Members of the Teresian Carmelites monastery were having difficulties supporting themselves financially and the Diocese of Worchester withdrew support saying they were too small to sustain themselves and to grow.
That’s when one of what Brother Dennis Wyrzykowski calls “God-incidences” connected them with a medical school professor, whose work included patented research into a compound in the human heart that has been found to also fight wrinkles.
With the professor’s blessing, the religious community recently started selling a high-end skin cream online based on the compound.
Its three consecrated members and approximately 30 lay members hope it’s the answer to their prayers, not just to keep the community afloat financially, but to prove its viability to the diocese and fund programs for homeless and disadvantaged people throughout the region.
“My first thought was, ‘What are people going to think about nuns and monks making cream for your face?’ ‘ Sister Nancy Connors said. “But it’s a good product, I use it every day and I believe it will help people.”
The $65-per-tube face cream, called Easeamine, is a far cry from the more traditional offerings that some monasteries sell, such as homemade jam and cheeses. After the Carmelites pay off their launch costs, the profits will be used for grants to Worcester-area agencies serving poor and homeless people, and to support the tiny religious community which has existed on donations since it was founded in 1971.
“I did worry initially about offering a so-called beauty product, but monks and nuns have always had a long tradition of making health care products and food products,” said Brother Solomon Balban, one of two consecrated monks in the independent religious community who live at the monastery in the Worcester suburb of Millbury in central Massachusetts. [reference]
Well St. Teresa of Avila was suppose to have said “From silly devotions and from sour-faced saints, good Lord, deliver us.” So maybe less wrinkled-faced saints could be included – though I doubt Blessed Mother Teresa would agree.
On another level though there is something just plain wrong about Carmelites selling high-end anti-wrinkle cream. Though I can imagine an appropriate motto for Easeamine “Vanity of vanities, all is vanity.”
But then again St. Paul did write in Ephesian in regards to husbands taking care of their wives ” that he might present the church to himself in splendor, without spot or wrinkle or any such thing, that she might be holy and without blemish.” Their is a link on their web site to buy the cream from Carmel Laboratories, LLC. So those that want the cream can also say that they are helping the poor by doing so! Plus at $65 a tube it is less than many on the market.
I once wrote a parody post about a moisturizer for spiritual dryness.
18 comments
Sixty-five bucks! You gotta be kidding–would people really pay that much for anti-wrinkle cream!?
Being a Secular Carmelite myself, I can’t quite picture myself selling anti-wrinkle cream. Coffee beans? Yes, definitely…but not anti-wrinkle cream. Hmmm…I would also love to know what St. Teresa would think of this…interesting.
Being a Secular Carmelite myself, I can’t quite picture myself selling anti-wrinkle cream. Coffee beans? Yes, definitely…but not anti-wrinkle cream. Hmmm…I would also love to know what St. Teresa would think of this…interesting. Well, at least it is for a very good cause!
Perhaps we could dig out some of St. Nonnus’ meditations on the beauty and beauty treatments of the prostitute (who later became a saint) Pelagia.
Something about how her efforts to appeal to her mortal admirers put our own efforts to appeal to our immortal admirer to shame. And how her efforts should inspire us to greater efforts to please our Lord.
There’s no “h” in Worcester. This diocese has had more than its fair share of trouble in the last generation, and we should be thankful that it has an incredibly competent bishop, Bishop McManus.
These religious aren’t the only ones feeling the pain in Worcester, either. The diocese had to close many, many churches just a year or so ago. So it goes when you have huge numbers of ethnic parishes a close distance apart, declining members, and a huge financial hit from the sexual abuse crisis.
P.S. It’s pronounced like it would be in England, “Wooster.” “Oo” as in “book.”
Yes, people will pay $65 — and a lot more — for wrinkle cream (aka “anti-aging products”). Ask your local NuSkin or MaryKay distributor.
While I’m not going to buy any wrinkle cream, this story made me think maybe I should write these folks a check. Their margin on the wrinkle cream is probably only about 50%, maybe less. If we send them cash, they get the benefit of 100% of the amount.
Don’t forget that the skin is a large and very important part of our body. Although the great majority of cosmetic products are used for vanity purposes, taking care of our skin should not be seen as secondary to taking care of our hearts or lungs.
Just like wines and liqueurs produced by monks are accepted, although they can be abused, this cream should also be seen as a valuable product that can, however, be used for the wrong purpose.
What I would like to know is whether it is advertised as a health care or a beauty product. I will stop at their site when my skin becomes wrinkled … 🙂
Have I missed something here? Isn’t anyone asking what’s in this cream when the article says, “That’s when […] Brother Dennis Wyrzykowski […] connected them with a medical school professor, whose work included patented research into a compound in the human heart that has been found to also fight wrinkles”?!
