Talk:Consecrated virgin

message: Perhaps consecrated virgins are customarily lay, but apparently they are not exclusively so, unless one considers the nun Wendy Beckett to be lay.  I have edited the article accordingly. — J M Rice 14:17, 13 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Consecrated Virgins and Sister Wendy Beckett are of course members of the Laity. For according to Canon Law the place among the People of God of the members of all the various forms of Consecrated Life is among the Laity; they belong to the Hierarchy only if they are also Priests (the so-called Priest-Monks), and this owing solely to their sacerdotal ordination, not their religious state. Canon Law however also accepts that their religious vow sets them apart from other members of the Laity, and in the case of Priest-Monks also the Clergy. 00:56, 1 December 2007 (UTC)

text: There are two diffent understandings of the word "lay". On one hand everyone who is not member of the clergy is considered to belong to the laymen. On the other hand, sometimes the church discerns between clergy, consecrated people and the laity. In this respect, the consecrated virigins – both the consecrated virgins in monastic orders and the consecrated virgins living in the world – belong to the consecrated life and are not to be considered as lay. HTH, --Turris Davidica (talk) 08:34, 13 October 2010 (UTC)

text: Sister Wendy Beckett changed her status in the Church during her life: When she left her congregation, she also left the status of religious and returned to lay status (even though she continued wearing her nun's clothes). As a consecrated virgin, she was a laywoman belonging to the Order of Virgins. Lumendelumine (talk) 09:34, 9 March 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: She was at that time not more lay than ever – (or not, depends of the point of view): in the Roman-catholic church anyone who is not a cleric is regarded to be lay as well as both the members of the congregations and the consecrated virgins are members of the consecrated life. Therefore, she did not "return to lay status", she has always been lay and still belongs to the consecrated life. --Turris Davidica (talk) 10:17, 9 March 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Not only lay 

message: Anyone familiar with the life of St. Mary of Egypt knows that she was not a virgin.  She is venerated because of her penance and asceticism, not her virginity.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.239.152.174 (talk) 06:01, 31 October 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: In my opinion someone must have confused the forms of life of a consecrated virgin and a hermit (Mary of Egypt has been the latter one). You were right to remove her.--Turris Davidica (talk) 08:48, 3 December 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Mary of Egypt

message: A relevant discussion to the title of this section appear on a UserTalk page: User_talk:Turris_Davidica#Consecrated_virgin. >> M.P.Schneider,LC (parlemus • feci)  14:20, 23 August 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Noted '''Consecrated''' Virgins 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified  on Consecrated virgin. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20160418141521/http://www.vatican.va/archive/ENG1104/__P1Y.HTM to http://www.vatican.va/archive/ENG1104/__P1Y.HTM
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20160418141521/http://www.vatican.va/archive/ENG1104/__P1Y.HTM to http://www.vatican.va/archive/ENG1104/__P1Y.HTM
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080221180735/http://www.vatican.va:80/archive/hist_councils/ii_vatican_council/documents/vat-ii_const_19631204_sacrosanctum-concilium_en.html to http://www.vatican.va/archive/hist_councils/ii_vatican_council/documents/vat-ii_const_19631204_sacrosanctum-concilium_en.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20160418141521/http://www.vatican.va/archive/ENG1104/__P1Y.HTM to http://www.vatican.va/archive/ENG1104/__P1Y.HTM
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20130724064758/http://www.vatican.va:80/archive/ENG0015/__P85.HTM to http://www.vatican.va/archive/ENG0015/__P85.HTM
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20081202150022/http://www.vatican.va:80/holy_father/john_paul_ii/apost_exhortations/documents/hf_jp-ii_exh_25031996_vita-consecrata_en.html to http://www.vatican.va/holy_father/john_paul_ii/apost_exhortations/documents/hf_jp-ii_exh_25031996_vita-consecrata_en.html
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 21:46, 29 November 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: It has been suggested that Anne Leflaive should be split into a standalone article from this article's section "Modern history". I support. Ping . – Finnusertop (talk ⋅ contribs) 09:50, 9 December 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Split [[Anne Leflaive]] 

message: Consacrated virgin in the christian tradition has no link with the sacred virginity in the Roman religion. The link is rather in the consacrated virgins in the Jewish religion. Mary was a consacrated virgin.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.91.51.235 (talk) 12:18, 11 August 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Nonsense and personal views/original research 

message: The OED's dictionary entry suggests female only. Our article manages to avoid the mention of male or female entirely! (Is this intentional in an era of gender offence?) So: are there male CVs? 86.154.141.222 (talk) 14:23, 15 September 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: No.  John Paul II's document says "these women".  in the Catholic Church, which is specified in the first sentence, consecrated men are not "brides of Christ".  This needs to be removed from the article. --134.153.14.13 (talk) 19:30, 19 November 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Can they be male, or only female? 

message: On the question of the sustenance:
Jane veritas, we have had this before: if you want to say something else than the source-based content of the article you have to source it. Ecclesiastical documents such Ecclesiae sponsae imago and all recommendations of bishop conferences on the consecration of virgins (which are dated earlier than ESI) I have ever seen clearly state that a consecrated virgin living in the world has to provide for their own upkeep. Some dioceses even require proof on that. Ecclesiae sponsae imago for example explicitely states among the requirements for a candidate to be sure that she has the "…capacity to work so as to provide for her own sustenance in a dignified manner". Please do not insert other content on the virgins being financially supported by their diocese or that they "may provide for their own upkeep", as this is both unsourced and simply not true. --Medusahead (talk) 08:15, 10 May 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Sustenance