Biblical Understanding of the Evangelical Counsels (Article Review)

This is a review of an article that appeared in Vaiharai, 20/1, Jan-Jun 2015. The article was entitled ‘Biblical Understanding of the Evangelical Counsels’ by Dr Denis Kulandaisamy, OSM.

Through the article, the author aims at establishing a biblical basis for religious life. Religious life has played an important role in almost every traditional religion, he begins. He does not go on to back up this statement nor does he venture to provide any further information. He just leaves it in the air, supposing the readers will understand. Under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit, different forms of religious life have arisen. The most common division made in consecrated life is between the contemplative and active ways of living. Both of these are founded on the evangelical counsels, which are not inventions of the founders but are rooted in the Gospels themselves.

The article is divided into two parts. The first part deals with the basic concepts of consecrated life and the evangelical counsels in general, while the second part contains theological explanations of the evangelical counsels. The author begins by presenting a brief history of religious life, namely its origin and forms, and picks out a few key characteristics. He then moves into presenting the place of the Bible in religious life and the biblical foundations as indicated by a few documents of the Church. He lists out every biblical reference used in three Church documents: Lumen Gentium (chapters 5-6), Perfectae Caritatis and Vita Consecrata. These lists stretch across roughly five and a half pages! The author has not bothered to provide even a short description of each passage. What he has done instead is group the passages according to the books of the Bible.  He confesses that commenting on each of the references would be ‘very interesting and useful’ but he refrains from doing so for practical reasons. For the benefit of all, I sincerely hope the author considers taking up one text at a time and providing us with the theological meanings of the bible texts in the context of religious life. This would illumine every reader and help them see the significance of the biblical text to religious life.

The second part deals with each of the counsels individually. The methodology followed is: a brief introduction, a presentation of the Old Testament understanding of the particular counsel followed by the New Testament understanding. Chastity and Obedience are presented with the above stated methodology but Poverty, for some reason, is not. The counsel of chastity, the author mentions, has anthropological, existential, ontological and theological significance, but he does not delineate any of these in his treatment of the counsel, except perhaps, the last one. In the section of ‘Chastity in the Old Testament’, he gives three examples: the daughter of Jephthah (Jgs 11:37-40), Jeremiah, the prophet (Jer. 16:1) and the people of Israel (Amos 5:2; Jer. 2:32). From these he concludes that virginity was looked on as a sign of curse, punishment or disgrace. To me, this conclusion applies to the first and third examples but not to the second one. In the case of Jeremiah, his virginity was meant to be lesson for the people, similar to what the counsel of chastity is meant to do. The author cites an insight of A. Aparicio Rodriguez, that ‘towards the end of the Old Testament period, a new line of thought emerges regarding this point’ (chastity). To back this claim, two passages from Isaiah and Judith are cited. These reveal a change in Jewish mentality with regard to celibacy and sexual abstinence. They are seen as a means of establishing a close relationship with God. I do not agree completely with this claim. If it were so, Elizabeth would not be ashamed of her barrenness (Lk 1:25). While Rodriguez may have good reasons to have made the assertion of a change in Jewish mentality, it is not seen in the New Testament as he claims. Of course I cannot rely on just this one example but then, the New Testament does not speak much with regard to Jewish tradition regarding childbearing. The focus instead is shifted to the person of Jesus and his role as the Messiah, fulfilling the prophecies of the Old Testament.

I do not have any comments to make with regard to the rest of the article. The author has attempted to present a biblical foundation for the evangelical counsels and I commend his attempt. However, I feel that he had nothing really original to offer. His insights were pretty bookish, although they reflected the truth. I would have expected insights that were more pertinent to the present state of consecrated life in the world today.