Q&A: I’m still confused and embarrassed by those “little chains” Saint Louis de Montfort counsels for those who have made the consecration.
Father J. Patrick Gaffney, SMM
Member D.W., Denver, CO.
Consecration and the Chains
Remember that Montfort insists that the wearing of little chains is not essential for those who have willingly recognized their loving slavery to Jesus in Mary.
Nonetheless, the missionary strongly encourages that this practice be not omitted. Montfort is basically recommending some clear external symbol of our baptismal consecration through Mary. He himself offers substitutes for the little chains; carrying the rosary, wearing the scapular. (cf TD 116, 5.). Other possible signs are the ordinary chain which many wear with a cross or religious medal, or a ring clearly symbolizing discipleship, or the religious habit, etc.
Each culture will have its own manner of externally manifesting one’s consecration whether it be through a chain of some sort or through some other sign. Whatever it may be, the purpose of this recommendation should be fulfilled; “First, to remind the Christian of the vows and promises of his baptism; of the perfect renewal he has made of them by this consecration . . . second, to show that we are not ashamed to be loving slaves of Jesus Christ; and that we renounce the slavery of the world, of sin and of the devil . . . third, to protect ourselves against the chains of sin and of the devil … (TD 238, 239).
The chain or its substitute is then in Montfort’s eyes a constant effective sign both to us and to others of our consecration to Jesus in Mary. It is an emblem of our baptism, a sign reminding us and others that we are Christians, living copies of the Gospel. Perhaps such a symbol is even more important in today’s culture than it was in Montfort’s time.
Return to The Queen: Q&A
