|
Forums26
Topics35,516
Posts417,601
Members6,169
| |
Most Online4,112
Mar 25th, 2025
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 5,264
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 5,264 |
Ahhh...yes, Father Anthony. I recall that as well.
While I would be attracted to the sense of community life there, I could not bear to be without the Byzantine Liturgy! The TLM there just seems so...well, arid. Sorry for any offense given. But give me 5 monks and a Byzantine Horologion and DL any day!
It was clear he was touched by the Rosary at the end of the video, which was very inspiring in some ways.
Gordo
Last edited by ebed melech; 11/16/06 02:24 AM.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2002
Posts: 7,461 Likes: 1
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Mar 2002
Posts: 7,461 Likes: 1 |
For the record, and to avoid any misunderstandings about the irregularity of this community, this community is not in communion with any standing canonical Eastern Catholic bishop. The priest(s) of the "Transalpine Redemptorists" currently have no valid faculties from any Catholic bishop in full communion with Rome, Latin or Byzantine.
There is a canonical process for erecting communities within the Congregation of the Holy Redeemer; this community has not ever been canonically erected by the Congregation nor is it recognized as such currently.
While they can claim what heritage they want, the official CSsRs who are in the canonical lineage of St. Alphonsus Ligouri, which includes that of the sainted Redemptorist bishops like Mykola Charnetsky and Vasyl Velychkovsky, do not recognize this community as a Catholic Redemptorist community.
The irregularities and overtly Latinized practices should alert one quite promptly that they do not practice traditional Byzantine monasticism - and as Andrij correctly pointed out, simply following a few externals does not mean one is in an interior fidelity to tradition.
Given the current climate of traditional monastic orders such as the Benedictines of Le Barroux and Fontgamoult receiving canonical recognition to be completely faithful to the traditional Latin Mass and their monastic heritage, and now the community in Oklahoma, one wonders why this community remains irregular.
This sort of mix-match of traditions pointed out above is itself a recent modern phenomena - and I would posit in violation of the spirit of Leo XIII, the Union and subsequent Popes. If one wants to find traditional Eastern monasticism there are ample examples. Perhaps this was the sort of thing Blessed Andrey Sheptytsky was trying to avoid when he repeatedly stated his preferences against bi-ritualism. - which he made in the time when the Tridentine Mass was the primary Mass of the Roman Rite.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2005
Posts: 156
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Dec 2005
Posts: 156 |
Originally posted by Diak... There is a canonical process for erecting communities within the Congregation of the Holy Redeemer; this community has not ever been canonically erected by the Congregation nor is it recognized as such currently. That much was obvious in watching the video. Unlike the 'canonical' Redemptorist Retreat Center outside of Tucson, the monks of Papa Stronsa didn�t have new-age mazes, Zen meditation workshops or Reiki �touch-healing� practitioners (available at $45 a session) in residence.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 45
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 45 |
Greetings and Blessings... Originally posted by Diak...
Quote:
There is a canonical process for erecting communities within the Congregation of the Holy Redeemer; this community has not ever been canonically erected by the Congregation nor is it recognized as such currently.
That much was obvious in watching the video. Unlike the 'canonical' Redemptorist Retreat Center outside of Tucson, the monks of Papa Stronsa didn�t have new-age mazes, Zen meditation workshops or Reiki �touch-healing� practitioners (available at $45 a session) in residence.
_________________________
~Isaac
As per the reference above, the "Congregation of the Most Holy Redeemer" would not be canonically accepted by the Congregation.
I give you their web address:
http://www.redemptorists.org.uk/red/stj/cssr/leaf01.html
Also, here are references of their foundation as found on the above web site:
NEW BEGINNINGS OF THE TRANSALPINE REDEMPTORISTS
Our Lady of Fatima Within the month of having been advised by His Grace Arch-bishop Marcel Lefebvre to make a new Redemptorist founda-tion, using the original Rule, Father Michael Mary (by then 17 years a Redemptorist) and Father Anthony Mary (a Seminarian at that time), left Ec�ne on pilgrimage to Fatima to prayerfully consider what the Archbishop saw as the Will of God for them. There at Fatima on the First Saturday of January 1987 they both consecrated themselves anew to the Immaculate Heart of Mary that they would be Her servants in undertaking the great work which lay before them. Upon their return to Ec�ne the Archbishop indicated their next move, through which they obtained their monastery on the Isle of Sheppey, Kent, England. The Archbishop blessed the name that had been chosen for it: The Monastery of the Sorrowful and Immaculate Heart of Mary. It was given this title because they desired that the monastery be an image of The Immaculate Heart of Mary; ie -"their Refuge and the way that will lead them to God." (Our Lady at Fatima, 13 May 1917).
