I commented months ago on the Pillar's coverage of this crazy story and asked why the wider Carmelite community across the USA had apparently not been invited to help sort out this mess.
On the basic Catholic principle of subsidiary , if a local community cannot help itself out of trouble, the Regional and then the National Superiors of that Order should lovingly intervene ASAP. They are the ones who, in theory, should best understand the charism of their Order. The Bishop should stand back.... Unless no one else intervenes.
But sadly things have spun so badly out of control that any outcome will probably reflect badly on the wider Church and likely damage vocations. The Pillar have done an amazing job of stuffing as many bizarre accusations as imaginable into one story.
Carmelite monasteries are autonomous by their very nature. While Francis has done some things to federate them -- and that comes into play in this story -- this is not like a rogue house of Franciscans, which belongs to a province and then an order. Monasteries of Carmelite nuns talk to each other, but there isn't (or hasn't been until Francis' changes) a hierarchy in the way that's true of many other religious.
My point about subsidiary still applies. The first intervention should come from fellow Carmelites who understand the spirituality of their order. Just as you would hope that siblings would be the first to notice and help a brother with a drink problem. A monastery may be autononomous to some extent, but it is not freelance.
I refer to my reply to Bridget below on the legal oddity of Arlington. Seemingly you can have two "Carmelite" monasteries in the same State with different Constitutions and different authority structures above them. Not being a canon lawyer, this possibility had never occurred to me. No wonder that the other Carmelites, operatoring under the Semi-Province of St Terese, seem to have been reluctant to offer fraternal assistance to a monastery for which they had no judicial responsibility.
> the Regional and then the National Superiors of that Order should lovingly intervene ASAP.
That's not how it works for the type of constitutions this specific monastery has. It's necessary not only to understand the charism of the Order but also the mechanics of the rule. In any case you can see that they (the Arlington Carmel) would have and currently do reject any attempt at visitation.
> any outcome will probably reflect badly on the wider Church and likely damage vocations.
Women who are called to the Carmel in Fairfield will not care what rebels in Texas are doing (except to the extent that we all need to pray for them because it's very sad.)
Unfortunately it is a very obvious question for anyone called to a Carmelite vocation anywhere. What happens if the apparently very holy Superior of the convent I am entering goes off the rails at some later date?
Thanks for pointing out the oddity of the Arlington situation. After more digging, I think I may understand it better.
The Carmelites in Arlington may be autonomous to a limited extent, but they are plainly cannot be free floating. The following article explains why, for complex historical reasons, they are under the authority of the local bishop....but their immediate superior is the Dicastery for Institutes of Consecrated Life and Societies of Apostolic Life in Rome. This looks like the worst of all possible worlds. The Bishop is not a Carmelite and probably has limited knowledge of what goes on in a monastery and the Dicastery is 5,000 miles away.
Another community of Discalced Carmelite Nuns in Texas are under the authority of the Semi-Province of St Terese. And that is part of the Province of St Terese. And the Provincial is Father Luis Joaquin Castenada. So two "Carmelite" monasteries in the same state have two different authority structures.
None of these "Provincial" structures seem to have been mentioned in the various reports, probably as they have no judicial authority over the Arlington community. What is meant by "authority"? I am guessing that Father Luis or a subordinate would, as an extreme measure, have power to take over a badly disordered monastery and close or reform it. But, unsurprisingly, no one in the Province seems to have wanted to get involved in this unholy Arlington mess for which they have no responsibility.
This stuff is making my head explode as I am not a lawyer. It is just, as a lifelong Catholic in a massively hierarchical religion, it used to be obvious that everyone, except the Holy Father, was answerable to someone for gross misbehaviour. Even if it was agony on stilts to boot him or her . Even Uncle Ted McCarrick eventually got booted.
As others have said, there are no regional or national superiors when it comes to Carmelite nuns. That being said, I completely agree that a respected Carmelite figure (or several) should have been called in at the very beginning of this fiasco to mediate between the nuns and the bishop. However, Olsen decided that, instead of stepping back and allowing such a mediation to take place, the thing to do was to phone Rome and get himself put in charge of the whole thing, which just escalated things into a death spiral.
It's like someone wrote a Catholic mad-lib on a cursed piece of paper and it came to life Jumanji-style.
