CHAPTER XXVIII.
THE VOWS OF THE CARMELITES.
A vow is a deliberate and voluntary promise of a greater good made to God.1 This is the common definition of a vow given by theologians. Such a vow can be made either by a private individual, or by an individual in so far as he is a member of a religious community. From time almost immemorial, it has been a custom in the Church of God that some people bind themselves by vows in religious orders or congregations. In fact the essence of the religious life consists in the taking of the three perpetual vows of poverty, chastity and obedience, or at least of obedience, in which chastity and poverty are implied, as among the Carthusians for instance. But theologians distinguish two kinds of vows that are taken in religion: the solemn and the simple vow. The solemn vow, according to the unanimous opinion of canonists, is that which, according to ecclesiastical institution, is received by the Church in such a manner that it creates an indissoluble bond of union between the religious that takes it and the order in which it is taken; a union that can be dissolved only by the Sovereign Pontiff for very grave reasons. Moreover, the solemn vow renders certain acts opposed to the perfection of the religious state not only illicit, but also invalid. Thus, for instance, it makes the religious incapable of possessing private property or contracting marriage. The simple vow, on the contrary, renders such acts merely illicit, but not invalid, and,
__________
1Ferraris.
273
274 Carmel in America.
moreover, can more easily be dispensed in. The simple vows suffice to constitute the essence of the religious state. This is evident from the Constitution of Gregory XIII, Quanto fructuosius.1 Solemn vows are taken in most of the older orders, such as of the Benedictines, Dominicans, Franciscans, Carmelites and others, and by the professed Fathers of the Society of Jesus.
Not only the Carmelite monks, but also the nuns take solemn vows, except in those countries where the Holy See has declared that their vows are simple, as was done for France. In the United States, as we have seen from the petition addressed to Rome by Archbishop Kenrick in 1853, the vows taken by the Carmelites in Baltimore were always considered solemn.
A doubt had existed in the minds of some Bishops as to whether the vows of certain nuns in America were simple or solemn, and in case they were solemn, whether it would not be better, considering the present circumstances, that in future all religious women should be allowed to take simple vows. As there was great diversity of opinion, it was agreed to submit the matter to the decision of the Holy See. The authorities at Rome having carefully examined this matter, a decree of the Sacred Congregation of Bishops and Regulars of September 3rd, 1864, was transmitted to the Archbishop of Baltimore. At the Second Plenary Council this subject was discussed in the fourth public Congregation held on Wednesday, October 17th, 1866, and extracts from the decree above mentioned read with the decrees of the Council in the fourth and last solemn session, held on Sunday, the 21st of October. Among other things it was declared that vows made by nuns in monasteries that already existed were simple, except they had obtained a rescript from the Holy See, allowing them to make solemn vows, as was the case with five monasteries of the Order of the Visitation. Moreover, it was decreed that
__________
1Cf . Huguenin, Expositio method ., Juris Canonici , No. 537, etc.
The Vows of the Carmelites. 275
henceforth the vows taken in monasteries that would be erected in the future, should be simple.1
Some one having stated that a rescript allowing the Carmelite nuns in the United States to take solemn vows existed in the archives of the diocese of Baltimore, the archives were searched, but no such rescript could be found. Consequently the vows of our Carmelites have, since the Second Plenary Council, been considered simple.
But the question may be asked whether, at least, the vows of those nuns who were professed before the decree was given are solemn. Here we premise that it has been a disputed question whether in the foundation of a monastery of nuns the sanction of the Holy See is required for the validity of the solemn profession, some have asserted that it is not strictly required, but that the permission of the diocesan authorities suffices.2 As regards the Carmelites of Baltimore a rescript of the Holy See had been given at a remote period in which their monastery in Charles County was sanctioned. Upon their removal to Baltimore, this approbation was confirmed in a rescript of the 21st of December, 1830.
Moreover, we must remark that there has been a doubt whether the papal enclosure, clausura papalis, is essential to the solemn profession. By papal enclosure is meant that in which the Bishops can dispense only in cases mentioned in papal constitutions, or in cases similar to those mentioned. It may be considered probable that the papal enclosure is not essentially required for the solemn vows, but that the Episcopal enclosure is sufficient.3 Have the Carmelites always observed enclosure? Considering the nature of the clausura, and the history of the Carmelites, we answer: yes. The essence of religious enclosure consists in this, that the nuns cannot leave the monastery without lawful dispensation, nor admit strangers within the enclosure without lawful permission.
