More Carmelite Monasteries closing

[JHFamily]

I'm kind of surprised that no one has pointed out that while some Carmels are closing, others have been forced to make new foundations. The one in Valparaiso is the one that would come most readily to mind.  Since 2009, they have made foundations in Elysburg, Philadelphia, Post Falls, and Australia (they had sisters from Australia). Elysburg has since made a foundation in Fairfield, and all six of the Carmels are still thriving and attracting young women. They are careful to have a mix of ages, which have left a wide range of ages in Valparaiso and Elysburg.

The story of Philadelphia is one that I hope to see reiterated many times.  They were down to three members and asked Elysburg to "refound" their Carmel, which they did with the help of some sisters from Valparaiso.  Now, they are a healthy community again. 

Don't ask me with I think of Cor Orans. It wouldn't be pretty...

[Graciela]

I wonder whether the fact that a number of monasteries with low numbers are closing  underlines that there was an actual problem that needed to be addressed and which Cor Orans was an attempt to solve.  There have been mergers: New Caney TX Carmel closed and the nuns joined the San Antonio Carmel; or the Valley Center, Kansas monastery closed and the nuns moved to join Brooklyn Carmel.   

JHFamily is circumspect in not commenting on Cor Orans. But I am going to be bold and say that even though I think there was legit reason for concern about some older monasteries with very few aged nuns, I am dubious its application.

For example, the Adoration sisters in Belfast had three or four women in first vows plus at least one novice- enough to re-establish adequate numbers- and yet the Vatican would not let them move to final vows because the community was too small. Basically means that that community will be gone, and there was no place for the women in formation to go except return to lay life.  I thought it was sad and really unjust to those women, especially those who had made first vows.

Also, I find it strange that contemplative women must have  a minimum 9 years of formation before final vows but contemplative men  (like Trappists, Benedictines) only need a minimum of 4.5 years.   

 

[Anastasia]

6 hours ago, JHFamily said:

I'm kind of surprised that no one has pointed out that while some Carmels are closing, others have been forced to make new foundations.

I did not know about some Carmels being forced to make new foundations. 

1 hour ago, Graciela said:

For example, the Adoration sisters in Belfast had three or four women in first vows plus at least one novice- enough to re-establish adequate numbers- and yet the Vatican would not let them move to final vows because the community was too small. Basically means that that community will be gone, and there was no place for the women in formation to go except return to lay life.

This is quite revealing. For all the history of the Church monasteries have grown exactly like this: someone went in to the desert, others joined. Any community would start from one or two persons. It means we are seeing the suppression of a natural, organic process.

And, being combined with the facts of forcing other Carmels to make foundations to me it looks like the whole issue is very much about control: to suppress what is already there and to establish from the scratch. The monasteries (both in the Roman Catholic and Eastern Orthodox Churches) always have been independent and that was necessary for their way of a life. One needs to be inside that life (one way or another) to really "get it". 

Some nuns whose statements I have read say plainly it is about a centralized control. Many of the do not like the idea of federation as well and they explain why. 

2 hours ago, Graciela said:

Also, I find it strange that contemplative women must have  a minimum 9 years of formation before final vows but contemplative men  (like Trappists, Benedictines) only need a minimum of 4.5 years.   

Yes, the nuns whose opinions I know were very stunned with that; in fact the German nun (see the link in my first message) was very articulate about that. I heard from some friar a couple of years ago though that the male contemplatives will have the same number or the years... yet it appears not to be a case yet (?)

[Anastasia]

I thought to expand, not so much on Cor Orans (because the nuns spoke about it better than I can) but on how the monasteries happened. Probably all is said in the expression “monasteries happened”. Take Carmel for example, the first hermits lived on the mount Carmel, then they asked Jerusalem Patriarch Albert to write for them their rule. The Carmelite Rule is truly remarkable: it is very short (about two pages), very simple but very deep as well. If you read it you will see that the Carmelite Rule is the exact opposite of any bureaucracy or autocracy. St Albert simply outlined the way of a life of the hermits as they already did live plus added some Scripture-rooted considerations. It is very broad, as if someone outlined a path in general, leaving the details to those who travel. It is truly a great Rule and I would advice any Christian to read it.

