Table of contents for Congress Pilgrimage 2008 Rome

1. International Congress Pilgrimage of Consecrated Virgins Rome 2008 Day 1
2. International Congress Pilgrimage of Virgins Rome 2008 Part II
3. International Congress Pilgrimage of Consecrated Virgins, Rome Day III
4. Consecrated Virgins International Congress Mass Days IV and V
5. February 2: World Day for Consecrated Life

by Therese Ivers, JCL, OCV

His Holiness the Pope rarely presides over public liturgies.  The importance of World Day for Consecrated Life is such that he prays Vespers and gives an official address on each Feast of the Presentation to consecrated persons.  Since the Marian (consecrated life) dimension of the Church is as essential as the Petrine (ordained life) in the life of the Church according to our Holy Father, dioceses should take their cue from Rome and also host celebrations for Consecrated Life in their cathedrals.  It is the one day that the Church prays for the consecrated, that is, for those of us who normally pray for the rest of the Church!

The Vicariate of Rome issued the invitation to the Papal Vespers and Address to religious superiors, religious, consecrated virgins, members of secular institutes, members of apostolic societies, hermits, and others in consecrated life living in Rome.  For those who don’t know, the Vicariate of Rome functions as the “diocese” of Rome and govern in the name of the Pope.  There is a bishop assigned for consecrated persons.   I found it ironic that in the official invitation, the Vicariate mentioned that the contemplative (cloistered) religious would be spiritually present, and yet hermits were invited.  Perhaps it was an official oversight in terms of the incongruity.  Or, perhaps the Vicariate wanted to make it clear that this is one occasion in which it is very appropriate for the hermit to leave his/her hermitage and join the other consecrated persons in celebrating this day in the cathedral.  It is heartening, however, that the Vicariate did not limit its invitation to religious.  Now I just wait with bated breath – not really – for a consecrated virgin to be one of those selected to have some part in the ceremony as I noticed that only habited religious were chosen this year.  At any rate, it is my fervent hope that dioceses will follow the example of the Vicariate of Rome and remember to include consecrated virgins and hermits in their mailings.

On a personal note, yours truly was able to participate in this Liturgy with another consecrated virgin, Jenna Cooper, the author of a blog on consecrated virginity.  We disagree on many practical interpretations of how our vocation is to be lived out but we are united in the love of our Divine Spouse and total self gift to the Lord.  Speaking of consecrated virgins, on my way home from the papal liturgy, I passed the place where the International Congress for Consecrated Virgins was held in 2008.  It brought back so many memories of the 500+ virgins who attended from over 52 countries.

                                                                                                                                                  by Therese Ivers, JCL

About fifteen years ago, while in the midst of my vocational discernment, I found an article on consecrated virgins.  The author described consecrated virgins as women who made public vows in the hands of the bishop, lived in strict solitude, and followed an individually crafted rule of life that had been approved by that bishop.  It was this article which convinced me that I did not have a vocation to consecrated virginity.  After all, I liked being among people!  What I didn’t know then, as I do now, is that such a description is a perfect fit for the vocation of diocesan hermits, and an almost entirely false one of consecrated virgins  living in the world (unless they happen to be diocesan hermits!).  There has been in the past, as well as in the present, a lot of confusion and misunderstanding about vocations to the eremitic and virginal life.  This is why I think it would be a good time to bring up some common myths about the two vocations.

Myth #1.  Hermits are the male counterpart of consecrated virgins.

The closest male counterpart to the consecrated virgin is the bishop.  There are several reasons for this.  One, the consecrated virgin most fully mirrors and represents the Church-Bride, for which reason she is called “bride of Christ”.  The bishop represents Christ-Bridegroom in the fullness of orders.  (This, incidentally, is why only a bishop -or abbot- can confer the consecration- he stands in the place of Christ the Bridegroom.)  As is the case with a bishop, the virgin receives and enters her vocation through the ministry of a bishop.  That is to say, a bishop enters the episcopacy through orders conferred upon him by the ordaining bishops, and a consecrated virgin enters the consecrated state through the consecration conferred upon her by the consecrating bishop.  It is important to note that in neither the case of a (non religious) diocesan bishop, nor in the consecrated virgin living in the world are vows/promises made which constitute the man a bishop or the woman a consecrated virgin.  Rather, it is the sacrament/sacramental conferred by the bishop which constitutes the person a bishop or a consecrated virgin.  Finally, both the virgin and the bishop are in what is known as the “state of perfection” (this is not the case of diocesan priests or deacons).

