Spanish police arrested two excommunicated nuns from the Poor Clares of Belorado for alleged illegal sales of artwork. The arrests are related to the potential misappropriation of assets classified as historical heritage from the Monastery of St. Clare. The nuns were excommunicated after signing a manifesto rejecting the post-Vatican II Catholic Church. The nuns lost court appeals and face eviction from the monastery. The monastery is recognized by UNESCO and subject to strict rules regarding asset sales.
13 days ago
Spanish judicial police arrested two nuns from the excommunicated Poor Clares community in Belorado on November 27, 2025, for suspected misappropriation of historical heritage assets through illegal artwork sales.1 The arrests targeted former abbess Laura García de Viedma (Sr. Isabel) and Sr. Paloma, who were released pending further investigation.1
Police forced entry into the convent after the nuns refused access, seizing items including a 17th-century St. Anthony figurine recovered from a Madrid antiques store.1 An antiques dealer was also detained in connection with the sales.1
In May 2024, ten Poor Clares nuns from the Belorado monastery issued a 70-page "Catholic Manifesto" rejecting the post-Vatican II Church as illegitimate, leading to their excommunication by Archbishop Mario Iceta of Burgos.1 Five elderly nuns avoided excommunication by not endorsing the document.1
Canon law defines schism as refusal of submission to the Pope, punishable by excommunication.1 The breakaway group, now based partly in Orduña, has refused to vacate the UNESCO-recognized Belorado convent, which is part of the Camino de Santiago heritage routes.1
A Spanish court ordered the nuns' eviction from Belorado in August 2024 after the archdiocese's legal action, with appeals exhausted but no firm date set.1 Unauthorized transfers of artworks to the Orduña monastery, which the group partially owns due to unpaid 2020 purchase debts, prompted police intervention there as well.1
Attempts to relocate five nuns from Orduña to another Poor Clares community failed, with details undisclosed.1 The Belorado site's protected status requires official approval for any asset handling, which the nuns allegedly bypassed.1
The nuns face multiple probes, including a February 2025 investigation for fraudulent gold sales exceeding 300,000 euros.1 Archbishop Iceta filed complaints for aggravated fraud, uncovering debts like 42,000 euros in unpaid invoices, 10,000 euros in staff salaries, and improper pension claims for a deceased nun until January 2024.1
Reports detail extravagant purchases, such as silk sheets, laptops, cell phones, and a fighting bull that was later sold.1 The community owes the Spanish social security institute for overclaimed pensions totaling thousands of euros.1
Excommunicated nuns’ asset sales violate Vatican II heritage protections
The case of excommunicated nuns engaging in asset sales raises profound questions about the intersection of ecclesiastical discipline, property rights, and the enduring legacy of the Second Vatican Council. At its core, this issue highlights tensions between individual actions within religious communities and the Church's safeguards for its temporal and spiritual heritage. While the specifics of any particular group's situation may vary, Catholic teaching consistently emphasizes the inviolability of Church property and the grave consequences of schism, including excommunication. Drawing from historical and canonical perspectives, such actions by excommunicated members could indeed contravene protections rooted in Church tradition, which Vatican II sought to reaffirm and adapt for modern contexts. This analysis explores the canonical framework of excommunication, the protections for ecclesiastical assets, and the broader implications for Vatican II's vision of ecclesial unity and heritage.
Excommunication serves as a severe medicinal penalty in the Church, aimed at correcting grave offenses while protecting the communion of the faithful. In instances involving nuns or religious who have been excommunicated—often for schismatic acts—this penalty severs their juridic communion with the Church, rendering them unable to exercise certain ecclesiastical functions or legitimately administer Church goods. For example, the recent declaration of latae sententiae excommunication against Archbishop Carlo Maria Viganò illustrates how public rejection of the Supreme Pontiff's authority and the magisterium of Vatican II constitutes schism, as defined in canons 751 and 1364 of the Code of Canon Law. This offense is not merely personal but disrupts the unity of the Body of Christ, carrying automatic excommunication that can only be lifted by the Apostolic See.