THE TRANSALPINE CONGREGATION OF THE MOST HOLY REDEEMER
In 1788 Saint Clement Mary Hotbauer set out from Rome to take the Redemptorist Congregation beyond the Alps; he was the first Vicar General of the Transalpine Redemptorists. He faced constant persecution from bishops, priests, freemasons and the Illuminati. The Redemptorist Congregation owes its propagation to Saint Clement Mary and the Transalpine Redemptorists.
Pope Pius IX, by Motu Proprio of 6 September 1853, divided the Congregation of the Most Holy Redeemer, into two distinct organisations: The Neapolitan Redemptorists and the Transalpine Redemptorists. These were finally reunited in 1869.
Our distinctive name is taken from this historical division. In the Church we again find two branches of Redemptorists:
The Novus Ordo Redemptorists adhere to the Novus Ordo Mass and the Novus Ordo Redemptorists Constitutions.
The Transalpine Redemptorists say the traditional Mass observe the traditional Redemptorist Rule received from Heaven and codified by Saint Alphonsus, lived by St. Clement Mary, St. Gerard Majella, St. John Neumann, Blessed Peter Donders. and all holy Redemptorists.
BEFORE VATICAN II:
The Redemptorists were a remarkably holy Congregation in the Church. Although founded only in 1732 they claimed the greatest number of Servants of God, Venerables, Blesseds and Saints (excluding martyrs) from that year to modem times. They made saints in their monasteries and were called saints by the people. In Ireland they were known as "the holy Fathers." The reason is simple: Their Rule and Preaching fixed their thoughts on Salvation, Death, Judgment and Eternity; - which thoughts inspire the soul with contempt for sin, love of Jesus Christ, hope in Mary and zeal for the salvation of souls.
AFTER VATICAN II:
With the crisis in the Church the Redemptorist Order was hit badly. Proportionally it lost the most priests and brothers. The reasons are simple: The New Church offered heaven to all religions, mocked Hell and denied the necessity of the intercession of the Blessed Virgin Mary for Salvation. More than any other Order these dogmas were the daily preoccupation of Redemptorists whether at home or in the pulpit. The solution was simple: an essential reform became necessary for the Redemptorists to continue the Congregation in the spirit in which St. Alphonsus had founded it.
I find quite interesting "two" facts from their web site presentation..
The first:
Pope Pius IX, by Motu Proprio of 6 September 1853, divided the Congregation of the Most Holy Redeemer, into two distinct organisations: The Neapolitan Redemptorists and the Transalpine Redemptorists.
The second:
Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre to make a new Redemptorist foundation, using the original Rule, Father Michael Mary (by then 17 years a Redemptorist) and Father Anthony Mary (a Seminarian at that time), left Ecne on pilgrimage to Fatima to prayerfully consider what the Archbishop saw as the Will of God for them.
This would be true by the reference to Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre that this C.Ss.R. foundation would not be canonically accepted by the Congregation.
Unfortunately, I was one of those who left this (Roman Catholic) "devoted" Congregation group of men during those difficult times of Vatican II...In my heart I am "still" a Redemptorist following the teachings of St. Alphonsus Liguori and a Benedictine on the outside. St. Alphonsus has (through his many books and writings) has provided such an example of a beautiful love for our "Blessed Mother"... the Theotokos. ...Such an example for all to follow!
It is "only" because of St. Alphonsus' teachings these "devoted" Monks of Papa Stronsa continue on with their community, regardless of their foundation!
Our Lord's Blessings Always to You.....
....Ignatius...
++++++++++++++++++++++++
Oblate of St. Benedict
"FOLLOWING THE MASTER"
++++++++++++++++++++++++
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2002
Posts: 7,461 Likes: 1
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Mar 2002
Posts: 7,461 Likes: 1 |
Both of the above posts don't really get at the facts, which are that the Transalpine Redemptorists have no valid faculties or are canonically and currently recognized by any Eastern or Latin bishop who has the authority to grant them.
Tangential claims and sentimental tugs about Vatican II do not change those facts, and those old arguments are very tired indeed. This community is simply not part of the Congregation of the Most Holy Redeemer. Being "advised" by Archbishop Lefevbre does not constitute a canonical erection according to the Statutes of the Congregation - even in the old statutes.
Isaac, I know nothing about the situation you mention; while it is a tragedy if true, and one which I would lament and not support, it does not negate the reality that there is a visible Church, Pontiff, and bishops in visible and full communion with Her, regardless of the difficulties. These men are simply not in communion with that Church nor enjoy any faculties from Her.