Hermits (solitaries, anchorites, anchoresses, etc.) may be male or female.  Thus, hermits (male) are the counterpart of hermitesses (female), not of consecrated virgins.  Perhaps one reason why people may think hermits are the male vocation equivalent to consecrated virgins is because both are individually lived vocations in the sense that they are not attached to a religious community of any kind.

Myth #2.  “Public” status requires visibility and “distinctness” for hermits and virgins

Some people object to the idea of becoming a hermit under the provisions of canon 603 because they perceive the public nature or status of the vocation of the diocesan hermit to be against the calling to solitude and silence.  That is, according to such persons, if you are a publicly consecrated diocesan hermit, this “public status” goes against the withdrawal from the world that the hermit seeks and lives.  Some people believe that consecrated virgins living in the world must live like religious because they believe that the consecrated state or the public state of consecration requires what is known as “separation from the world”.  Both are errors tied to misunderstandings about what a “public state” is, and of what constitutes the essential elements of the vocations in question.

What is a public state? 

by Therese Ivers, JCL

There are times when controversy kicks up on the internet about different vocational aspects. Most of the time I have chosen to let them pass because a lot of common questions will be covered in my upcoming book on vocations. However, there is quite a heated discussion at the moment as to whether primary virginity is required for consecrated virgins as opposed to “secondary” virginity.

Yes, my book on vocations will go into this issue in depth. I actually have arranged for a friend of mine who is discerning her vocation to write some thoughts on her struggle between entering a religious order to which she has been accepted, and becoming a consecrated virgin that will provide discerners with some unique insights into the matter. Another place you may be able to get greater detail on the Church’s understanding of primary & secondary virginity is through the USACV by getting a CD of the talk by Dr. Shalina Stilley, who provides a thomistic approach to the issue in the 2010 convocation. I personally haven’t heard it, but knowing the quality of her research and in discussing the topic with her a number of times while she was preparing the talk, I am sure it is quite informative.

Right now, I just want to mention that the author of one blog has given his reasons for believing that primary virginity is required for a valid consecration. The link to this blog is HERE.  For what it’s worth, I have actually read the letter to now-Cardinal Burke that is referred to in this post, and have a copy of it in my possession (Protocol 231/96/L) that was an affirmative response to his question on whether primary virginity was required for the consecration.   Primary virginity is assumed of the virgin, and the words “public violation” are there to help clue in the bishops to not force her to make a manifestation of conscience if she had voluntarily experienced sexual intercourse in the past.   This canon law student makes a very good point in his post about the manifestation of conscience.  I want to explain it a little bit better, one reason being that I wrote my thesis for becoming a canon lawyer on protecting people from unwarranted intrusions into their conscience.

If a woman has voluntarily fornicated or committed adultery, then she has objectively sinned (depending on the circumstances, her actual culpability might be slight or great).  By such an act, or by consummating holy matrimony, she thereby has given up her virginity.  Since women who have been married are barred from the consecration anyway, we will focus on fornication/adultery by a single female and its implications for the woman seeking the consecration.

First of all, she has committed an objectively grave sin with another person.   Second, no matter how secret their rendezvous, at least two human beings know it- the male and the female.   Third, everyone has the right to privacy and a good reputation.  They are “innocent” until proven guilty, so to speak.  Included in this right is the right to not be forced to manifest one’s conscience.  That is, no one can be forced to admit guilt (except the Church can morally compel people to go to confession to admit their guilt, but does not identify any specific priest one has to go to and what is discussed is in the internal forum) in the external forum.  For a bishop to ask, “are you a virgin”?  runs the risk of putting the  non-virgin into a situation where she may feel obligated to reveal her conscience “no!,  I had a one night stand thirty years ago with a high school sweetheart” just because he’s the bishop and she might feel she needs to give an honest answer.   In writing the Rite of Consecration to a Life of Virginity, the Congregation wanted to make sure that it was written in canonical language that made it clear that the woman had to be a virgin and yet protect the non-virgin’s right to maintain silence about her objectively sinful action outside of the confessional.

