
consecrated her at the age of twenty-three, as opposed to asking her to wait an
additional two years in a formational limbo not described or envisioned by ESI.
ESI
also does not specify an upper age limit. From a technical canonical
perspective this is not surprising, since religious life and other forms of
consecrated life also don’t have a universally prescribed upper age limit for
new vocations. But, just as individual religious communities can set their own
upper age limits, I personally think it may be helpful for individual dioceses
to consider adopting an upper age limit for discerning consecrated virginity in
their own policies or proper diocesan law (even if it’s well understood that
exceptions to a stated age limit could be possible on a case-by-case basis). Among
other things, a stated upper age limit for consecration in the Ordo virginum
helps communicate the idea that consecrated virginity truly is meant as a
radical offering of one’s whole life, that it should be a woman’s “first
choice” vocation, and that it presupposes an openness to formation and a
willingness to take on significant new commitments.
6.
ESI emphasizes respect for the internal forum
Finally, ESI makes explicit what could
have always been inferred about formation for consecrated virginity: namely,
that the distinction between the internal and external forum must always be
respected.
To
give some background, when the Church speaks of the internal versus external forum,
this indicates the distinction between a person’s private interior life and
their outward observable actions and behavior. As a illustration, a person’s attendance
at a particular Mass is a matter of the external forum, as this can be easily
noted by anyone else who happened to be present; but on the other hand, his or
her interior attentiveness and spiritual experience while at that Mass are
matters of the internal forum.
The
Church’s law has always sought to maintain a strict boundary between the
external and internal forum in order to protect the privacy and freedom of conscience
of all the faithful, and to properly reverence the sacred relationship between
God and an individual soul. This general principle finds its most obvious
expression in the absolute inviolability of the seal of Confession. But it is
also evident in ecclesial laws strongly discouraging, for example, clerical
religious superiors from hearing the sacramental confessions of their subjects,
(cf. CIC can. 630) or in the prohibition on rectors of seminaries serving
as spiritual director to the students under their care. (cf. CIC can.
240 §2) The general idea in
these latter examples is that an authority figure in the Church, who is
empowered to make serious decisions about one’s future (such as whether or not
someone will be ordained or determining where someone will be assigned), should
not be influenced in their decision by the purely personal spiritual matters of
their subjects, which are legitimately private.
As
in some of my above-mentioned points, I think a working knowledge of the Church’s
practices regarding the protection of the internal forum in parallel situations
could easily have led one to conclude that aspiring consecrated virgins should
likewise enjoy reasonable boundaries between the internal and external forum. So
in that sense, this aspect of ESI is one of its least novel concepts.
Nevertheless,
ESI references the need to respect the internal forum in several places. For example, ESI 53 states: “Regarding pastoral collaboration in the external
forum, those entrusted with these responsibilities [i.e., responsibilities
related to the formation of aspiring consecrated virgins] will not establish a
spiritual accompaniment relationship with aspirants, candidates, or consecrated
women. They know that their personal dialogue with each one is to be used
specifically for listening, challenge, and review of progress.”
Similarly,
under the heading of “The practice of spiritual accompaniment,”**** ESI 79
tells us: “To ensure the [aspiring consecrated virgin’s] freedom in the area of
manifestation of conscience, the Delegate for the pastoral care of the Ordo
virginum and the consecrated women who participate in the service of
formation offer this service in the external forum. They do not establish
relationships of spiritual accompaniment with the aspirants, candidates or
consecrated women. They abstain from asking for information or advice about the aspirants, candidates or consecrated women from their directors, spiritual
accompaniers, and confessors.”
One
important concrete consequence of this newly-articulated principle is that
there now must be some sort of formation director—either in-house from among
the diocesan staff, or another qualified person brought in from the “outside”
whom the diocese commissions for this task—for aspiring consecrated virgins and
candidates. That is, while spiritual directors have an important role, the
entirety of formation cannot be delegated to a woman’s spiritual director. If
this were to happen, this would lead to one of two unacceptable options: either
1. The spiritual director would have to violate confidentiality, leading to a
conflict of fora; or 2. The diocesan bishop would be completely in the
dark about the candidate’s progress in formation or suitability for consecration.
A
practical pastoral note…
Looking
at all this, it might be tempting for discerners and aspiring consecrated
virgins to compare, with a critical eye, how their diocese’s formation program
measures up to everything described in Ecclesiae Sponsae Imago. And
conversely, bishops and diocesan staff responsible for the Ordo virginum
might feel dauted by the scope of the task at hand!
And
so it might make sense to close by reminding all of my readers that,
especially with such a “new” vocation, at the end of the day we all have to do
the best we can with what we have. Certainly, some elements of ESI (e.g., respecting
the privacy of the internal forum) can and should be implemented immediately.
But other aspects (such as the development of a theological curriculum or
robust program of human formation) are necessarily going to take some time. And
this time of “growing pains” is going to be a reality no matter how many people
devote their best efforts to this worthy project, and regardless of the
resources devoted to it. In fact, I have often mused that it will probably take
an entire “generation” of consecrated virgins to develop, from our collective
studies and lived experience, all the details of truly effective practical
formation programs.
In
the meantime, we all keep doing what we can to serve the women who, in God’s
providential plan, come to us. Every step we take can be a step forward, and we
trust the Holy Spirit to guide us in the beautiful work of nurturing new
vocations.
Notes:
* cf. Fratelli
tutti, 32
** I think we
can use the terms “aspirancy” and “candidacy” to refer to periods of formation,
because ESI refers to women in the “preparatory period” as “aspirants,” and to
those in the “formation program” as candidates.
*** On a more
whimsical personal note, when I was discerning my own vocation in the 2000s, for
whatever reason thirty-five was often cited (or rather, mis-cited) as the lower
age limit for consecrated virginity. Obviously, in my case it was clarified that
thirty-five was simply a suggested lower age recommended by some bishops. But on
my actual thirty-fifth birthday—by which point I had already been consecrated
for eleven years!—I remember thinking: Huh, I’m finally “old enough” to be a
consecrated virgin now!
**** ESI frequently
speaks of “spiritual accompaniment.” I understand this as being more or less
the same thing as what I would normally call “spiritual direction.”
