Dioceses forbidden to establish religious communities without prior Vatican consultation [CWN]
- Status
M
Mintaka
Guest
Well, well, well. That doesn’t sound much like “collegiality” or “synodality.” That sounds like a heaping big grab at the power of individual bishops, since the “consultation” is apparently actually an approval or denial based on the Curia’s opinion.
What I’m wondering is why the announcement is so sudden (announcing the new policy on May 20th, and saying it takes effect on June 1?), and whether there have been any scandals that would cause such an about-face.
The “originality of charism” criterion is also pretty stupid, frankly. Historically, having an innovative charism when founding a religious order was almost a black mark, whereas sticking to one of the traditional monastic rules or the evangelical counsels was a good thing.
If we were crawling in religious, I could see where one might want to avoid duplication. But in a world where many existing religious orders are busily deleting themselves, but new religious orders have tremendous growth, it seems very hostile to the Holy Spirit and to charity.
What I’m wondering is why the announcement is so sudden (announcing the new policy on May 20th, and saying it takes effect on June 1?), and whether there have been any scandals that would cause such an about-face.
The “originality of charism” criterion is also pretty stupid, frankly. Historically, having an innovative charism when founding a religious order was almost a black mark, whereas sticking to one of the traditional monastic rules or the evangelical counsels was a good thing.
If we were crawling in religious, I could see where one might want to avoid duplication. But in a world where many existing religious orders are busily deleting themselves, but new religious orders have tremendous growth, it seems very hostile to the Holy Spirit and to charity.
D
dans0622
Guest
Hello,
I think you’re reading quite a bit too much into this. The requirement of “consultation” was already there in the law, going back to at least 1918. This is only a clarification of what happens if there is no consultation.
The requirement of “consultation” is not the same as a requirement of “consent.” A bishop is free to act in the way he thinks best, once he has a talk with the Holy See.
Dan
D
dans0622
Guest
I’m more intrigued by the manner of this clarification/interpretation than its content (which is not too surprising). Such things usually proceed through the Pontifical Council for Legislative Texts. I guess it is another example of the greater prominence being given to the Secretary of State.
Dan
Dan
T
twf
Guest
So if a bishop consults with the Holy See, the congregation says “nope, this is a bad idea” and goes ahead with it anyway there will be no consequences?
On the surface, the way the article is written, it does seem to be a crack down on episcopal autonomy, in an era when the Pope has said he wants less centralization not more.
D
dans0622
Guest
“Consequences”? I don’t know about that. All I can say is that consultation is consultation and consent is consent. Consultation has been required for many years. Consent is not required.
A bishop *cannot *validly erect a new institute without prior consultation with the Holy See. Once consultation has taken place, the bishop *can *validly erect the institute.
Dan
R
RPRPsych
Guest
Good points. But there may be more to this story than is visible on the surface. I seriously wonder what prompted Rome to come out with this notion at precisely this point in time.
Cloisters
Well-known member
Speaking as a founder, I can verify that the diocesan bishop – after the private association has lived the life in private and presented it’s “final draft” of its governing documents – has to send the information to CICLSAL and say, “Does this group fit a need?” If the Vatican says no it doesn’t, the group cannot receive it’s “decree of erection” and become officially recognized by the diocese. That’s “Private Association of Christ’s Faithful with the Intention of becoming an institute of religious life suri juris.”
The guidelines for establishing communities isn’t as nebulous as one might think, but everyone thinks that the Holy See has to approve even a group of people wanting to come together to meet a need. Canon law doesn’t say that. In fact, there is a canon that says that if a group of people have to associate to promote justice JUST DO IT. I call it the imperative canon.
Probably what has been happening here, to provoke such a statement from the Vatican, is that some dioceses probably were recognizing religious communities – granting the 'piece of paper from the bishop" as our founders support groups call it – without sending the information to the Vatican first. They’ve just sent out the ‘friendly reminder’ memo.
Some new religious communities begin with the bishop asking the founder to take on the task. Then, when they’re recognized, the bishop hasn’t consulted Rome. That’s against canon law.
Blessings,
Cloisters
The guidelines for establishing communities isn’t as nebulous as one might think, but everyone thinks that the Holy See has to approve even a group of people wanting to come together to meet a need. Canon law doesn’t say that. In fact, there is a canon that says that if a group of people have to associate to promote justice JUST DO IT. I call it the imperative canon.