The verbiage in the Rite says that one of the three requirements for the candidates is “that they have never married or lived in open violation of chastity”.   Although some people want to interpret “open violation of chastity” as concubinage or some public knowledge of the woman’s sexual activity with a man, its basic interpretation is that chastity was openly violated when she fell through fornication or adultery.  This interpretation is reaffirmed in the private letter from the Congregation in the Vatican to the then Archbishop Burke.   This letter is private, and will not be published in an open manner, because permission for that has not been given either by the Vatican or by Cardinal Burke.  However, a copy of it may be requested from the Cardinal if one is, for example, a bishop.  For those who are determined to at least see an excerpt from the letter, the excerpt is on page 144 of Sequela Christi (the official periodical of the Congregation for Institutes of Consecrated Life and Societies of Apostolic Life), 2009/01.  While I’m at it, I will tell you upfront that although I do have a copy of this correspondence in my possession, I cannot distribute it without express permission, so you might as well directly contact the USACV or Cardinal Burke for a copy if you feel you have need of it.

Although he is not a modern theologian, St. Thomas Aquinas did discuss the requirement of primary virginity for women who wished to receive the consecration of virgins.  It is interesting that he specifically addresses certain points of modern contention such as whether the woman must be a virgin to receive the consecration, whether a priest can do the consecration, and the like, in his works.  Again, this is covered in greater detail in my upcoming book on vocations.  I am writing this as an aside for people who respect his opinion on the matter  since he is closer to our times than the fathers of the Church and sundry Church councils and documents that touched upon consecrated virgins.

Back to a manifestation of conscience.  The centuries of tradition and the recent private response of the Vatican make it clear that only a woman possessing primary virginity may validly receive the consecration of virgins.  However, we often encounter the woman who possesses “secondary virginity”.  That is, she has fornicated or committed adultery, and has repented and lived a life of chastity since.  She may be interested in the consecration because she was erroneously told by priests and even some bishops that she is eligible for it.  What the Rite does is makes it clear that the bishop cannot force her to admit that she lost her primary virginity.  He can ask her if she’s ever been married.  That’s public knowledge.  He can also ask if there is common, public knowledge of her living in an unchaste relationship.  Again, this is because it’s public knowledge.  However, he can’t directly ask her if she has lost primary virginity.  This is because she has the right to refrain from manifesting her conscience to him.  If she freely volunteers the information that she is no longer a virgin, he should not consecrate her.   If she brings it up to him or anyone else in confession, they should discourage her from receiving the consecration, but can’t enforce this because it is sealed information.  Theoretically, then, a non-virgin could actually receive the consecration.  However, the woman would have to wonder about her motivations for going through the motions of a ceremony that will not have any effect upon her.  She will not actually be a consecrated virgin in the eyes of God because she’s lost primary virginity.  Further, she will feel uncomfortable in proclaiming herself to be a consecrated virgin among genuine consecrated virgins who have indeed preserved their primary virginity.

Given the necessity for the bishop to respect the right to privacy and not asking a woman to make a manifestation of conscience on the one hand, and the desire to uphold the integrity of the vocation to consecrated virginity on the other hand, I propose a solution that will help bishops and women in their discernment without crossing boundaries.  I think the difference between “primary” and “secondary” virginity should be explained to the candidate.  Included in the application package, will be a declaration of eligibility that will be required of formal applicants.  This declaration would say that she certifies that she is a virgin in the primary sense.  Thus, a non-virgin can choose to drop out of the process without specifying any reason, and the fraudulent use of mental reservation “I’m a renewed virgin” will be reduced.

by Therese Ivers, JCL

St. Therese of Lisieux is my patron saint.  I celebrate her feast day as my name day every October 1st.

