F.A.Q.
Frequently Asked Questions
A: Dear Julie, There is absolutely no movement whatsoever toward making the OCDS independent from the Friars. As number 41 of our Constitutions states quite emphatically: “The Secular Order is juridically dependent on the Discalced Carmelite Friars.” The footnote to that comes from the code of canon law. If there has been any movement at all from the old OCDS Rule of Life to the new Constitutions, it is precisely in the opposite direction. The new constitutions put into law what was only presumed in the old Rule of Life. That the OCDS was under the friars. This number was put into the constitutions precisely because many of our Secular Carmelites had drifted away from the friars in areas of the world where none of the friars were available to minister to them. Also many were taking direction from our nuns, who with the best of intentions, were not always careful to keep the friars informed. Now to the other half of your area of concern.
The question of self-government should not be seen as synonymous with independence from the Friars. It should rather be viewed as part and parcel of the same package. Seculars should govern themselves within the framework of the Constitutions approved by the Holy See and provincial Statutes approved by the Friars. This is nothing new. The trend toward self government began when the old OCDS Rule of Life was approved back in 1979 where the Spiritual “Director’s” role was changed to that of an “Assistant.” He was “normally a priest of the Order”, but had no right to vote in the local council. [article 21] That article went on to state that the Assistant was “the Order’s representative” to the local community.
Now the trend toward self-government increased in the 2003 Constitutions, where the Assistant’s powers and authority over the local canonical community were further reduced. Not only was he not expected to preside over the council meeting as was not expected in the old rule either, but now the council did not even need to invite him to attend their meetings. As number 44 states: “He may attend without right to vote,” and “the council may consult him.” But the local council made up exclusively of Seculars has ultimate authority under the general law to govern its own members. This was recognized in the old rule, but further strengthened in the new Constitutions. A most notable statement left out of the new Constitutions was the statement that the Assistant was the order’s representative to the secular order. The reason this was omitted from the new law was a statement of identity: “The Secular Order... is... an integral part of the Discalced Carmelite Order. It is essentially lay in character.” [Constitutions # 37] If our OCDS members are full members of the order, they don’t need anyone to be their representative to the order. And if they are essentially lay in character, it stands to reason that they should be governed by members of the laity, not members of the clergy or from religious life.
The province of Mexico seems to have set the pace by incorporating into their provincial statutes that Seculars could make visitations of local communities. When our provincial council was formed, they read the statutes of Mexico and other provinces who had written statutes to see what they had done, so we didn’t have to re-invent the wheel. We decided to follow Mexico’s lead and Rome approved. Five times as many visitations are being made today in our province than was possible before when only the Provincial or his delegate was making visitations of our secular communities. Many do not like the idea of being visited by their own. I suspect it is because one of their own knows them better than a religious priest. Ignorance is often bliss. You can get away with a lot more, the less the visitator knows you.
What the future holds, we cannot foresee. All Rome is telling us now is that the friars are here to assist you in governing yourself. The friars are handing over authority to you. We only take on our authoritative role granted by that juridical dependence I quoted at the beginning, when local order breaks down or has yet to develop. Our Statutes give the Provincial Council and Provincial Delgate authority to step in when the local community is developing. In the case of our groups who are just starting out and haven’t enough personnel to achieve canonical status, that is to say they can’t yet enjoy all rights given by the Constitutions, then either the PC or the PD appoints local officers that a canonical community would normally elect. The same applies to canonical communities who have lost so many functioning members that they are no longer able to self-govern themselves. Again the higher authority steps in to assist. But I assure you, we do you no favors by playing our authoritative trump card when you are capable of governing your own life.
Q: Dear Fr. Aloysius, If you have time would you please check out my response to this lady to see if anything in it needs corrected before I publish it as a frequently asked question in our newsletter.
A: Dear Father, your response to the question about the dependence of the OCDS on the OCDs is right on target. I am myself preparing something for the blog [www.ocd4ocds.blogspot.com] on that phrase "juridically dependent on the Carmelite friars" because of a number of questions and observations I have been getting in emails and in person. Your answer is right in line. I am happy that you are going to publish it.
Q: Dear Fr. John Michael, After returning home and having an opportunity to assimilate the information from the Congress, I had a few questions regarding the changes occurring in the OCDS. I know I am not a member of your Province. I hope you don't mind me addressing these questions to you.
Conversations and comments I heard at the Congress from secular members and a review of the Statutes approved for the Oklahoma Province indicate to me a general trend in the OCDS toward self-governing and independence from the Friars... Can you tell me whether the origin of this trend is from secular members, from the Provincial Delegates, or from higher up in the Order? What is the final goal of this trend? Is the purpose to relieve the Friars of unnecessary burdens in management of communities, while still retaining authority? Or, is it a movement toward total autonomy? Will the OCDS remain juridically dependent on the Friars?