And then later Carmelites came to Europe the relaxed too much hence St Teresa and St John did the reform returning to that very simple Rule. As far as I recall ‘The Foundations’ of St Teresa of Avila, all Carmel’s enjoyed autonomy. I cannot imagine St Teresa putting them into “a federation” ordered from above precisely because any change or any initiative, to be productive for contemplatives must come from the contemplatives themselves! St Teresa did her reform not out of blue but because she herself, being a contemplative, was ordered to do so for Christ. She had only one consideration: to put her nuns in the conditions the most productive for a prayer.

To give an analogy: I am an iconographer. If a non-iconographer approaches me and suggests that I, instead of my normal spiritual practice have been prescribed to all iconographers for centuries, “orders” me to drop it and do something “modern” I would disregard that because obviously it is nonsense which is coming from the lack of knowledge. If I follow his “order” I will lose the ability to paint properly. This is how I see the problem when non-contemplatives, non-monastics order something to contemplatives and monastics.

I read that some Cardinal was lecturing Carmelite nuns re: 'Cor Orans' saying that their ways were "outdated". My question is, if the sole purpose of a Carmelite is the union with Christ and Christ is eternal how then the ways of Carmel which lead to that eternal purpose can be "outdated"? Clearly that Cardinal just "does not get it".

Here is the Carmelite Rule

Edited December 1, 2020 by Anastasia

[cruciatacara]

53 minutes ago, Anastasia said:

I thought to expand, not so much on Cor Orans (because the nuns spoke about it better than I can) but on how the monasteries happened. Probably all is said in the expression “monasteries happened”. Take Carmel for example, the first hermits lived on the mount Carmel, then they asked Jerusalem Patriarch Albert to write for them their rule. The Carmelite Rule is truly remarkable: it is very short (about two pages), very simple but very deep as well. If you read it you will see that the Carmelite Rule is the exact opposite of any bureaucracy or autocracy. St Albert simply outlined the way of a life of the hermits as they already did live plus added some Scripture-rooted considerations. It is very broad, as if someone outlined a path in general, leaving the details to those who travel. It is truly a great Rule and I would advice any Christian to read it.

And then later Carmelites came to Europe the relaxed too much hence St Teresa and St John did the reform returning to that very simple Rule. As far as I recall ‘The Foundations’ of St Teresa of Avila, all Carmel’s enjoyed autonomy. I cannot imagine St Teresa putting them into “a federation” ordered from above precisely because any change or any initiative, to be productive for contemplatives must come from the contemplatives themselves! St Teresa did her reform not out of blue but because she herself, being a contemplative, was ordered to do so for Christ. She had only one consideration: to put her nuns in the conditions the most productive for a prayer.

To give an analogy: I am an iconographer. If a non-iconographer approaches me and suggests that I, instead of my normal spiritual practice have been prescribed to all iconographers for centuries, “orders” me to drop it and do something “modern” I would disregard that because obviously it is nonsense which is coming from the lack of knowledge. If I follow his “order” I will lose the ability to paint properly. This is how I see the problem when non-contemplatives, non-monastics order something to contemplatives and monastics.

I read that some Cardinal was lecturing Carmelite nuns re: 'Cor Orans' saying that their ways were "outdated". My question is, if the sole purpose of a Carmelite is the union with Christ and Christ is eternal how then the ways of Carmel which lead to that eternal purpose can be "outdated"? Clearly that Cardinal just "does not get it".