Have I missed something here? Isn’t anyone asking what’s in this cream when the article says, “That’s when […] Brother Dennis Wyrzykowski […] connected them with a medical school professor, whose work included patented research into a compound in the human heart that has been found to also fight wrinkles”?!
This group has lost their canonical status: see here:
http://www.telegram.com/article/20080816/NEWS/808160343/1008/NEWS02
I’ve lived near Worcester, passing through Millbury on an almost daily basis for almost a year now and my wife works for the diocese, and neither of us have ever heard of this group. Strikes me as a little odd. Please pray for the Church in Worcester County. It could really use it.
Found a statement.
http://www.worcesterdiocese.org/PressReleasesMenu/ctcstatement/tabid/751/Default.aspx
Statement by Most Rev. Robert J. McManus, S.T.D., Bishop of Worcester
Regarding the status of the group known as the Community of Teresian Carmelites
“In light of the fact that they have not met necessary criteria, official recognition has ceased for the group know as the Community of Teresian Carmelites. They may not refer to themselves as a Private Association of the Christian Faithful, or as a religious community, or any such term that implies that they represent the Catholic Church in any official capacity. Although they may pursue establishment as some other form of non-profit organization, they are not canonically recognized by the Catholic Church.”
“In the past they enjoyed a spiritual bond with the Order of Discalced Carmelites who allowed them to wear their habit in private and in public settings. Since that non-juridical association was dependent upon local recognition by the diocesan bishop, the General Definitor of the order has notified them that any association with the Order of Discalced Carmelites has ended as well. Therefore, I ask that they not present themselves in the habit of the Carmelite Order so as to avoid confusion among the faithful.”
“We are all called by virtue of our common baptism to be people of prayer. May they, like all the faithful, find ways to witness to the power of God’s mercy in response to our prayerful intercession.”
August 15, 2008, WORCESTER, MA
I believe this is what is mentioned in the first 25 words of the post.
The stuff in the wrinkle cream is adenosine. Nothing harmful about it, whether or not it works.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adenosine
However, it does apparently promote sleep and discourage getting woken up, so probably you don’t want to wear it during the day! 🙂
Yes, it’s important to note that this community has lost their canonical status, as others have mentioned, and have expressed – by my recollection – some spirit of disobedience. Now don’t take my words as gospel, as I’d hate to erroneously accuse anyone, much less religious (if they in fact are such), but nonetheless it adds an interesting wrinkle to this wrinkle cream story.
I read an interview with the leader of the group after they lost their status and he seemed to express the sentiments that they were going to continue on their way in spite of what the bishop said. In other words, it struck me as another group which thought that it’s own opinions were more important than the judgment of the Church. In any case, if you’re really curious, research it, since as I said, my memory may err.
So bishop’s are now infallible in their decisions? I thought infallibility belonged to the Papacy when it came to faith and morals. The Capuchins were supressed and lived in the mountains for over 20 years until another Pope recognized them again. St. Joan of Arc was burnt at the stake by a council of Bishop’s and then reinstated by the Church, close hundreds of years later and then canonized a Saint. St. John of the Cross almost died outside of the Discalced Carmelites because of the slander and malice against him. Blessed Mary McKillop was excommunicated by her own Bishop. The LIttle franciscan sisters of Mary were also excommunicated. I could go on and on… While ‘most canonical communities’ don’t even wear a habit, or live a common life, here is a small group that is trying to live an authentic christian life. Who are we to judge based on canonical status. As Saint John of the Cross said ‘in the evening of life we will be examined on love’.
Skepticism remains on Rev. Aquino story
by Diane Williamson TELEGRAM & GAZETTE STAFF
Bishop Robert J. McManus has decided to bypass the secular skeptics and preach to the converted.
After more than two weeks of silence to lingering questions about the Rev. James Aquino case, he opted to respond to the 17,000 subscribers of The Catholic Free Press, the diocesan newspaper in which he writes an occasional column under his trademark motto, “Christ, The Splendor of Truth.”
In doing so, the bishop relieved himself of the burden of answering questions about inconsistencies in his handling of the case, which is surely his prerogative and no great surprise, as the church hierarchy rarely considers itself answerable to the populace.
Specifically, reporters have been calling Bishop McManus repeatedly in an effort to understand why he initially supported the Rev. Aquino after the priest was charged with lewd conduct last year in Las Vegas, then suddenly relieved him of his duties last month after the issue broke in the press.
OK, so damage control is hardly rocket science, and it seemed apparent that the bishop responded to the scandal after he could no longer contain it. Except that’s not what the bishop said when he removed Rev. Aquino Oct. 30. Then, Bishop McManus claimed that “I did not possess the whole truth” about the incident until recently, even though he learned about Rev. Aquino’s conduct in February.