The Little Flower has been an inspiration to me in many ways.  This devout, pious laywoman lived in a convent from the age of 15 to 24, where she died of TB.  Life in the convent was very hard.  Her fellow sisters, also very devout laywomen, with their own gifts and personality quirks, did not always understand her very well and the saint suffered as a result.  St. Therese loved her vocation.  She loved being a pious laywoman who recited the Divine Office, prayed and lived in common with the other sisters, and she kept her religious vows of poverty, chastity, and obedience with assiduous care.  The Lord guided her on the path to holiness in the midst of her humble occupations within the convent.  Prior to her death, she wrote an autobiography which has transformed the world.  Eventually, this work and its influence helped her become the 33rd Doctor of the Universal Church, a great honor for this religious laywoman.

I hope that people reading the above paragraph reacted in dismay because I called the Little Flower a pious laywoman even though she was a religious nun with solemn vows.  Why did I call her a pious laywoman?  I called her a laywoman for the exact same reason that people call consecrated virgins laywomen, which is because in a sense she was a lay person (non-ordained so she was not in the hierarchy).  There are, as I have mentioned before, two ways of looking at the Church.  One is dividing the Church according to hierarchy (lay vs. ordained).

Now we know that religious men and women (publicly vowed members of diocesan right or pontifical right institutes of consecrated life) are in the consecrated state.  This is because the other way of dividing the Church is by doing so into vocational states (lay vs. hierarchy vs. consecrated).  “In itself, the state of consecrated life is neither clerical nor lay (canon 588).”  St. Therese was in the consecrated state.  In this view, then, she was neither clerical nor lay.  She was in the consecrated life. Therefore, it is not entirely correct to write that she was a “pious laywoman” when describing the time she was in the convent, because in the strict charismatic sense in the Church, she was in a state that was different from the laity’s.

That being said, I’d like to draw your attention to this sentence, which I found describing consecrated virgins, “Single lay people have chosen to be consecrated virgins and have made private vows in the presence of the local bishop as they lived out their vocation in various walks of life.”  Consecrated virgins are not laywomen.  They are not “single lay people”.  Yes, they were single lay women before their consecration, just as the Little Flower was a single lay woman before she professed her vows in Carmel.  Once consecrated by her bishop, the consecrated virgin is no more a pious laywoman than the Little Flower.  Also, just as a reminder, consecrated virgins do not make private vows in the presence of the local bishop, they are consecrated brides of Christ through the ministry of the Bishop.  They do not make vows of any kind.

Men and women who are members of a diocesan or pontifical right institute of consecrated life (religious) are in the consecrated state.  Female virgins who have received the consecration of virgins (whether in the world or as nuns) from their bishop are in the consecrated state.  Diocesan hermits who have professed poverty, chastity, and obedience in the hands of their bishop are in the consecrated state.  Members of other forms of life are NOT in the consecrated state.  They are, therefore, either lay or ordained.

There is only one form of “consecrated laity”.  Consecrated laypersons are non ordained men and women members of Secular Institutes who take vows or promises of poverty, chastity and obedience.  All other lay persons in other groups and organizations remain lay, without consecration.  Some groups label their men or women members who have commitments to living out poverty, chastity, and obedience, as “consecrated” members.  This is incorrect.  They are no more consecrated than any other lay person if they are not religious, diocesan hermit, consecrated virgin, or member of a secular institute.

Anyone trying to say that members of an organization that is not a diocesan right or pontifical right religious community (who belong to the consecrated state) or of the only way of life that is “consecrated laity” (secular institutes who have semi-public vows but the non-ordained members remain lay), is incorrect.  I have recently read a convoluted argument from a pious group which is facing a Vatican investigation that claims that they are “consecrated” even though they are a collection of lay persons.  In a nutshell, because they are not a diocesan/pontifical right institute of religious life nor a secular institute, they have no right to collectively call their members with promises, “consecrated”.