Here is the Carmelite Rule

 

It's not that I think you are wrong in what you say, but I think your comments lack the fullness of context. The Carmelite Rule is not outdated but many of the cultural traditions practised by some monasteries are very outdated. The Rule is particularly vague about how to actually achieve a lot of the things that it states, so that is left up to each community to carry out as they see fit. Over the 400+ years since St Teresa's reformation, some practices just don't make sense today, or they are inconsistent with other practices that have been allowed to change. Case in point, my friend (who has lived in several Carmelite communities) told me that at one place they had to carry the large floor rugs outside and 6 nuns would hold the heavy carpet upside down and shake it to clean it. Most of the nuns were middle aged to elderly and this was a heavy strain on them, so she asked why they didn't just use a vacuum cleaner and was told that qa vacuum was 'not the Carmelite way'. And yet at another equally traditional Carmelite community, they would use a vacuum cleaner and explained its use as being no different than using electric lights or fax machines etc. because after all, St Teresa was practical and would have used these if they had been around in her day. Same Order, different communities.

I think perhaps some of the communities over the years failed to understand that not everything St Teresa did in her day is necessary today in order to come closer to Jesus. Beating rugs by hand is just one small example. My friend told me that it always amazed her that one of the most important sentences in the Carmelite Rule is  to remember that 'common sense is the guide to the virtues' when she saw very little actual common sense being applied in many of the communities. That being said, she told me she always felt that she was a 'Carmelite in her heart' but that simply meant to her that contemplation was where she found Jesus. 

A little correction now and again is obviously not a bad thing. That's why St Teresa had to reform the O Carms after all. Nothing on earth is perfect or doesn't need correction at some time or another.

 

And just to add a little support for the Federations and other associations, I think total isolation is what leads to lack of common sense, not being able to see other communities doing something that is working perfectly well for them. Associations allows the communities to share ideas and to take stock of their own practices, to re-evaluate things. I think St Teresa would have really liked the Federations. After all, she was constantly traveling to the different communities to make sure they were all on track. She isn't around today, but associations can help the communities to help each other.

[Anastasia]

Your example with a vacuum cleaner is good (and again I have the analogy - I occasionally use the synthetic varnish for my icon when I judge it works better than " a natural") yet note that it was another Carmelite nun who used a vacuum cleaner, not some Cardinal.

35 minutes ago, cruciatacara said:

The Carmelite Rule is not outdated but many of the cultural traditions practised by some monasteries are very outdated.

Perhaps they are  "outdated" but as long as they derive some spiritual good from their "outdated" traditions those traditions work. If a nun derives some good from cleaning not with a vacuum cleaner but with a more primitive device - why not? My point is that only the nuns themselves can decide what is truly outdated and what is not.

Again, from own example: I was told by some "modernists" that I waste my time grinding the pigments and making my own paints. Those people thought I was mindlessly sticking to the tradition and were oblivious to the fact that gridding my own pigment allowed me to control the appearance of crystals in the layer of paint (that in turn causes the play of light impossible to achieve using ready made paints). At the same time, non-iconographers "traditionalists" would tell me off for the usage of galvanized steel as a board (instead of traditional wood) but they did not understand that I did it because the icon would be in damp conditions so the traditional board would warp.

Again, only I who have knowledge of why I do this (and knowing also the fruits my practice brings) can decide what to do. Same withy cloistered nuns.

Spiritual practice is a living thing. It changes very slowly and naturally. It is very easy to kill it by the order "above".

35 minutes ago, cruciatacara said:

I think St Teresa would have really liked the Federations. After all, she was constantly traveling to the different communities to make sure they were all on track. She isn't around today, but associations can help the communities to help each other.

Again, the same point: if there was a need in Federations Carmelites would come up with that idea themselves. Please do not forget that St Teresa, the reformer of Carmelites was one of them and her reforms were based on the return to the initial practice inspired by Our Lord Himself. Other reformers of the Order were also Carmelites. 

Edited December 1, 2020 by Anastasia

[Anastasia]

Besides, I think it would not cause a harm if a cardinal said "your practices of cleaning are outdated, get vacuum cleaners!" But the problem is that 'Cor Orans' addressed not cleaning but far deeper things, the very basis of the monastic life.

