Sister said that in Africa, religious sisters are frequently referred to as "Brides of Christ," but in her studies in North America, she observed that this language was not exactly the title of preference. Instead, she was told, Sisters prefer to be identified as "women of the Church," this reflecting the option for social justice. And so she put the call out to women religious in a very modern fashion: via Facebook message! " I would like to know your congregation's view on the 'bride of Christ' metaphor. Do you still use it? Do you have another model that you use to refer to women religious?"
Interestingly enough for me, her question came the day after I myself was musing on the title "Bride of Christ," so I was delighted to give it some more thought. And since that generated way more than a Facebook message's worth of content, I am just referring Sister to the old Nunblog for my reflections on her question. (As the Lady Alice More said in "A Man for All Seasons": "If anyone wants to know my opinion...he only has to ask for it!")
Dear Sister,
Thank you for your question. I really
benefited a lot from thinking it over. In fact, just the day before
your inquiry, I had been reflecting on the image of the “Bride of
Christ” in connection with another project. Your question just gave
me the excuse I needed to delve a little further into my own
convictions.
I had never ever heard the expression
“women of the Church” used to substitute for “Brides of
Christ.” It seems a very poor, pale replacement. In fact, it is the
very weakness of the substitute that triggered most of my
reflections. “Women of the Church” is valid enough as it stands,
but it is nowhere near as evocative and rich as the term it is meant
to replace. Frankly, it doesn't say very much to me.
 |
| First vows for Paulines in Pakistan (Jan 25) |
In my community (Daughters of St Paul)
we do not use this expression very much, but we do not use a
“replacement” for it either. We tend to think of ourselves more
in apostolic terms, and identify ourselves charismatically (as
“Paulines” or “media nuns”), taking the relationship with
Jesus as a matter of fact and of the public record. (Since “apostle”
means “one who is sent” the Sender is automatically included!)
Personally, I do not use the expression
“Bride of Christ.” I am not a particularly romantic type of
person, and do not identify too much with the expression, which I
think I have heard mostly from much older people (i.e. my parents'
generation) and found in books published fifty or more years ago.
Given our highly sexualized culture, I have also found that when the
expression is used today in secular media (for example, in an article
or post about a group of sisters or about women religious in
general), it is used with an air of bemusement or mild ridicule.
Today's culture being as unhealthy as it is, the expression “Bride/s
of Christ” can even be distasteful (outside
of extremely fervent Catholic circles).
The expression “Bride of Christ”
may have fallen by the wayside in the affluent world, but it is
making a comeback among some younger women religious. It is possible
that some of the younger sisters are taken with the romance of all
things “retro” and might be somewhat uncritical about old things,
but I think they are also telling us something very important about
the imagery of the “Bride of Christ” and we need to listen to
that.
I believe (very strongly!) that the
language of the “bride of Christ” ought to remain part of our
self-understanding as women religious, but not flaunted or used
casually in secular contexts where it can be either grossly
misinterpreted or treated as the quaint but bizarre belief of a
marginal culture. The language is based on an analogy; it is not a
bare fact that stands on its own.
Among the values of the “Bride of
Christ” image:
The virgin/bride is an archetype: a
foundational human symbol that simply cannot be done away with or
replaced. Assumption of this image makes a powerful statement about
Christianity. I think it is especially unwise to reject ancient
insights in light of modern sensibilities which may be (to use
biblical language) “passing away.”
What does the virgin/bride archetype
“say”? I believe this image speaks of both present and future
realities:
Present
realities:
Beauty (when is a
woman more lovely than on her wedding day?)
Joy
Hope
Beginnings
Gift of the
“whole” self, and one's whole future
Focus on the Groom!
Future
realities:
Fruitfulness
(children)
Fidelity
(lifelong)
Fidelity
(exclusivity)
At the center of all these present and
future realities is the one word that sums it all up: LOVE. A
bride is a woman whose existence is practically synonymous with love.
To say “bride” is to speak of love: a love that is somehow new,
dawning, brimming with promise. To say “bride” is to evoke a
happy future: a future which is the full flowering of the love that
is promised on the wedding day. (That happy future is the main reason
we celebrate other people's weddings with so much joy!)