(c) 2010 by Therese Ivers, JCL

www.DoIHaveAVocation.com

All rights reserved.

Table of contents for Consecrated Virgins

1. Consecrated Virgins Part I
2. Consecrated Virgins Part II
3. Consecration Vs. Vow

by Therese Ivers, JCL

This is a belated continuation of a series of posts on consecrated virgins living in the world.

Q.  I read this explanation of consecrated virgins on a vocations website and wanted to know if this is accurate:

From the beginnings of the Church there have been those who felt the call to consecrate themselves exclusively to Christ in a private manner. In recent times there has been a revival of this vocation, by which a woman makes her private consecration in the presence of her bishop.

A.  This description of consecrated virginity is highly inaccurate and unfortunately widespread on the internet.  I will respond to each sentence of this explanation of the vocation separately.

From the beginnings of the Church there have been those who felt the call to consecrate themselves exclusively to Christ in a private manner.

From the beginning of the Church, women have felt the call to follow Christ exclusively and completely.  They were known in the early Church as “virgins” and this was a public vocation, not a way of life lived “in a private manner”.  It is said that the Apostle Mathew was the first known Bishop to have conferred the consecration of virgins (upon the princess Iphigenia for which he was martyred as her kingly father wanted to marry her off and couldn’t because of the consecration).  However, this was far from being a private affair; members of the Order of Virgins had special privileges in the ancient Church because of their public status as brides of Christ.  What were some of these privileges?  Virgins occupied a special place of honor in the assembly in Church.  They often assisted the deaconesses in the ministry of baptism.  As membership in the Order of Virgins was public, many of the Church fathers wrote about consecrated virgins and how they were to live.  St. Cyprian described consecrated virgins as “the choicest portion of the Lord’s flock”.  That this vocation was not private is implicit in the Catechism of the Catholic Church which states:  From apostolic times Christian virgins, called by the Lord to cling only to him with greater freedom of heart, body, and spirit, have decided with the Church’s approval to live in a state of virginity “for the sake of the Kingdom of Heaven.”  [CCC 922, emphasis added]

In recent times there has been a revival of this vocation, by which a woman makes her private consecration in the presence of her bishop.

Since the revision of the Rite of Consecration of Virginity promulgated in 1970, female virgins living in the world were once more permitted to receive the consecration of virgins from their bishop after a short temporary exclusion dating from the 1950′s.  This is not private and it is not made by the woman.  This is a public ceremony in which the bishop confers the consecration upon the female virgin, constituting her a “sacred person” and placing her in the (public) consecrated state.  No vows are made, either public or private in this Rite.  Instead, the virgin is consecrated body and soul as a bride of Christ through the ministry of the bishop.  This is similar to what happens at an Ordination.  A man or deacon does not make promises which somehow transform him into a deacon or priest.  Instead, the sacrament of Orders is conferred upon him by the bishop and it is this conferral of Orders which constitutes him a deacon, priest, or bishop.  Priests and deacons do make promises during their ceremony, but consecrated virgins don’t.  Once a man legitimately receives Holy Orders, he belongs to the ordained state of life, in the hierarchy.  Once a female virgin legitimately receives the consecration of virgins from her bishop (or a bishop delegated by him), she belongs to the consecrated state of life and no longer in the lay state.

Q.  I am thinking about becoming a consecrated virgin.  This seems to be a personal matter between me and Christ and so I don’t want this to be public.  Can’t I just have a private consecration?

A.  If John wishes to marry Gloria, their marriage is between themselves but their vows create a new reality for them and for the Church.  They become husband and wife and join the married state when they get married.  Even if John and Gloria get married in the rectory or just in front of a priest/deacon and two witnesses, the marriage is a public act and their new status is public of being married with a true spousal bond between them.  They don’t need a whole church full of people to make their marriage a public ceremony celebrating a new public status that they enjoy once they exchange vows.  A consecrated virgin becomes a sacred person and a bride of Christ when the sacramental consecration of virgins is conferred upon her by the Bishop.  This can be done in a small chapel or (preferably in the mind of the Church)her Cathedral in front of hundreds or thousands of people.  Either way, the consecrated virgin has become a member of the consecrated state and is no longer single nor lay.  In this sense, her commitment (even if only the bishop was present doing the consecration) is very public.