[Guest]

2 hours ago, Anastasia said:

It is truly a great Rule and I would advice any Christian to read it.

   (i.e. Rule of St Albert) 

39 minutes ago, Anastasia said:

Spiritual practice is a living thing. It changes very slowly and naturally

 

 

Quote

Rule of St Albert: "Common sense is the guide of the virtues" (first quoted by Anastasia)

 It is important, I think, because no religious rule is an end in itself.  The Rule serves a higher purpose.

[cruciatacara]

3 hours ago, Anastasia said:

Your example with a vacuum cleaner is good (and again I have the analogy - I occasionally use the synthetic varnish for my icon when I judge it works better than " a natural") yet note that it was another Carmelite nun who used a vacuum cleaner, not some Cardinal.

Perhaps they are  "outdated" but as long as they derive some spiritual good from their "outdated" traditions those traditions work. If a nun derives some good from cleaning not with a vacuum cleaner but with a more primitive device - why not? My point is that only the nuns themselves can decide what is truly outdated and what is not.

Again, from own example: I was told by some "modernists" that I waste my time grinding the pigments and making my own paints. Those people thought I was mindlessly sticking to the tradition and were oblivious to the fact that gridding my own pigment allowed me to control the appearance of crystals in the layer of paint (that in turn causes the play of light impossible to achieve using ready made paints). At the same time, non-iconographers "traditionalists" would tell me off for the usage of galvanized steel as a board (instead of traditional wood) but they did not understand that I did it because the icon would be in damp conditions so the traditional board would warp.

Again, only I who have knowledge of why I do this (and knowing also the fruits my practice brings) can decide what to do. Same withy cloistered nuns.

Spiritual practice is a living thing. It changes very slowly and naturally. It is very easy to kill it by the order "above".

Again, the same point: if there was a need in Federations Carmelites would come up with that idea themselves. Please do not forget that St Teresa, the reformer of Carmelites was one of them and her reforms were based on the return to the initial practice inspired by Our Lord Himself. Other reformers of the Order were also Carmelites. 

Even St Teresa put herself under obedience to a priest (her spiritual director), and if her Cardinal or the Pope had given her a directive, she would probably at least have given it a try first rather than arrogantly assume she knew the right way to do everything.

What I tried to say is that the nuns don't always make the decisions for themselves anyway - there is a hierarchy within the community and if the Prioress had this idea that 'the Carmelite way' is one thing while a Prioress in another community thinks it is another, then sharing this kind of info could be helpful to each other. Many of the communities are very happy about associations, even without a directive from 'above'. And some of them would be the first to admit that they don't have all the answers.

Sometimes someone from 'outside' a community might be in a better position to see things before they become a problem. Too much control within the monastery can lead to cult-like institutions. The yearly Visitations can't always pick up problems either because nuns are 'afraid' to speak up in case their words get back to the Prioress. I have heard all of these things from someone who was a nun, but I can't speak from personal experience, as a male and non-religious, so you could discount what I say, but I trust the things I was told. So to me, nothing wrong with a little oversight. It might not be applicable for your particular occupation, but in a community situation, I can see how valuable it could be.

[Anastasia]

St Teresa indeed put her personal spiritual life under the obedience of her confessors; it is a necessary condition for a good spiritual life. In fact one of her confessors, St John of the Cross, criticized her for too much obedience she had for her latest confessor (who was quite young) who was also a Carmelite. I did not say St Teresa was not obedient to those she chose to guide her. Note though that she chose them; she was looking for the learnt and/or spiritually very experienced people (like St Peter of Alkantara). 

She also had superiors of the same Order so of course she listened to them – she had to. I did not say she did not (although one may argue she was disobedient to her first prioress when the Lord directed her to establish her first reformed monastery).

You seem to misinterpret the point I have been making as clearly as I could: that problem is with the new rules which significantly change the life of monastics when they come from those who do not know their life from inside (who are not monastics (contemplatives)).

