Is Our Lady of Clear Creek a good Benedictine abbey?

  • Thread starter Thread starter SlavesOfJesusandMary
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
S

SlavesOfJesusandMary

Guest
I was wondering if they are a good foundation of Benedictine monks, now I have questions such as, what is the youngest age you can join at, mainly saying what is the age you can join at, are they very isolated? Do they use internet such as modern orders do? How much does it cost to join if it has a price and how can I join?
 
Our Lady of Clear Creek Abbey is very good. My parish priest spent most of his days off there before the Covid restrictions and I’ve visited twice. The monks there are very traditional and orthodox in their views.

They are pretty isolated and the only internet access allowed is for maintaining their website and necessary tasks (taxes, email, banking, etc). I believe their minimum age is 20.
 
The easiest way to find answers to your questions is to visit their website and read the information they have about vocations.
 
Torolf, you said they are orthodox in their views?!!! Meaning what.
 
What do you mean they are very orthodox in their views!?
 
I think any community that is approved by Rome or by the local bishop can be assumed to “uphold the teachings of the church.” It is not up to us to impose standards, but up to the Church authorities.
 
You need to contact them about joining. They are a TLM community and growing very quickly.
 
nunsuch said:
I think any community that is approved by Rome or by the local bishop can be assumed to “uphold the teachings of the church.” It is not up to us to impose standards, but up to the Church authorities.
Click to expand...
This seems to be a common misconception within contemporary Catholicism:

“Because I am in communion with Holy See in Rome, and Rome holds the divinely instituted Primacy which is indefectible, therefore heresy cannot attack the Roman Catholic Church because the idefectibility extends to its fullness.”

Church history in the West proves otherwise.

For example, the Donatists believed they were Catholic but were later condemned as heretics. The Pelagians were widespread especially in Britain and France and believed they were Catholic but condemned as heretical. The Arians and Semi-Arians believed they were Catholic but were condemned by the First-Ecumenical Council as heretics. The Cathars in France believed they were Catholic but were condemned as heretical. There are many who believe themselves to be Catholic today who hold heretical doctrines, i.e. modernism, liberalism, etc. but the Church has not yet lanced the wound via Ecumenical Council and applied the healing salve of anathema.

As history shows, not all that calls itself Catholic is orthodox.
 
“Believing” one is Catholic is not sufficient. I explicitly designated approbation by the appropriate church authority — diocesan or pontifical.
 
nunsuch said:
I explicitly designated approbation by the appropriate church authority — diocesan or pontifical.
Click to expand...
I understand that, but I think you are missing my point.

The “church authority”–diocesan or pontifical* can fall into heresy.

For example, during the Arian crisis in the Church the majority of bishops, presbyters, deacons and faithful were Arian. It was a small group, primarily led by St. Athanasius of Alexandria, at that time a deacon, who did not capitulate and kept the orthodox Catholic Faith.

*By pontifical I do not mean that the Pope can teach explicit heresy, but certainly the bureaucratic organs of the Vatican that surround the pope can fall into error.
 
I would still trust the judgment of these church authorities, particularly over time (Clear Creek has existed a very short time, while many Benedictine monasteries in the US have been in place for over well over a century) over essentially anonymous people on an internet site, when trying to determine the “goodness” of a religious congregation. That is my only point.
 
Forgive me. I misunderstood the tone of your earlier comment.
 
Thank you. I was not trying to argue–or to criticize Clear Creek. I was simply pointing out that we should respect the judgment of the church, and that there are many, many “good” religious communities. Not all may appeal to any particular individual (which is one reason I believe there is such a variety). A seeker should find the community best for their spirit and salvation. But not everyone needs or seeks the same thing(s).
 
Reach out to them with your questions! My understanding is they are a great community!
 
nunsuch said:
Thank you. I was not trying to argue–or to criticize Clear Creek. I was simply pointing out that we should respect the judgment of the church, and that there are many, many “good” religious communities. Not all may appeal to any particular individual (which is one reason I believe there is such a variety). A seeker should find the community best for their spirit and salvation. But not everyone needs or seeks the same thing(s).
Click to expand...
I encourage a Community that is currently recognized by the Church, over one that is not. But many communities long “recognized” by the Church have, in the past 60 years, drifted from the ideals of their founders. They have embraced the values of the secular establishment media, though not quite badly enough to be “unrecognized” by the Church.

Some existing communities would likely not get recognized today, if they were starting out, but are sort of “grandfathered in.”

So, a little discernment is needed here.
 
Last edited:
Well, they have all had to have their Constitutions Revised and re-approved after the 1983 Code of Canon Law was implemented (under Pope St. John Paul II), so this is good enough for me. Again, some of their customs may not be what individuals are looking for, but if Rome is satisfied, I’ll take that.
 
nunsuch said:
Well, they have all had to have their Constitutions Revised and re-approved after the 1983 Code of Canon Law was implemented (under Pope St. John Paul II), so this is good enough for me.
Click to expand...
I don’t think many people realize this, that all religious had this call to re-evaluate and return to the roots and mission of their founding more authentically, and that it was both universally done and had to be approved by the Vatican. I think many see the changes in these communities as “rebellion” when they involved a change in ministerial focus or other externals like alterations/omissions of the horarium, spiritual exercises, and the habit.
 
Well, I study this and have published extensively on this subject so, yes, I’m well aware of this.
 
nunsuch said:
but if Rome is satisfied, I’ll take that.
Click to expand...
In today’s litigious, politicized environment, it would be very expensive, both in money and public scandal, to decertify a religious order.

They will do it on extreme cases. Fortunately the problematic communities are mostly shrinking rapidly, so Rome is letting them “clock down”.

They have to pick their battles.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top