I have no problems with someone forming their own monastic community; they should do so honestly and openly regarding their independence and related lack of canonical recognition. If they are not in communion because they feel the current hierarchy to be invalid, or refuse their authority, just come out, be honest, and say it.
And as I mentioned, both the previous and current Holy Fathers have given their blessing for traditional communities to be established in full and visible communion with the Church, whether Eastern or Western. From Bishop Rifan to Le Barroux to the latest agreement with Father Aulagnier, these arguments in the Latin Rite just don't fly anymore with me.
I was present at the translation of the relics of Blessed Vasyl Velychkovsky, a true saint and Redemptorist. I saw many of the holy brothers and priests of the Congregation. I saw none of this Transalpine community, which purports to be part of the Congregation, and furthermore was specifically told by the Canadian Provincial they most certainly are not part of the same Congregation of the Most Holy Redeemer of which Bishop Vasyl was a sainted member. I'll put more stock in these words of the spiritual children of Blessed Vasyl.
I continue to pray for the Transalpines to return to full communion with the Church, to abandon their syncretic liturgical practices which have been discouraged since Leo XIII, and return to the liturgical tradition, spirit, and canonical lineage of the Fathers of the Union. I think they could do much more good if they would humble themselves to be placed in obedience in a regular situation with the Church, as the Benedictines I mentioned have flourished since doing so while remaining faithful to tradition.
FDD
Last edited by Diak; 11/16/06 11:39 PM.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2005
Posts: 156
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Dec 2005
Posts: 156 |
Originally posted by Diak... Isaac, I know nothing about the situation you mention; while it is a tragedy if true, and one which I would lament and not support, it does not negate the reality that there is a visible Church, Pontiff, and bishops in visible and full communion with Her, regardless of the difficulties. These men are simply not in communion with that Church nor enjoy any faculties from Her. Reverend Father Deacon, Agreed - and I would add that their lack of communion is most fortunate for the monks of Papa Stronsa - otherwise they too would be cursed with the �difficulties� to be found with the �canonical� Redemptorists. It seems to me that embracing pagan new age practices negates any claims to canonicity or other supposed benefits derived from communion with the Roman Patriarch and his bishops. As for the veracity of the new age nonsense I described as being offered by the Tucson Redemptorists, see for yourself (although I was in error � the price for Reiki sessions has apparently risen from $45 to $50 an hour): Tucson Redemptorists [ desertrenewal.org] As for the other Tucson Redemptorist new age nonsense (i.e. �difficulties�) I previously mentioned: 2006-2007 Program Directory [ desertrenewal.org] Page 04: "Reiki Massage" Page 16: �Dancing with God: The Surrender Samba� Page 18: �Buddhist Meditation in Theravada Tradition� Page 20: �Zen Sesshin.� Page 21: �Life Force Yoga Healing Retreat & Training.� I�ve refrained from adding my admittedly irreverent commentary about each of the above retreats/workshops � I�ll let the �canonical� standing of these Redemptorists and the oversight provided by Rome and her bishops speak for itself. ~Isaac
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 45
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 45 |
Greetings and Blessings Reverand Father Deacon Diak, What a joy to be present at the translation of the relics of Blessed Vasyl Velychkovsky, C.Ss.R.! Thank you very much for sharing your experience! As per your statement below: I was present at the translation of the relics of Blessed Vasyl Velychkovsky, a true saint and Redemptorist. I saw many of the holy brothers and priests of the Congregation. I saw none of this Transalpine community, which purports to be part of the Congregation, and furthermore was specifically told by the Canadian Provincial they most certainly are not part of the same Congregation of the Most Holy Redeemer of which Bishop Vasyl was a sainted member. I'll put more stock in these words of the spiritual children of Blessed Vasyl.
I continue to pray for the Transalpines to return to full communion with the Church, to abandon their syncretic liturgical practices which have been discouraged since Leo XIII, and return to the liturgical tradition, spirit, and canonical lineage of the Fathers of the Union. I think they could do much more good if they would humble themselves to be placed in obedience in a regular situation with the Church, as the Benedictines I mentioned have flourished since doing so while remaining faithful to tradition. I shall share my prayer with yours for the Transalpines to return to full communion with the Church and to abandon their syncretic liturgical practices. I find this discussion topic very important as we all learn from both sides of the Church...East and West. And, my only wish here is to absorb and learn as much as I can of the beautiful teachings and traditions of the Eastern Church. The comments and observations here are very important in keeping the truth always focused. Thank you, Reverand Father Deacon Diak. May God's Blessings always be upon you, Reverand Father Deacon. ....Ignatius....
++++++++++++++++++++++++
Oblate of St. Benedict
"FOLLOWING THE MASTER"
++++++++++++++++++++++++
|
|
|
|
|
