After twelve years: Who will save the monastery in Palma's old town — and how?

After twelve years: Who will save the monastery in Palma's old town — and how?

Ownership clarified, future open: Between canon law, heritage protection and the wish for public access

In the morning you can still hear the bells of the Cathedral here, a pigeon hops across the marble steps, and volunteers prune the bougainvillea in the backyard: the Monestir, hidden in a quiet lane not far from the Catedral, now has clarity about its ownership. Spain's highest court awarded the building to the community of Hieronymite nuns. For neighbors and passersby the first feeling is one of relief — no conversion into a hotel, the order's leadership has made that clear — but the relief comes with many open questions.

Key question: How can the monastery be opened and operated so that its spiritual function, its heritage value and the interests of the neighborhood are preserved?

The legal situation is only part of the problem. The monastery is listed as a cultural asset of special interest and is subject to strict heritage protection. At the same time, the religious community is bound by canon law requirements: decisions on fundamental changes of use must be approved by the competent dicastery in the Vatican. Taken together, both narrow the scope for quick solutions.

Several usage options have already been mentioned publicly: long-term leasing, partial rental, a university site or social services. Such ideas sound compatible with the protected status. In practice, however, they lead to concrete practical problems: who will finance the restoration of the façade and the climate-controlled storage for sensitive textiles? Who will cover the ongoing costs for heating, maintenance and security measures? Volunteers have kept the complex remarkably well maintained in recent years; voluntary work, however, cannot replace professional restorers or museum technology.

Another sensitive issue is the mortal remains of 525 nuns. Any decision about opening and visitor expectations must respect dignity and requirements of reverence. This means: visitor schemes with clear zones, visual screening, fixed guided paths and, if necessary, restricted access times for certain areas.

What has so far been missing in the public debate is a concrete financial plan and a transparent governance model. Public subsidies (from the Consell Insular or from the Ministry of Culture) only help if they are linked to a viable operating model. One conceivable option would be the creation of a foundation or a non-profit company with the participation of the religious community, the island administration, the university and independent experts. Such a structure could raise donations, apply for grants and at the same time be democratically overseen.

The scientific component must not be underestimated either: conservation work, inventorying and digitization of over 1,000 catalogued objects — including an extensive textile collection and embroideries associated with Gaudí — require specialists and suitable infrastructure. Cooperation with the University of the Balearic Islands (which was already involved in 2016) would be obvious, as would applying for European-level funding for cultural preservation.

Concrete, immediately implementable steps could look like this: First, a mandatory inventory with a prioritized list of conservation measures. Second, a short moratorium on tourist uses until a protection and visitor management plan is in place. Third, begin negotiations with the dicastery early so that canonical approvals run in parallel with technical preparations. Fourth, set up a transparent neighborhood participation process to regulate traffic impact, delivery logistics and quiet hours.

A small everyday vignette makes clear what is at stake: a resident from Carrer del Sindicat brings her dog by in the morning and chats with a nun about the soil delivered for the monastery gardens. Such encounters shape the character of the neighborhood. If it becomes a cultural center with regular public traffic, delivery vans, security barriers and ticket booths will change the atmosphere. That must be taken seriously.

My proposal: open gradually, not spectacularly, but solidly. First conserve, then start small, controlled educational offerings — for example guided tours in limited groups, temporary exhibitions with digitally supported access and educational programs with the UIB. In parallel, establish a nine-member steering committee that brings together the religious community, the heritage protection authority, the city, the university, residents and restorers. In this way economic viability and the need for protection can be brought together in a binding way.

The conclusion is pragmatic: the end of the court case is no guarantee of quick solutions. Rather, the real work begins now — legally, financially and organizationally. Those who protect the city's cultural heritage must also ensure that it does not become a lifeless backdrop. Those who open it must preserve the atmosphere of the lane and the dignity of those buried there. It is demanding, but feasible — with clear rules, honest financing and local participation.