Q.  I believe that there are four vocations- the priesthood, marriage, religious life, and the single life.  Do consecrated virgins belong to the generous single life?

A.  There are three states in the Church:  lay, ordained, and consecrated.  Most people are called to be in one of the vocations in these states in Holy Orders (permanent/transitional diaconate, priesthood, and episcopacy),  Consecrated Life (religious life, diocesan eremitic life, and consecrated virginity), or to Matrimony (in the lay state).   Some people are in more than one vocation such as the married deacon (married state+ ordained state) or the religious priest (consecrated state + ordained state).  Those in the consecrated state cannot be in the lay state.  Consecrated virgins, therefore, are not singles nor are they lay.  They are brides of Christ (a relationship) and they are in the consecrated state.

Q.  I thought that consecrated virgins are lay women because they are not priests.  Why do you say they are not lay?

A.  There are two ways the word “lay” is used in the Church.  The first way is to refer to non-ordained persons in the hierarchical sense.  Thus, in this view, the Church is divided into two hierarchical categories, ordained and non ordained (lay).  In this sense, even non-ordained religious and hermits are “lay” because they are not ordained.   In the other view, which is not hierarchical but vocational, the Church is seen to be divided into three categories: ordained, consecrated, and lay.  On this subject, the Catechism says:  “the state of life which is constituted by the profession of the evangelical counsels, while not entering into the hierarchical structure of the Church, belongs undeniably to her life and holiness.” CCC 914  This is how canon law talks about consecrated life as not being lay or ordained:  “In itself, the state of consecrated life is neither clerical nor lay.” – CIC 588  Thus, consecrated virgins are not lay when it comes to the states of life, any more than a religious monk or sister is lay.

Q.  Can a consecrated virgin adopt a child?

A. Consecrated virgins live out their consecrated life in accordance with the bishop’s directives.  The joys of motherhood are not proper to the virgin who remains celibate for the sake of the Kingdom.  To understand this better, a married person agrees not only to be open to children (and the sexual dimension requisite for the procreation of children) but also to assume the duties of educating and rearing of any children God may bless the couple with.  The responsibility of educating and parenting of a child in preparation for that child’s eventual maturity as an adult is intrinsically bound with the parental generation of the child. Therefore, unless the child in question is a close relative without other resources, it is not proper for a consecrated virgin to adopt a child as the renunciation of parenting is an implied part of the virgin’s renunciation of sexual intercourse (and its consequences).  A decision so momentous which doesn’t normally foster the virgin’s freedom to think upon the things of the Lord without worries stemming from a physical spouse and children must be approved by the virgin’s bishop for her to be able in good conscience to adopt a child without betraying her vocation.

Another objection to a consecrated virgin’s adoption of a child has to do with the way God designed humans to be formed.  The acts proper for the procreation of children and the education of any resultant children is an essential element of marriage.   A child’s best interest is served by the stable, permanent union of a male parent and female parent with their masculine and feminine influences and complementary gifts with which to give the child the environment necessary for a holistic upbringing. This may be one reason why Mary and Joseph were married- to give the Child Jesus a stable family unit with male and female modeling.

Merry Christmas!

Q.  What type of veil do consecrated virgins living in the world receive?
A.  Typically a consecrated virgin receives a bridal veil or a white scarf or mantilla when consecrated.  Normally, consecrated virgins living in the world do not wear veils like some religious women do, but a virgin may choose to wear her consecration veil on occasions such as her consecration anniversary.

Update:  I thought I’d add some photos of some consecrations:

Here, Joan has chosen not to receive the veil.

In the above video, you can see the six consecrated virgins process out of the basilica.  They have white albs over their clothing and some of them have lace mantillas and some have a white pashmina like scarf.

Site for Photos of Polish Consecrated Virgins

You can see in the above photo that these particular virgins did not choose to wear a veil.