Conversations and comments I heard at the Congress from secular members and a review of the Statutes approved for the Oklahoma Province indicate to me a general trend in the OCDS toward self-governing and independence from the Friars... Can you tell me whether the origin of this trend is from secular members, from the Provincial Delegates, or from higher up in the Order? What is the final goal of this trend? Is the purpose to relieve the Friars of unnecessary burdens in management of communities, while still retaining authority? Or, is it a movement toward total autonomy? Will the OCDS remain juridically dependent on the Friars?
Julie Payne, pres., Flint MI
A: Dear Julie, There is absolutely no movement whatsoever toward making the OCDS independent from the Friars. As number 41 of our Constitutions states quite emphatically: “The Secular Order is juridically dependent on the Discalced Carmelite Friars.” The footnote to that comes from the code of canon law. If there has been any movement at all from the old OCDS Rule of Life to the new Constitutions, it is precisely in the opposite direction. The new constitutions put into law what was only presumed in the old Rule of Life. That the OCDS was under the friars. This number was put into the constitutions precisely because many of our Secular Carmelites had drifted away from the friars in areas of the world where none of the friars were available to minister to them. Also many were taking direction from our nuns, who with the best of intentions, were not always careful to keep the friars informed. Now to the other half of your area of concern.
The question of self-government should not be seen as synonymous with independence from the Friars. It should rather be viewed as part and parcel of the same package. Seculars should govern themselves within the framework of the Constitutions approved by the Holy See and provincial Statutes approved by the Friars. This is nothing new. The trend toward self government began when the old OCDS Rule of Life was approved back in 1979 where the Spiritual “Director’s” role was changed to that of an “Assistant.” He was “normally a priest of the Order”, but had no right to vote in the local council. [article 21] That article went on to state that the Assistant was “the Order’s representative” to the local community.
Now the trend toward self-government increased in the 2003 Constitutions, where the Assistant’s powers and authority over the local canonical community were further reduced. Not only was he not expected to preside over the council meeting as was not expected in the old rule either, but now the council did not even need to invite him to attend their meetings. As number 44 states: “He may attend without right to vote,” and “the council may consult him.” But the local council made up exclusively of Seculars has ultimate authority under the general law to govern its own members. This was recognized in the old rule, but further strengthened in the new Constitutions. A most notable statement left out of the new Constitutions was the statement that the Assistant was the order’s representative to the secular order. The reason this was omitted from the new law was a statement of identity: “The Secular Order... is... an integral part of the Discalced Carmelite Order. It is essentially lay in character.” [Constitutions # 37] If our OCDS members are full members of the order, they don’t need anyone to be their representative to the order. And if they are essentially lay in character, it stands to reason that they should be governed by members of the laity, not members of the clergy or from religious life.
The province of Mexico seems to have set the pace by incorporating into their provincial statutes that Seculars could make visitations of local communities. When our provincial council was formed, they read the statutes of Mexico and other provinces who had written statutes to see what they had done, so we didn’t have to re-invent the wheel. We decided to follow Mexico’s lead and Rome approved. Five times as many visitations are being made today in our province than was possible before when only the Provincial or his delegate was making visitations of our secular communities. Many do not like the idea of being visited by their own. I suspect it is because one of their own knows them better than a religious priest. Ignorance is often bliss. You can get away with a lot more, the less the visitator knows you.
What the future holds, we cannot foresee. All Rome is telling us now is that the friars are here to assist you in governing yourself. The friars are handing over authority to you. We only take on our authoritative role granted by that juridical dependence I quoted at the beginning, when local order breaks down or has yet to develop. Our Statutes give the Provincial Council and Provincial Delgate authority to step in when the local community is developing. In the case of our groups who are just starting out and haven’t enough personnel to achieve canonical status, that is to say they can’t yet enjoy all rights given by the Constitutions, then either the PC or the PD appoints local officers that a canonical community would normally elect. The same applies to canonical communities who have lost so many functioning members that they are no longer able to self-govern themselves. Again the higher authority steps in to assist. But I assure you, we do you no favors by playing our authoritative trump card when you are capable of governing your own life.
Q: Dear Fr. Aloysius, If you have time would you please check out my response to this lady to see if anything in it needs corrected before I publish it as a frequently asked question in our newsletter.
Fr. John Michael
A: Dear Father, your response to the question about the dependence of the OCDS on the OCDs is right on target. I am myself preparing something for the blog [www.ocd4ocds.blogspot.com] on that phrase "juridically dependent on the Carmelite friars" because of a number of questions and observations I have been getting in emails and in person. Your answer is right in line. I am happy that you are going to publish it.
Aloysius Deeney, Rome
posted by john michael at 11:51 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home