I am no Canon Lawyer but I have been Catholic long enough to have seen how various religious orders operate within various dioceses. Here’s what I can give you:My regular correspondent added,I chuckle as I watch this tempest in a teapot.
- How is a Monastery supported?
Usually, these are self-supporting, by a combination of private benefactors, fundraising activities of the monastery (like these nuns did by selling soap, hand-made scapulars, etc.), or additional assistance from their parent organization if they are a satellite group. It is also possible, if a group is answerable to a specific Bishop, that the diocese where the monastery resides could offer financial assistance or a stipend of some sort. I do not know the financial arrangements between the Poor Clares and the archdiocese of San Antonio.
- What are the Canon Law governing codes for a Monastery within an Archdiocese or Ordinariate?
I don’t know the specific statutes, but religious orders are established (a) within a diocese, in which case the local bishop is the person to whom the order must obey or (b) as a personal prelature, in which case the members are answerable to their order Superior (Mother, Brother, Abbot etc.), who is then answerable to technically the pope (but in practice to an arm or office of the Vatican). Either way, any religious order working within the geographical confines of a diocese must have the auspices (permission) of the bishop of that diocese to minister there. So the Mother Superior was in AL (where that monastery must have permission from the local Bishop of Hanceville) but the nuns were ministering in San Antonio (not just living as private citizens) so they needed permission from Archbishop Garcia-Siller.
- Why wasn't the parish informed until the sisters were packed up and already on the road?
The nuns operated entirely separate from OLA; they only lived in a house owned by the parish that would have otherwise been vacant. The nuns were staying there rent free but were taking care of the lawn, cleaning the house, etc. The charism of the nuns was contemplative, fundraising and outreach via their radio program, none of which was connected to the parish or the school at OLA. The nuns did attend Mass at the parish and I assume the priests at OLA assisted them as needed, possibly because of an original arrangement with the Archbishop of San Antonio (I find it unlikely an order of religious whose charism is perpetual adoration would establish a satellite community in another diocese without at least some assurances from the local ordinary that the group could have access to some method of Eucharistic Adoration, hence the relationship with the clergy at OLA). They were contemplatives. They didn’t have many visitors because their days were so regimented. They only had to pack their clothes (which was what, a habit that each one was wearing and some undergarments and maybe pajamas). What would be the point of notifying the parish in advance? A going away party? That’s not really the Poor Clares style. I imagine they left immediately because the Mother Superior told them to. I’m sure they were given specific instructions about the date and time they needed to be back at the Motherhouse in AL. It is a long drive but doable in one shot with three drivers from San Antonio to Hanceville.
- Why didn't the Mother Superior contact Bp Lopes? Did she? Why such a quick decision to uproot before exploring other options.
Who knows what the Mother Superior did and who says other options weren’t explored? The nuns specifically wanted 50 acres of natural, raw land in San Antonio to build their monastery on. They did not want to remodel existing structures. There was nothing even close to their price range available within the city limits of San Antonio or the surrounding area. They looked, waited and prayed for ten years. That seems like a pretty long window of exploring all their options to me.
- Why the drama of leaving on Ephiphany?
These are contemplative nuns who practice Eucharistic Adoration and come from a monastery named after the Virgin Mary. What better day to begin a new chapter in their lives of discernment than on such an auspicious feast day. The Catholic Church has a very long history of scheduling important events on feast days (note that Fr. Phillips chose Aug. 15th, the Feast of the Assumption, as the date to found the school of OLA- was that just drama?)
- Is the Archbishop King Herod in this story?
Really? How many innocents were slaughtered exactly?
[Y]ou are probably right that Fr Phillips then turned around and gave, directly or indirectly, a fuller and more lurid version of the story to Church Militant. Not good. And the spin on the story: are we really to assume that Abp G-S has been waiting since last April to take revenge on Fr Phillips by having the nuns yanked out of San Antonio? A dish served cold indeed, if so. And, as you point out, the idea that this is a big story because "Texas has lost an entire monastery" is absurd.Another interesting aspect is that Fr Phillips, retired for nearly a year as pastor, has inserted himself into the story, complete with photo of himself, and made himself a chief player and victim of the archbishop.
I'm not sure if Bp Lopes is all that interested in being Bishop of the OCSP, or he'd have been on Phillips's case and at minimum issuing some type of clarification to Church Militant, which it seems to me they'd be obligated to add to the story. Instead, he's allowing the impression to develop that things are out of his control.