Probably what has been happening here, to provoke such a statement from the Vatican, is that some dioceses probably were recognizing religious communities – granting the 'piece of paper from the bishop" as our founders support groups call it – without sending the information to the Vatican first. They’ve just sent out the ‘friendly reminder’ memo.
Some new religious communities begin with the bishop asking the founder to take on the task. Then, when they’re recognized, the bishop hasn’t consulted Rome. That’s against canon law.
Blessings,
Cloisters
C
commenter
Guest
It is also possible the Vatican was already issuing clarifications and reminders every month or so on lots of topics, for centuries prior to the advent of 24/7 news coverage and analysis of every cough and comma to come from the Vatican. There is such a thing as too much scrutiny.
D
dans0622
Guest
R
RPRPsych
Guest
True, that!
Cloisters
Well-known member
You’re most welcome. The Institute on Religious Life has an email-able copy of the Guidelines for Establishing Religious Institutes. Just email them and request a copy. If you can find a copy of the Gambari book about the establishment of religious institutes, that would be a huge boon. A Dominican sister in New Jersey had translated it from the Italian, but I don’t know if she has any further copies. She founded a new community located across from the Flemington, NJ, Carmel.
Blessings,
Cloisters
M
Mintaka
Guest
Good to hear. Fr. Z was also saying this, albeit he didn’t post until after I grumbled. But info from someone who has been in the process is super-useful!
C
CNA_News
Guest
http://www.catholicnewsagency.com/i...dit_LOsservatore_Romano_CNA_4_2_16.jpgVatican City, May 20, 2016 / 04:09 pm (CNA/EWTN News).- Pope Francis issued a binding clarification of a question regarding Canon Law and the establishment of new diocesan Institutes of Consecrated Life on Friday.
Specifically, the Holy Father confirmed that a local Ordinary (diocesan bishop) who wishes to establish a new Institute of Consecrated Life within his own diocese under his own authority must first consult with the Holy See before deciding to establish the new Institute.
The Secretary of the Pontifical Council for Legislative Texts, Bishop Juan Ignacio Arrieta, told Vatican Radio that the local bishop does not have to obtain permission, per se, but must at least consult with and hear from the Congregation for Institutes of Consecrated Life and Societies of Apostolic Life before proceeding.
“The bishop is always responsible in his diocese – but he has to evaluate the answer, the opinion, of the Congregation,” Bishop Arrieta told Vatican radio.
“After (hearing) the opinion of the Congregation, he remains free to act in one sense or in the other; but he has to balance, to think about, the opinion…of the Congregation, and that is important – very important – even in diocesan governance.”
The initial inquiry came from the Congregation for Consecrated Life, and was issued to the Holy Father through the Secretary of State of the Holy See, Cardinal Pietro Parolin, and asked Pope Francis to clarify the meaning of Canon 579 of the Code of Canon Law
The clarification by the Holy Father was issued by way of Papal Rescript, which is an official written answer by the Roman Pontiff to a formal petition regarding the interpretation or administration of Roman canon law and any associated law directly subject to it.
A Papal Rescript is technically equivalent to the highest form of “Judicial Appeal” in the Western Roman legal system, according to Canon 6555.
feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/catholicnewsagency/dailynews?d=yIl2AUoC8zA
http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/catholicnewsagency/dailynews/~4/ONHZKerfl18
Full article…
Specifically, the Holy Father confirmed that a local Ordinary (diocesan bishop) who wishes to establish a new Institute of Consecrated Life within his own diocese under his own authority must first consult with the Holy See before deciding to establish the new Institute.
The Secretary of the Pontifical Council for Legislative Texts, Bishop Juan Ignacio Arrieta, told Vatican Radio that the local bishop does not have to obtain permission, per se, but must at least consult with and hear from the Congregation for Institutes of Consecrated Life and Societies of Apostolic Life before proceeding.
“The bishop is always responsible in his diocese – but he has to evaluate the answer, the opinion, of the Congregation,” Bishop Arrieta told Vatican radio.
“After (hearing) the opinion of the Congregation, he remains free to act in one sense or in the other; but he has to balance, to think about, the opinion…of the Congregation, and that is important – very important – even in diocesan governance.”
