Christ the King Abbey

  • Thread starter Thread starter bjcsfo
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
B

bjcsfo

Guest
Can anyone here tell me about Christ the King Abbey out of Cullman Alabama? Somehow I got on their mailing list and I get their newsletter. Some of their articles seem ok when on general topics such prayer and contemplative life but I have the feeling they might not be in union with Rome after reading their Statement of Purpose. Are they SSPX? Thanks in advance
 
Been there for a Mass on Thanksgiving day.
A beautiful, serene place, all built by the monks. The pews have pre-1955 missals.
The Mass was also.
They say nothing about VATII, the New Mass, etc…complete silence. That is, they are never outwardly antagonistic as is the SSPX of which they do NOT belong.

It’s as if the world of pre-1955 is still in effect; a time machine.
As far as I know, they are without the local bishop’s authorization.

If yur not Sede, do not give it your Sunday/Holy Day Obligation, but any other day, it is an overwhelming experience.

I really did not want to leave the grounds.
 
christthekingabbey.org/
The monastery was founded by Reverend Father Leonard Giardina, O.S.B., a monk since 1942 and a priest since 1949. Due to the devastating effects of the modernist changes in the Roman Catholic Church, brought about by Vatican Council II and its spirit, he left his original monastery. He soon realized that it was imperative that the traditional Benedictine way of life be preserved and kept alive for the welfare of the holy Catholic Faith. On July 13, 1994, he received the Abbatial Blessing by His Excellency, Bishop Robert F. McKenna, O.P. Although the Abbatial Blessing confers on him the title and power of an abbot over a monastery, it does not make him a bishop with the power of ordaining to the Holy Priesthood.
Click to expand...
(italics are original)

It would appear as though this group is valid and licit.
 
TNT said:
Fr. McKenna was consecrated a bishop on August 22, 1986 in Raveau, France by Mgr. Michel Guerard des Lauriers, O.P, one of the bishops consecrated by Bishop Ngo Dinh Thuc without papal mandate.
Click to expand...
Has this abbot been excommunicated?

If not, then he is functioning as a valid, licit abbot.

It shouldn’t be up to lay persons to “play politics” and decide who and what is “valid and licit”. One should assume things are “valid and licit”, until told otherwise.
 
TNT said:
Fr. McKenna was consecrated a bishop on August 22, 1986 in Raveau, France by Mgr. Michel Guerard des Lauriers, O.P, one of the bishops consecrated by Bishop Ngo Dinh Thuc without papal mandate.
Click to expand...
So they are then, sedevacantist?
 
paramedicgirl said:
So they are then, sedevacantist?
Click to expand...
Depends on your definition of “sedevacantist”.

Bishop Robert McKenna:
Now while the Popes of Vatican II, including the present John Paul II, can function on the purely natural level in running the Church as an organization or legal corporation, they have on the supernatural level - in view of their spiritual madness - no divine authority to speak for the Church as the Mystical Body of Christ or to govern the faithful in His name; no power, that is to say, to function precisely as the Vicar of Christ for so long as this insanity continues. They and the bishops under them, blindly following them, are lacking the jurisdiction they would otherwise have under normal circumstances. We must simply ignore them and carry on as best as we can without them.
Click to expand...
 
Catholic_Hammer said:
christthekingabbey.org/

(italics are original)

It would appear as though this group is valid and licit.
Click to expand...
Catholic_Hammer said:
Depends on your definition of “sedevacantist”.

Bishop Robert McKenna:
Click to expand...
So, that would make him
*sedeplenist, *that is, he holds that Benedict XVI is a true Roman Pontiff but unable/unwilling to teach the Faith & Morals of the Catholic Church.

I’m not gonna argue that position since it will produce no persuasion of anyone here.
I will say that I doubt it has any historical pedigree in the Catholic Church.
But, back to the Cullman Abbey, I like it as I already said. If I lived there I’d spend a lot of time there.
 
bjcsfo said:
It sounds to me that the bishop and the abbey are sedevacantist
Click to expand...
Not really.
See above post.
They recognize the pope as legit, just as the SSPX, but unworthy of trust in Faith & Morals direction…
SEDEPLENIST.
 
TNT said:
So, that would make him
*sedeplenist, *that is, he holds that Benedict XVI is a true Roman Pontiff but unable/unwilling to teach the Faith & Morals of the Catholic Church.

I’m not gonna argue that position since it will produce no persuasion of anyone here.
I will say that I doubt it has any historical pedigree in the Catholic Church.
But, back to the Cullman Abbey, I like it as I already said. If I lived there I’d spend a lot of time there.
Click to expand...
I agree.

It’s really not worth arguing about.

I think we could all agree, however, that there needs to be MORE places like this abbey, and the hierarchy needs to let people know that they ARE “valid and licit”, and there’s nothing wrong with HUNDREDS of years of tradition.

That being said, I’m someone that has NEVER attended anything BUT a “NO” Mass. Ironic?
 
Catholic_Hammer said:
I agree.

It’s really not worth arguing about.

I think we could all agree, however, that there needs to be MORE places like this abbey, and the hierarchy needs to let people know that they ARE “valid and licit”, and there’s nothing wrong with HUNDREDS of years of tradition.

That being said, I’m someone that has** NEVER attended anything BUT a “NO” Mass.** Ironic?
Click to expand...
Starvation diet, I say.
 
As with many good ends, there are good means and bad means of going about it. The Benedictine abbey in this thread does it the wrong way, while this Benedictine monastery does it the right way:

Our Lady of the Annunciation
 
Are there any other abbeys like Our Lady of the Annunciation out there? When I go to the OSB website there are a mixture of loyal ones and modernists and its difficult to figure out which is which.
 
I don’t know off the top of my head. A good friend of mine is entering the one I linked to. If you’re trying to discern a vocation, the best bet is to visit the monastaries and see for yourself. 👍
 
I’m not looking to enter but possibly looking for an isolated oblate program. I don’t want to align myself with a modernist abbey. Most of the ones within driving range from me are kinda wackey.
 
ewtn.com/library/BISHOPS/Christ-the-King.htm

The only problem I see in the bishop’s letter is that in the same bullet point where he states that the Masses at the Abbey are illicit he also states that they do not fulfill the Sunday obligation. Including these in the same bullet point implies that the bishop is saying that the faithful do not not fulfill their obligation at an illicit Mass.

And this is a bit problematic. I have attended illicit Masses at many parishes in the diocese of Columbus, the diocese of Cleveland, the diocese of Stubenville, the Archdiocese of Cincinatti, the archdiocese of Indianapolis and other dioceses. It would seem that bishop Foley believes that I did not fulfill my Sunday obligation because of the evil acts (liturgical abuses) of these priests.

I certainly wouldn’t mind seeing this cleared up a bit. I was always under the impression that an illicit Mass fulfilled your Sunday obligation. If not, then there are a lot of people in the above mentioned diocesese (and many others) who are in trouble.

James
 
James,

Don’t worry. Abuse does not render a Mass illicit in itself. Unless of course, the consecration was changed, but then it would be invalid as well. A liturgical abuse is illicit but it doesn’t render the entire Mass illicit. A Mass itself is said to be illicit when it is either invalid or is valid but is performed illicitly by a priest who is suspended or has no faculties.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top