__________
1Acta S. Sedis. I , p. 708. 2Acta S. Sedis., loc. cit. Craisson II, No. 2541.
3Acta S. Sedis. II , p. 735.
276 Carmel in America .
That such has been the enclosure of the Carmelites from the establishment of their monastery in Charles County up to the present time, no one can deny.
Add to this that the vows of the Carmelites were always considered solemn, as is evident from the petition addressed by Archbishop Kenrick to the Holy See in 1853. Moreover, the consultor of the Congregation of Bishops and Regulars was of the opinion that the vows of nuns in the United States belonging to orders approved by the Holy See, of which the members take solemn vows, were also solemn. In the answers given by the Congregation on September 1st, 1864, it would not decide the matter for want of the necessary data. On the following day, September 2nd, a decision was given by Pius IX, as follows:
“Vota, quae emittuntur ab aliis monialibus in monasteriis jam erectis simplicia sint, excepto casu, quo obtinuerint a S. Sede Rescriptum ad emittenda vota solemnia.1
"The vows that are taken by other nuns in monasteries already erected must be simple, except the case, in which they may have obtained a Rescript to take solemn vows.”
It appears evident from this that there is here only a question of the future, and that this decision by no means touches the past, and consequently, although it is certain that the vows of those Sisters professed since 1864 are simple, it would appear to us from the foregoing that those who were professed before 1864 are bound by solemn vows.
A decree of the Congregation of Bishops and Regulars has, however, settled this matter, so that the vows of the Carmelites are to be considered as merely simple. This decree was obtained in the following manner: doubts still existing in the minds of some with regard to the solemnity of the vows of the Carmelites of Baltimore, Most Rev. Archbishop Gibbons, in the year 1883, applied to the Holy See for a final decision. The following answer was sent to His Grace by Cardinal Simeoni:
__________
1In the Decrees of the Second Plenary Council we read: "Vota ... esse simplicia.
The Vows of the Carmelites. 277
“The Sacred Congregation of the Most Eminent and Reverend Cardinals of the Holy Roman Church placed over the affairs and consultations of Bishops and Regulars, having carefully weighed everything in the proposed doubt, have judged that an answer be given as they now give: As it is not certain that the monastery in question obtained, at its erection, from the Apostolic See a rescript for the taking of solemn vows; therefore, according to the existing discipline of the Church, solemn vows could not be taken in it.
" Furthermore, His Holiness, to whom an account was given in an audience of April 27th of the present year by the under-signed secretary of this same Congregation, granted in the case of the professed of simple vows, that they might use and enjoy all and every one of the graces and spiritual favors which the professed of solemn vows of the same order lawfully use and enjoy in Rome.
J. CARD. FERRIERI,
Praef."
For the consolation, however, of those whose vows are only simple, let us remind them that before God they are just as much religious as if their vows were solemn. Moreover, they in like manner belong to the Order of Carmel, they are really discalced Carmelites of the Reform of St. Teresa, sharing in all the privileges of the Order, as is evident from a letter written by the Very Reverend Father Dominic of St. Joseph, General of the Discalced Carmelites at Rome, to the mother prioress of a Carmelite monastery.
After the French revolution, the Carmelite nuns in France remained under the jurisdiction of their respective ordinaries. Several of their monasteries having applied to the Holy See to obtain the favor of a canonical erection, it was granted to them, and they hereby received and acknowledged the rules and constitutions of the Congregation of Italy, the only constitutions that had been approved by the Holy See. Notwithstanding this privilege, the monasteries remained under
278 Carmel in America.
the jurisdiction of the Bishops. But with the rules of the Order and Canonical Institution, they really belong to the Order and are a portion of the Congregation of Italy. We here insert a translation of the letter mentioned above:
ROME, September 19, 1869.
PAX CHRISTI! J. M. J.
Very Reverend Mother Prioress,
Having obtained for your community the privilege of conforming with the Discalced Carmelites of our Congregation in the constitutions, ceremonial, etc., being canonically established and, although of simple vows, made partakers of all the graces and privileges of the monasteries with solemn vows, you may become members of the Congregation, like the monasteries of our Sisters at Rome,who are under the jurisdiction of the ordinary. Of five monasteries of Discalced Carmelites in Rome, two are not under the jurisdiction of the Order. Hence, although you have only taken simple vows, you are in the same position as those two monasteries. I thus acknowledge you as daughters of our Congregation, as I do the religious of the two monasteries just mentioned, and others, as well in Italy as elsewhere, who are in their position.