The initial inquiry came from the Congregation for Consecrated Life, and was issued to the Holy Father through the Secretary of State of the Holy See, Cardinal Pietro Parolin, and asked Pope Francis to clarify the meaning of Canon 579 of the Code of Canon Law
The clarification by the Holy Father was issued by way of Papal Rescript, which is an official written answer by the Roman Pontiff to a formal petition regarding the interpretation or administration of Roman canon law and any associated law directly subject to it.
A Papal Rescript is technically equivalent to the highest form of “Judicial Appeal” in the Western Roman legal system, according to Canon 6555.
feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/catholicnewsagency/dailynews?d=yIl2AUoC8zA
http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/catholicnewsagency/dailynews/~4/ONHZKerfl18
Full article…
P
pnewton
Guest
This makes sense. Anyway, such memos are outside my grade, so I trust the bosses to figure out what they need.
Just a note about the current lack of religious though, fewer religious actually increases the need for coordination, not eliminate it. When you are down to five loaves and two fish, the hand of Jesus is needed to divide it up.
G
graciew
Guest
Could you tell me the difference between institutes and orders if there is? Thanks.
Cloisters
Well-known member
Today, “order” is used to cover the spectrum of religious communities, despite what their actual standing may be. This is similar to using “nun” for all women religious, despite the fact that “nun” is cloistered with solemn vows, and “sister” is uncloistered with simple vows.
Solemn vows are the “deepest” for lack of a better word. Someone who leaves solemn vows usually receives a letter from the Vatican saying “as far as I am able to” they are released from their vows. If they enter another religious community, they are to be given the “black veil” or whatever the symbol is for perpetual profession after an orientation novitiate.
Those who have left simple vows in a pontifical institute receive the same treatment when they go to another community.
“Order”, in its proper use, belongs to the great Orders like the Dominicans, Franciscans, etc. There came a time in the history of the church when the pope said, “No more Orders!” So founders were forced to use other names, like institute or congregation.
I personally am still learning the difference between congregation and institute.
In the Guidelines, there is a chart outlining the differences between religious institute; secular institute; and society of apostolic life. All three have the evangelical counsels in some form. A society of apostolic life is a step up from private lay association of the faithful, and requires less oversight from the local bishop. Religious and Secular institutes require more oversight, with religious institutes requiring the most.
One has to keep in mind that it all boils down to the form of commitment being made by the members.
HTH
Blessings,
Cloisters
Cloisters
Well-known member
I was needing to clarify a point I made. Even if Rome says no, the bishop can still grant recognition.
I know of a charism that didn’t get past their priest and nun founders (both deceased)because they refused to go online in any way. They did have Rome’s encouragement, though, despite there being a couple of objections from the Congregation, none of which were clarified. They used the 1945 Latin Mass. They wanted only virgins, no “married” women or post-abortive women. The only women they attracted were divorcees with children who wanted to repaint the kitchen.
There have been some really strange new communities to come about, not the least of which was the Order & Mandate of St. Michael the Archangel, which was found to be a cult. I think Rome is wanting the bishops to take a closer look at what they’re approving, and send it to the Congregation for a second opinion. That’s just responsible governing. I know when my own communities get to that point, I will want the Congregation to put the information to scrutiny to make sure everything is in line with scripture and canon law.
Blessings,
Cloisters
I know of a charism that didn’t get past their priest and nun founders (both deceased)because they refused to go online in any way. They did have Rome’s encouragement, though, despite there being a couple of objections from the Congregation, none of which were clarified. They used the 1945 Latin Mass. They wanted only virgins, no “married” women or post-abortive women. The only women they attracted were divorcees with children who wanted to repaint the kitchen.
There have been some really strange new communities to come about, not the least of which was the Order & Mandate of St. Michael the Archangel, which was found to be a cult. I think Rome is wanting the bishops to take a closer look at what they’re approving, and send it to the Congregation for a second opinion. That’s just responsible governing. I know when my own communities get to that point, I will want the Congregation to put the information to scrutiny to make sure everything is in line with scripture and canon law.
Blessings,
Cloisters
G
graciew
Guest
Thanks so much,Cloisters!!
Have a great weekend!
Have a great weekend!
R
RPRPsych
Guest
Enter the conspiracy theorists! 
rorate-caeli.blogspot.com/2016/05/no-collegiality-here-text-of-new.html#more
Really, they’re becoming more predictable than a Dan Brown novel these days.
rorate-caeli.blogspot.com/2016/05/no-collegiality-here-text-of-new.html#more
Really, they’re becoming more predictable than a Dan Brown novel these days.
- Status