I do not recall in the history of the Carmelite Order when the rule was given to them from outside. When there were reforms many times in the history the Carmelite reformers would write the rules/constitutions and get the approval of the Pope. I do not recall the Pope suddenly doing that for them. St Teresa would ask various people including Spanish King to assist her in her reform.

44 minutes ago, cruciatacara said:

The yearly Visitations can't always pick up problems either because nuns are 'afraid' to speak up in case their words get back to the Prioress. I have heard all of these things from someone who was a nun, but I can't speak from personal experience, as a male and non-religious, so you could discount what I say, but I trust the things I was told. So to me, nothing wrong with a little oversight.

I am not going to discount what you said; I also know about those problems in some cloisters so they have to be addressed in some way - and better if they are addressed by those who are contemplatives themselves expanding already existent rules. The better overseeing for instance could be done within the Order. I would like to point out though that those problems of too much isolation etc. in some places cannot explain other major changes Cor Orans mandates, like the changed of the time of formation and the minimum number of professed nuns etc. from which this thread began. 

Edited December 1, 2020 by Anastasia

[Anastasia]

To sum up: do I think that the problems which inevitably arise in the monastic life should be addressed? Yes, absolutely. Yet, at the same time I firmly believe it must be done in a way that does not compromise the monastic life tending towards its goal, a union with Christ. Because only those who know that monastic life from inside and struggle towards that ultimate goal can know what is helpful and what is not it is them who must initiate and make necessary changes.

[rosamundi]

15 hours ago, Anastasia said:

And, being combined with the facts of forcing other Carmels to make foundations to me it looks like the whole issue is very much about control:

the Carmelite Rule specifies a maximum number of nuns in a monastery. The Valparaiso Carmel and its daughter houses are experiencing such numbers of vocations that they rapidly get too big according to the rule, so "forced" here means "having to make new foundations because the existing Carmel is too big per the Carmelite Rule", not in the sense of the Archbishop or whoever ordering the nuns to make another foundation whether they want to or not.

Edited December 1, 2020 by rosamundi
typo - Rue instead of rule

[Sponsa-Christi]

Re. Cor Orans...granted, if the Pope had personally commissioned me to write it, I might not have come to all the same conclusions as the drafters of this document did. E.g., nine years does seem kind of long for initial formation.*

*(Although even here, one of those years is spent as an "aspirant," and I assume a woman could be considered an aspirant from the time of her very first contact with the monastery as a discerner, so practically it might only be eight years of post-entrance formation.)

Still, reading it as a canon lawyer, nothing in the document seemed truly outrageous to me. My impression is that Rome had been seeing problems in cloistered communities that followed certain long-standing patterns, and they were doing their level best to try to address these problematic patterns. Sometimes, issues get to the point where there is no perfect solution or pain-free option. 

[Anastasia]

8 hours ago, rosamundi said:

The Valparaiso Carmel and its daughter houses are experiencing such numbers of vocations that they rapidly get too big according to the rule, so "forced" here means "having to make new foundations because the existing Carmel is too big per the Carmelite Rule", not in the sense of the Archbishop or whoever ordering the nuns to make another foundation whether they want to or not.

Thank you for a clarification.

Edited December 1, 2020 by Anastasia

[graciandelamadrededios]

On 12/1/2020 at 8:52 AM, rosamundi said:

the Carmelite Rule specifies a maximum number of nuns in a monastery. The Valparaiso Carmel and its daughter houses are experiencing such numbers of vocations that they rapidly get too big according to the rule, so "forced" here means "having to make new foundations because the existing Carmel is too big per the Carmelite Rule", not in the sense of the Archbishop or whoever ordering the nuns to make another foundation whether they want to or not.

The Carmelite Rule does not specify the number of nuns in the monastery but the Constitutions written by St. Teresa does.

[rosamundi]

1 hour ago, graciandelamadrededios said:

The Carmelite Rule does not specify the number of nuns in the monastery but the Constitutions written by St. Teresa does.