To recap, Rev. Aquino was charged with lewd conduct after police say they saw him masturbating another man in a Las Vegas porn theater Oct. 21, 2004. The bishop was informed in February of this year. In March, Rev. Aquino pleaded guilty to a lesser charge and was ordered to perform community service. On Sept. 6, the case was dismissed.
Last month, as the case broke on the Internet and local reporters began making inquiries, Rev. Aquino called an extraordinary meeting of his parishioners at Our Lady of Loreto Parish and vehemently denied engaging in any sex act. Rather, he blamed the charge on police eager to target a priest. And his lawyer told parishioners that Bishop McManus has been “very supportive of Father and very pleased with how the matter was handled,” saying he felt no need to discipline him.
Six days later, Bishop McManus felt a need to discipline him. His feelings had changed, the bishop said. Suddenly, he considered the case “a source of great scandal” for the church, he told parishioners.
Pesky reporters — as well as many in the public — were confused. What had changed? What new facts had come to the bishop’s attention?
Finally, we know. Well, we sort of know. Actually, we’re still not quite sure, but let’s hear what the bishop has to say. In fairness to him, I won’t paraphrase his main points and instead quote him directly:
“Shortly before I spoke at the parish I received an unredacted copy of the initial police report, which included the name of the individual alleged to have been involved in sexual activity with Father Aquino,” the bishop wrote in the Free Press. “The police report I had been given in February did not include that full name. Second, I learned of the admission of sexual activity by the other consenting adult, when it was reported on NECN-TV. Third, I learned that an additional Las Vegas law enforcement official publicly supported the findings of the initial police report.”
It’s not clear why the name of the man alleged to have engaged in sex with the priest was pertinent to the bishop’s understanding. As for the “additional Las Vegas law enforcement official,” I believe he was referring to a Las Vegas police sergeant I interviewed by picking up the phone and calling him. This cop simply explained that Rev. Aquino had been caught in a raid, and he scoffed at his protestations of innocence.
In his homily to parishioners, Bishop McManus claimed that he had “tried my best to discern the truth” about the Aquino incident. In his recent column in the Free Press, he indicated that he relied on the priest and his lawyer for information, surely not the most exhaustive of investigative techniques. What sort of effort is expended by taking an accused man at his word, let alone the word of his lawyer? Bishop McManus spoke to the Las Vegas district attorney in February — how can he now insist that he didn’t know the truth?
These questions will remain unanswered. And the bishop’s claim that his actions “did not constitute a coverup, as some have suggested,” must go unchallenged, because he has declined to make himself available. Instead, he’s obviously more comfortable pontificating in the Free Press.
So be it. I don’t mean to pile on, but I figured that the bishop’s explanation deserved a bigger audience than the one provided by the diocesan newspaper. And I’ll simply note here that if the Free Press claims “the truth shall set you free,” it can also tie you up in knots.
MASSACHUSETTS BISHOP ISSUES WARNING TO JESUIT COLLEGE (Subscribe to RSS Feed)
Worcester, Oct. 11, 2007 (CWNews.com) –
A Massachusetts bishop has strongly criticized a Jesuit-run college in his diocese, hinting that he could withdraw the school’s recognition as a Catholic institution.
Bishop Robert McManus of Worcester issued a statement on October 10, responding to protests from lay Catholics about plans for a conference at the College of the Holy Cross in which Planned Parenthood and NARAL Pro-Choice Massachusetts will make presentations. Siding with the pro-life protestors, Bishop McManus disclosed that he had urged Holy Cross to cancel the conference plans.
The organizations participating in the scheduled event, the bishop said, “promote positions on artificial contraception and abortion that are contrary to the moral teachings of the Catholic Church.” Saying that the Church’s position on key issues involving respect for life is “manifestly clear,” he questioned why a Catholic school would offer these groups a forum. The bishop warned that the conference could create a “situation of offering scandal understood in its proper theological sense, i.e. an attitude or behavior which leads another to do evil.” By canceling the conference, he said, Holy Cross would not infringe upon academic freedom, but would “make unambiguously clear the Catholic identity and mission of the College of the Holy Cross.”
Bishop McManus noted that as the head of the Worcester diocese in which Holy Cross is located he has the “pastoral and canonical responsibility to determine what institutions can properly call themselves Catholic.” He added: “This is a duty that I do not take lightly…”
The bishop concluded his public statement by expressing his “fervent wish” that Holy Cross would cancel plans for the conference, “so that the college can continue to be recognized as a Catholic institution committed to promoting the moral teaching of the Roman Catholic Church.”
HOLY CROSS went on and had the conference anyways!!!!!!!
Bishop McManus did NOTHING about it. Who is gonna go against the JESUITS of Holy Cross College. All bluff from McManus no consequences. In short people pleaser!
Comments are closed.