Similarly, historical precedents underscore that excommunication applies to those who usurp or alienate Church property, particularly when tied to rebellion against ecclesiastical authority. The Constitution Apostolicæ Sedis of Pius IX, building on earlier councils, reserves certain excommunications to the Holy See, including those against individuals who absolve reserved censures without faculties or who invade the rights of the Roman Church. In the context of religious orders, excommunicated nuns acting independently to sell assets would fall under this scrutiny, as their status bars them from legitimate stewardship. The Council of Trent's decrees, upheld in Apostolicæ Sedis, explicitly launch excommunications latae sententiae against usurpers of various ecclesiastical properties, emphasizing that such acts profane the sacred trust of the Church. If the nuns' excommunication stems from schism—as in rejections of Vatican II's teachings—their asset sales could exacerbate the offense, transforming a spiritual breach into a material one that harms the Church's patrimony.
The Church's right to own and administer property is not a mere legal construct but a divine endowment for fulfilling its mission. Ecclesiastical property, including assets held by religious congregations like convents or orders of nuns, is vested in the Universal Church or its moral entities, such as religious institutes. This principle traces back to early Christian communities and was formalized in canon law to prevent secular interference or internal misuse. The Catholic Encyclopedia on Ecclesiastical Property clarifies that while individual institutions may hold goods, their moral personality derives from communion with the Universal Church; apostasy or schism forfeits such claims, reverting property to the Church at large. Thus, excommunicated nuns, if operating outside obedience, lack the authority to dispose of these assets, rendering any sales illicit and potentially subject to canonical penalties.
Historical councils reinforce this safeguard. The Second Council of Lyons (1274) pronounced ipso facto excommunication against laypersons—and by extension, those in religious life—who seize or detain temporal Church possessions. The Council of Trent echoed this in its Twenty-Second Session, condemning usurpers with latae sententiae excommunications, a decree still in vigor as affirmed by Apostolicæ Sedis. These protections extend beyond mere financial assets to include lands, rights, and even pious establishments (opera pia), which are integral to the Church's heritage. In the case of nuns, whose vows bind them to poverty and communal goods, unilateral sales by excommunicated members would violate not only property norms but also the charism of their order, inviting further censures for those aiding such acts. Governments or individuals despoiling Church property, as seen in historical confiscations in Italy and France, have similarly incurred these penalties, underscoring the timeless applicability.
Vatican II, often invoked in discussions of renewal and continuity, does not introduce novel "heritage protections" per se but reaffirms the Church's perennial teachings on unity, property, and tradition amid modern challenges. The Council's documents, such as Lumen Gentium and Gaudium et Spes, emphasize the Church's role as guardian of spiritual and cultural patrimony, calling for deeper study to reveal its harmony with Tradition. Pope John Paul II's motu proprio Ecclesia Dei (1988) addresses schismatic movements that reject Vatican II, urging fidelity to the Vicar of Christ and warning that formal adherence to schism incurs excommunication. This is pertinent if the excommunicated nuns' actions stem from a broader rejection of conciliar reforms, as in the Viganò case, where denial of Vatican II's legitimacy led to schism. Such defiance undermines the Council's vision of ecclesial communion, where religious life flourishes in obedience to the hierarchy.
While Vatican II promotes dialogue with the world and adaptation of religious practices, it upholds the inviolability of Church goods as essential to mission. The Council's Decree on the Appropriate Renewal of Religious Life (Perfectae Caritatis) stresses that religious institutes must preserve their heritage while aligning with contemporary needs, but always under Church authority. Asset sales by excommunicated members could thus violate this by fragmenting the heritage—liturgical, charitable, or material—that Vatican II sought to revitalize, not dismantle. The continuity emphasized in Ecclesia Dei counters interpretations that pit pre- and post-conciliar eras against each other, making schismatic asset alienations a direct affront to the Council's integrative spirit. However, the provided sources do not detail specific Vatican II texts on property; their relevance lies in framing schism as the root enabler of such violations, with excommunication as the Church's response to restore order.
In analyzing this scenario, it becomes evident that excommunicated nuns' asset sales not only breach canonical property protections but also erode the unified heritage Vatican II championed. The Church's law prioritizes reconciliation, reserving the lifting of such excommunications to the Holy See, which invites repentance and return to communion. For affected communities, bishops and the Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith play key roles in adjudicating disputes, ensuring assets revert to legitimate ecclesiastical use. This aligns with the Church's tradition of viewing property as a means for evangelization, not personal gain.
Ultimately, these events call for renewed commitment to Vatican II's teachings on unity and stewardship. By adhering to canonical norms, the faithful safeguard the Church's temporal and spiritual legacy against fragmentation.