Thank you for the correction.

[graciandelamadrededios]

10 minutes ago, rosamundi said:

Thank you for the correction.

You're welcome!

The Constitution stipulates that maximum number of Nuns in a monastery is 21.  However, these numbers can be increased in the event that a future foundation is being planned hence more postulants can be admitted.  I will have to check my copy if 21 will include the extern sisters or excluding the extern sisters.

[Guest]

If a Carmelite Monastery for example closes, I don't think that any remaining nuns are then out of monastic life.  I think, they can always transfer to another Carmelite community?  That would be difficult especially for nuns many years in a particular community. 

I do know of one Carmelite community where an elder nun has had to go and live in a nursing home (same community professed over 50 years).  Her care needs were too complex for her fellow sisters. It was a real jolt for her and she embraced her (psychological?) cross in the Carmelite spirit.  Now some years down the line she is happy and at Peace in that home. I do think that probably it was a very difficult transition time for her, although one would never have guessed it from her demeanor.  I don't think that applies in every case where some necessity means a nun or nuns are transferred elsewhere for some reason.  The cross to some degree or other is intrinsic to all the vocations, I would think, in Holy Orders, consecrated and laity?  One can never know when the cross might become a very heavy burden indeed.  While not waiting for it!  

Apologies if the above subjects have already been covered.

 

 

[graciandelamadrededios]

RULE

AND

CONSTITUTIONS

of the Discalced Nuns of the

Order of the Blessed Virgin Mary

of Mount Carmel

adapted according to the Directives

of the Second Vatican Council

and the Canonical Norns in force

and approved by the Apostolic See

in the Year 1991

 

Part I – THE DISCALCED CARMELITE

NUNS’ VOCATION IN THE CHURCH

 

 

Chapter 5

 

COMMUNITY LIFE

 

Single category of nuns

and their number

 

91.       So that the Teresian community may keep its character as a little “College of Christ” and not lose the aspect that Holy Mother wished for it, no monastery will have more than twenty-one sisters.

 

 

Part III – THE ORGANIZATION AND GOVERNMENT

OF THE MONASTERIES

 

 

Chapter 1

 

THE CANONICAL STATUS OF THE MONASTERIES

AND THEIR ERECTION AND SUPPRESSION

 

The erection and suppression

of monasteries

 

 

205.    The monastery or monasteries which undertake a new foundation must have a sufficient number of nuns to provide for the new house without undermining their own strength and compromising their future.

            In order to proceed to erect a new monastery, there must be at least eight religious, not counting the postulants and extern sisters, of whom six must be chapter sisters.  They must have freely accepted the transfer to the new monastery and must be endowed with appropriate spiritual qualities and sufficiently prepared for the environmental and cultural conditions of the new foundation.

[Chiquitunga]

On 11/25/2020 at 5:54 PM, Graciela said:

Loughrea, Galway, Ireland Carmel (closing after 340 years!)  https://www.irishcatholic.com/deep-sorrow-as-carmelite-convent-closes-after-340-years/ 

This one is particularly sad for me to see! I had a lovely visit there some years ago. The Discalced Carmelite Friars have a really beautiful old church & friary across the road as well. I wonder what they will do with the monastery! The Friars in San Jose, CA originally came from Loughrea. 

I haven’t visited PM for a while! I feel funny to post about my life so much publicly, but in short a Carmel accepted me, and if and when all obstacles are removed, I can go. But happy just to be at daily Mass for now. Who knows what life will bring! Just happy to live in God’s grace!

Graciela, remember that one thread years ago where we were listing for fun which Carmels we visited in different cities, like for Mass or a quick visit? That was fun! Carmel is special. I hope you are doing well! I was very happy to see your name here as well as all other old PMers, and new ones too ! I want to add a blush emoji but forget how. Ah and the old nun emojis here! Loved those! Or like 10 plus years ago, weren’t we calling them emoticons? *blush*