I pray you to present my respectful homage to His Lordship the Bishop, your legitimate superior. Act always in union with His Lordship and the Holy See, and God will bless you. Assure your daughters that I also consider them my children in Jesus Christ. I recommend myself to their prayers and I bless you all.
I recommend myself especially to your prayers and remain in the Sacred Hearts of Jesus, Mary and Joseph.
Your Reverence's humble servant in Jesus Christ,
FR. DOMINIC OF SAINT JOSEPH,
Preposito General.
Another general of the Order, Rev. Father Luke of St. John of the Cross, having been consulted, wrote in the same spirit to the Sisters of the Carmelite Convent at St. Louis, Missouri:
"At Rome we have five convents of Discalced Carmelites: three under the jurisdiction of the Superiors of the Order, and two under the jurisdiction of the Cardinal-Vicar, who is the Bishop of Rome delegated by the Pope to administer in his name. Now, the two convents of our Sisters, which are not
The Vows of the Carmelites. 279
under the jurisdiction of the General, are composed of true Carmelites, true daughters of St. Teresa, our Mother, having the same rules, the same duties, the same graces and privileges as the three other convents which are under the jurisdiction of the General and Provincial. It is the same for the convents of America, France, Belgium, etc., which by the disposition of the Holy See are under the jurisdiction of their respective Bishops. Have, therefore, no inquietude on this point. The Holy See, which approved your Constitutions, has authority to derogate from them in some points when it judges proper. Observe well your laws, for the love of God, and be assured that these laws are calculated to render you holy, and to make you gain a beautiful place in heaven, where St. Teresa will welcome you as her genuine daughters; she who on earth willed nothing else than what the Holy Catholic Church willed. Your Bishop being, by the will of the Church, your Superior, it is to him you must have recourse in all cases where your laws direct you to the General or Provincial. If, in practice, the General replies to some of your questions, this can only be by way of information regarding what is practiced in the Order, and its manner of interpreting certain points of the law subject to some doubt, but never as having authority over you.
"As to the Apostolical Constitutions, those which are general oblige throughout the entire world; your own Constitutions of the Order have an authority equal to the Apostolical Constitutions, since they are approved by the Holy See. Therefore, all the Constitutions emanating from the Holy See must be observed equally and with the same respect. If, in certain points, one Constitution is contrary to another, it is always the most recent which makes the law in these points. Your Constitutions place you under the jurisdiction of the General, etc.; but as, by a more recent ordinance, the Holy See wills that you should be under the jurisdiction of your Bishop, this point of your Constitution is modified, and the General has no authority over you.”
280 Carmel in America.
As regards the rules and constitutions of the Italian congregation, mentioned in the letter of Father Dominic of St. Joseph, it is well to know that the Sisters applied to Sixtus V for the confirmation of their constitutions which had been approved by the Chapter of Alcala, during the lifetime of St. Teresa. Sixtus V, by Brief, June 5th, 1590, confirmed these constitutions with some modifications and additions. Gregory XIV afterwards modified the Brief of Sixtus V, and the constitutions were finally approved by Urban VIII in 1630, for the religious women of the Congregation of Italy.
The English Carmelites of Antwerp had been founded in 1619, under the obedience of the General of the Order, but in 1623 a Brief of Gregory XV transferred them to the jurisdiction of the Bishop, guaranteeing to them, at the same time, the full enjoyment of all the graces, indulgences, Indult and privileges granted to those under the authority of the general. The Sisters observed thenceforward the constitutions of St. Teresa, as they had been approved by the Chapter of Alcala in 1581, without the subsequent statutes of Gregory XIV.
The foundresses of the American Carmel introduced the same constitutions into their monastery of Charles County, and they were observed until the year 1862, when, by the advice and with the approbation of Archbishop Kenrick, they adopted the constitutions as approved for the Italian Congregation of the Order. These latter constitutions forbade the reëlection of prioresses, whilst the former allowed it. This explains the frequent reëlections prior to the year 1862.
All the Carmelite convents approved by the Holy See, with the exception of a certain number in France and England, observe, at the present day, the rules and constitutions of the Congregation of Italy, for the Congregation of Spain has no longer a separate existence, but has been united to the Italian Congregation and is under the jurisdiction of the Preposito-General at Rome. Those Carmelite nuns who are
The Vows of the Carmelites. 281
subject to the diocesan authorities are, nevertheless, in relation with the body of the Order, and, with the permission of their Ecclesiastical Superiors, frequently consult the Superiors of the Order on certain obscure points of the rules and constitutions.