All of the above are subsumed into the
Church's use of the image of the bride of Christ, an image which
started not with Christ, but in the Old Testament. The image of the
human bride of the divine Bridegroom is a biblical image, especially
significant in the prophets, in St Paul (especially 1 Cor 7 and Eph
5), and in the book of Revelation, the last divinely inspired words
we have from the early Church.
St Paul saw the married couple, husband
and wife, as a “type” or symbol-in-person of Christ and the
Church. So the primary “bride of Christ” is not the religious
sister, but the Church. It doesn't take much to then see the
consecrated woman as a “type” of the Church-as-Bride, and it
didn't take long for the Fathers of the Church to make this explicit.
Thanks to them, the spousal language became a part of the Liturgy of
the Hours and Office of Readings for Virgins and Religious. This is
especially clear in the antiphons and the use of Psalm 45 (an ode for
a royal wedding) for the Common of Virgins.
The image of the bride evokes election
(being called personally, by name). It is the relationship,
not the work that is primary. I think this is lost when “women of
the Church” is chosen because it is presumed to speak of social
justice. No, my primary relationship in life is not with my ministry
(or even with my fellow believers, co-members of the Mystical Body),
it is with the Lord Jesus in whose name and for whose sake I am
baptized and am engaged in ministry. This relationship with the Lord
is one of communion, not the one-flesh union of natural marriage, but
a communion that hopefully grows toward that undivided union with the
Lord that is the nature of heaven.
Then there is the mystical tradition of
the Church in which the spousal image (and the biblical Song of Songs!) plays such an important part.
Although men like Bernard of Clairvaux and John of the Cross
contributed powerfully to this mystical tradition of the soul as
beloved spouse of Christ, women are the icon of the
virgin/bride/Church. Even the liturgical designation of “virgin”
for women only (even though there are many virgin men saints)
underlines the importance of this image. The liturgical title is not
about a woman's biological status, but about what Facebook would call
her “relationship status” and then, more profoundly, not about
the woman at all, but about the Church: The woman depicts the
Church as Bride in a way that a virginal man cannot. (The male priesthood, then, is the counterpart--is there a correlation between rejection of the title "Bride of Christ" and resistance to the male priesthood? Just wondering.)
Just as the image of the bride evokes
the hope of future happiness, the “Bride of Christ” is an
eschatological sign (cf. Mt 22:23-33). Humans are designed for
marriage. The bridal image says that the woman religious is not a
shriveled, lonely, unfulfilled person who devotes herself to work
because she never found a partner in life; she is united to
her life-partner and at the same time, she evidently “awaits” him
as her most “blessed hope” (cf. Tit 2:13): her apparent single
state speaks of the one who is coming. This is a huge sign of
hope to those who understand the Christian faith, and enough of a
question mark for those who do not to provoke them to approach the
woman herself and ask their questions—which they do—giving the
sisters an opportunity to proclaim the gospel. It is also significant
that women religious find the vow of chastity the most meaningful of
the three evangelical counsels (1993 Nygren and Ukeritis study of
Religious in the US). I even read once that the psychological
profiles of women religious match those of married (not single)
women!
So the image of the "Bride of Christ" is liturgically and biblically rich; our state in life is not marginal to the Bible. Instead, with a self-understanding as "bride" we women religious find ourselves spoken to powerfully across the arc of divine revelation. It is fitting that there be in the Church a living "key" to the Scriptures.
So the image of the "Bride of Christ" is liturgically and biblically rich; our state in life is not marginal to the Bible. Instead, with a self-understanding as "bride" we women religious find ourselves spoken to powerfully across the arc of divine revelation. It is fitting that there be in the Church a living "key" to the Scriptures.
- - - -
As we close the Year of Consecrated
Life during this Jubilee of Mercy, it was a special grace for me to
have the opportunity to reflect a bit more on this title, to
recognize more explicitly how rich it really is, and what grace it
suggests for me and for the Church.
No comments:
Post a Comment