Former Poor Clare nuns of Belorado: Catholic Church in Burgos responds to false accusation

The Managing Commission of the Monasteries of Belorado, Orduña and Derio of the Archdiocese of Burgos (Spain) stressed that “it is a false accusation to speak of illegitimate usurpation of bank accounts”, as indicated in a new statement from the excommunicated former Poor Clare nuns of Belorado. , led by former abbess Laura García de Viedma Serrano.

The former nun, at the head of the 10 former nuns excommunicated and expelled from consecrated life on June 24 for the crime of schism—despite having had the opportunity to appear before the local ecclesiastical court, something they did not ultimately do—sent a new statement to the media.

This text indicates that “the illegitimate usurpation of the bank accounts belonging to our community (now an association) has been detected, without any judicial procedure to justify said intervention.”

For this reason, the statement from the former schismatic nuns states, “false information is proliferating that presents us as defaulters to companies and individuals, seriously affecting our reputation” in which, however, it is indicated that they have always complied “punctually” with your payments.

This part of the statement refers to recent news that reported expenses of up to 6,900 euros for silk sheets and velvet blankets, which would be unpaid.

Referring to the Archbishop of Burgos and Pontifical Commissioner, Mons. Mario Iceta, the former nuns point out that it is “alarming that the person now in charge of our accounts has previously been sanctioned by the Bank of Spain due to irregularities in the management of third-party accounts. “.

The response of the Archdiocese of Burgos

To the statement from the former nuns, the Management Commission of the Monasteries of Belorado, Orduña and Derio responded that “Mrs. García de Viedma claims to speak on behalf of a civil association that does not appear to be registered as such before the competent authority.”

“The transformation of a religious entity into a civil association requires the permission and procedure provided by the Holy See, which has not been respected in this matter,” the commission states.

“An attempt is being made to confuse public opinion, trying to make it believe that the new civil association established by the former religious women is the owner of the heritage of the Monasteries,” the text highlights.

In this sense, the commission indicates that “the Pontifical Commissioner, as Legal Representative, has the right to administer all movable, immovable, monetary and financial property of the monasteries. It is a false accusation to speak of illegitimate usurpation of bank accounts nor is any judicial procedure required for this.”

The commission’s note also recalls that “those who affirm the existence of late payments to companies and individuals are the former religious themselves, as can be seen in their various manifestations.”

Likewise, the text continues, “we have invoices in our possession that have not been paid for months by the management of the former abbess (approximately, and excluding loans, about €42,000 is owed on invoices alone, some of which have up to 2 years old), and which she herself has sent to us.”

“We do not know the extent of the financial obligations of the monasteries because Mrs. García de Viedma continues to illegally prevent access to their management,” despite the five requests made “the last one yesterday.”

Response to the “personal disqualifications” against the Pontifical Commissioner

The note also refers to the “personal disqualifications” made by the former abbess against the Pontifical Commissioner and specifies that “referring to an administrative sanction of the Pontifical Commissioner from his time in which he belonged to the board of directors of Cajasur from 2005 to 2008, to question his legitimacy to manage assets, constitutes an attempt to slander him using arguments to the person and it describes well the moral quality of Mrs. García de Viedma.”

However, the text explains that “the administrative sanction of the Bank of Spain to the two boards of directors of Cajasur that had responsibilities in said savings entity around the years 2006 to 2010, among whose members was the current Pontifical Commissioner, does not “It was due to irregularities on the part of said boards of directors in the management of third-party accounts, nor did it entail any disqualification or limitation of any kind for the Pontifical Commissioner.”