I commented months ago on the Pillar's coverage of this crazy story and asked why the wider Carmelite community across the USA had apparently not been invited to help sort out this mess.
On the basic Catholic principle of subsidiary , if a local community cannot help itself out of trouble, the Regional and then the National Superiors of that Order should lovingly intervene ASAP. They are the ones who, in theory, should best understand the charism of their Order. The Bishop should stand back.... Unless no one else intervenes.
But sadly things have spun so badly out of control that any outcome will probably reflect badly on the wider Church and likely damage vocations. The Pillar have done an amazing job of stuffing as many bizarre accusations as imaginable into one story.
Carmelite monasteries are autonomous by their very nature. While Francis has done some things to federate them -- and that comes into play in this story -- this is not like a rogue house of Franciscans, which belongs to a province and then an order. Monasteries of Carmelite nuns talk to each other, but there isn't (or hasn't been until Francis' changes) a hierarchy in the way that's true of many other religious.
My point about subsidiary still applies. The first intervention should come from fellow Carmelites who understand the spirituality of their order. Just as you would hope that siblings would be the first to notice and help a brother with a drink problem. A monastery may be autononomous to some extent, but it is not freelance.
sure. I was just providing some context, but i think your assessment is correct.
I refer to my reply to Bridget below on the legal oddity of Arlington. Seemingly you can have two "Carmelite" monasteries in the same State with different Constitutions and different authority structures above them. Not being a canon lawyer, this possibility had never occurred to me. No wonder that the other Carmelites, operatoring under the Semi-Province of St Terese, seem to have been reluctant to offer fraternal assistance to a monastery for which they had no judicial responsibility.
> the Regional and then the National Superiors of that Order should lovingly intervene ASAP.
That's not how it works for the type of constitutions this specific monastery has. It's necessary not only to understand the charism of the Order but also the mechanics of the rule. In any case you can see that they (the Arlington Carmel) would have and currently do reject any attempt at visitation.
> any outcome will probably reflect badly on the wider Church and likely damage vocations.
Women who are called to the Carmel in Fairfield will not care what rebels in Texas are doing (except to the extent that we all need to pray for them because it's very sad.)
Unfortunately it is a very obvious question for anyone called to a Carmelite vocation anywhere. What happens if the apparently very holy Superior of the convent I am entering goes off the rails at some later date?
Then don't re-elect her (she is not elected for life). In this case it seems that everyone has gone off the rails together.
Thanks for pointing out the oddity of the Arlington situation. After more digging, I think I may understand it better.
The Carmelites in Arlington may be autonomous to a limited extent, but they are plainly cannot be free floating. The following article explains why, for complex historical reasons, they are under the authority of the local bishop....but their immediate superior is the Dicastery for Institutes of Consecrated Life and Societies of Apostolic Life in Rome. This looks like the worst of all possible worlds. The Bishop is not a Carmelite and probably has limited knowledge of what goes on in a monastery and the Dicastery is 5,000 miles away.
https://wherepeteris.com/the-canonical-background-of-the-situation-of-the-arlington-carmel/
Another community of Discalced Carmelite Nuns in Texas are under the authority of the Semi-Province of St Terese. And that is part of the Province of St Terese. And the Provincial is Father Luis Joaquin Castenada. So two "Carmelite" monasteries in the same state have two different authority structures.
None of these "Provincial" structures seem to have been mentioned in the various reports, probably as they have no judicial authority over the Arlington community. What is meant by "authority"? I am guessing that Father Luis or a subordinate would, as an extreme measure, have power to take over a badly disordered monastery and close or reform it. But, unsurprisingly, no one in the Province seems to have wanted to get involved in this unholy Arlington mess for which they have no responsibility.
This stuff is making my head explode as I am not a lawyer. It is just, as a lifelong Catholic in a massively hierarchical religion, it used to be obvious that everyone, except the Holy Father, was answerable to someone for gross misbehaviour. Even if it was agony on stilts to boot him or her . Even Uncle Ted McCarrick eventually got booted.
As others have said, there are no regional or national superiors when it comes to Carmelite nuns. That being said, I completely agree that a respected Carmelite figure (or several) should have been called in at the very beginning of this fiasco to mediate between the nuns and the bishop. However, Olsen decided that, instead of stepping back and allowing such a mediation to take place, the thing to do was to phone Rome and get himself put in charge of the whole thing, which just escalated things into a death spiral.