(c) 2009 by Therese Ivers, JCL

www.DoIHaveAVocation.com

Q.  Do consecrated virgins wear a habit?
A.  Consecrated virgins living in the world do not have the right or obligation to wear a habit unless obliged/permitted by the local bishop.

(c) 2009 by Therese Ivers, JCL

www.DoIHaveAVocation.com

by Therese Ivers, JCL

An individual who had heard me introduce myself to a group as a consecrated virgin spoke with me at a table. He asked me whether I was thinking of “taking the next step”. Startled, I asked him what he meant, and he responded by saying that he was wondering if I was thinking about joining the religious life. Naturally, I wasn’t planning on joining a convent and explained to him that consecrated virginity is a vocation in its own right.

It struck me that I might have asked that same question of those religious women who find their identity in the thought of being a bride of Christ: “Are you thinking of taking the next step by receiving the consecration of virgins?” For, in my research, I discovered that the consecration cannot be dispensed and yet religious vows can be. I even read in the lives of the saints the story of how a solemnly professed nun, who was a daughter of a king, was for political reasons promised by her father to be the wife of another royal person. This king even obtained a dispensation of vows from the Pope for this to take place, which was to take effect upon her acceptance of the dispensation. Far from accepting the dispensation, the princess-nun took the unusual step (at the time) of receiving the consecration of virgins from her bishop, so as to forever cut off the possibility of marriage.

Another person approached me hours after the encounter I had with the young male. She expressed regret that she didn’t make it to my “private vow” ceremony. For the record, I didn’t make any private (or public) vows before my bishop. Instead, through the ministry of my bishop, I was made body and soul a virgin bride of Jesus Christ through the long consecratory prayer that constituted me a “sacred person” and which placed me in the consecrated state. The closest analogy I can make of my consecration is with ordination. The bishop confers Holy Orders upon a man, (it is not obtained by vow) and it makes him forever a deacon/priest/bishop of God. A deacon/priest/bishop cannot lose this fundamental sacramentally changed identity even if he ceases believing in God and acting as a cleric. In a similar way (although by an ontologically changing sacramental not by a sacrament) the bishop confers the consecration upon a virgin and through the action of God, makes her a bride of Christ, a consecrated virgin forever.

Yes, I will take the next step, which is to become holy in my own vocation as a bride of Christ. I thank God for my vocation and wish you all the best in yours!

Happy Thanksgiving!

(c) Therese Ivers, JCL
All Rights Reserved
www.DoIHaveAVocation.com

Q.  Does a consecrated virgin pray the Liturgy of the Hours in the name of the Church?
A.  A consecrated virgin is not bound or obliged by universal law to pray the Liturgy of the Hours, and therefore she does not pray it in the official name of the Church.

(c) 2009  by Therese Ivers, JCL

www. DoIHaveAVocation.com

by Therese Ivers, JCL

The Virgin Mary said what was in her heart so beautifully in the Magnificat.  My heart has echoed her canticle frequently, and it was what came to mind recently when my bishop set the date for my consecration as a virgin living in the world to be August 15.  I was so happy to be called to be the bride of Christ and to have the consecration on the Feast of the Assumption of the Blessed Virgin.  While preparing for the consecration, I discovered to my joy that the Gospel had the Magnificat.

On August 15, 2009, I received the solemn consecration of virgins living in the world through the ministry of Bishop Swain.   After giving a moving homily and saying the prayer of consecration which made me the Lord’s own, Bishop Swain presented me with the veil, the ring, and the Liturgy of the Hours.  The ring was engraved “I to my Beloved and my Beloved to me”.

My mother attended the consecration, as well as representatives of several vocations.   Several priests, including our vocation director, a permanent deacon, a transitional deacon, religious sisters, seven consecrated virgins from around the USA, members of a secular institute, and lay men and women were present.

Truly, it was a day of great joy and I am humbled to have been called to be the bride of Jesus Christ.  I ask the prayers of our readers, and assure of my own.

www.DoIHaveAVocation.com