Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Beer News & Releases' started by generallee, Jun 26, 2018.
I hope we see this in the US. Thanks for posting!
That's a handsome abbey, that is.
I would like to think that it would definitely make its way to the US market but if not, i'm sure beer trades could be made.
Yes the landscape is attractive and the beer is very appealing. I certainly hope this one makes it to the export market.
eh it's no Downton.
Looking forward to this as well, they have a 20HL brewery so I assume they should be able to export some.
Alright so who's gonna throw a fit over this not being a proper Trappist style? Appears to be an English Strong Ale.
I have no problem with a well made English Strong Ale.
Every good Trappist beer needs a good glass as well. Hopefully they will be available too. Maybe as a set.
I pass that area often. Beer exchange anyone?
It's not an IPA or Imperial Stout, so I think we're OK.
that's where they fucked up, why would I even drink a beer thats not double dry hopped? Do these guys even know how to brew?
If it doesnt hit state side, I would gladly trade some Spencer's Trappist. Their current offers include a Pils, IPA, Grapefruit IPA, NEIPA, Belgian Stout, Quad, Holiday Lager, and Patersbier.
Orval also isn’t a "proper Trappist style" – are they not Trappist enough either?
No, I'm on board with Trappist breweries brewing whatever styles they want. My post was intended as a bit of a jab towards some other members of the forum who have disagreed with me on that subject in the past.
It makes sense to me that a Trappist brewery would make beer styles that are popular with the people near the brewery. So an IPA from Spencer or a Bock from La Trappe or in this case a English Strong Ale from the UK sounds good.
They also have a Peach Saison.
So you think that Trappist breweries sought out demographic information to back up which beer styles are popular in certain regions and then made the styles that directly reflected that information?
Loose translation: "I can't let anyone have the last word on anything.".
Quite possibly, but haven't you yet told the International Trappist Association that they are doing it all wrong and should only allow Quads, Tripels, and Dubbels to be brewed?
Until you convince them otherwise, any beer that legitimately wears their label is a Trappist beer by definition.
Precedents are a bitch, aren't they?
Indeed it is. Very unfortunately, IMO.
Yes, precedents can be constraining, especially when they are set by a religous order that makes it's own decisions regardless of what others happen to think or want.
(BTW, just between you and me, I don't think the ITA gives even one tiny little fig about your opinion of what should or should not be a Trappist beer. )
When Trappist breweries are renowned for making certain styles of beer and then new additions to the Trappist designation start making other ones, for the overt reasoning of increased profit and not adherence to tradition, you'll have to forgive me for being both skeptical and confused by the ruling of the ITA, as although the short term increase in profit might be nice, the long term dilution of their brand won't be. FWIW, I don't consider this particular beer and brewery to be guilty of the profiteering that I mentioned. Yet.
They definitely give < fig about what I think.
You clearly have little to no understanding at all of what motivates a monastic order and its members. The very fact that you make the accusation of a profit motivation shows that clearly.
They are in fact being absolutely traditional in their approach. In one time and place demographics and what could be sold to support the abbey and its monastic lifestyle motivated choices. In another time and place demographics and what can sell to support the abbey and its monastic lifestyle motivates choices. Traditional to the core.
While I certainly understand the purview of the ITA, I don't agree that "any beer can be a Trappist beer". If you think that Trappist breweries making hazy IPAs and fruited beers is good for the Trappist designation, I don't know what to tell you.
Oh my god, THE IRONY ! It's too much, canno... *passes out*
A “Trappist” has to satisfy a number of strict criteria proper to this logo before it may bear this name:
The beer must be brewed within the walls of a Trappist monastery, either by the monks themselves or under their supervision.
The brewery must be of secondary importance within the monastery and it should witness to the business practices proper to a monastic way of life
The brewery is not intended to be a profit-making venture. The income covers the living expenses of the monks and the maintenance of the buildings and grounds. Whatever remains is donated to charity for social work and to help persons in need.
Trappist breweries strictly comply with all health and safety standards as well as consumer information standards. Their advertising and communication is marked by honesty, soberness and a modesty proper to the religious setting in which the beer is brewed.
I'm not seeing anything relating to a specific style.
And this is the point of contention. When the original 7 breweries with the Trappist appellation produce certain types of beers and have for many decades and then other Trappist monasteries jump on the bandwagon in basically the last 5 years and one of them starts brewing styles that are not within the realm of the original 7, something smells funny. Whether or not the ITA sees this as an issue is moot. Consumers expect something when they see the Trappist seal and they are not getting it from Spencer. Plain and simple. That said, I feel that this beer is in the spirit of those beers that the original 7 produce.
No, I don’t think you do understand the purview of the ITA. If you did you’d stop insisting that any beer style can’t be a Trappist beer style. Any beer that meets their requirements for certification can be a Trappist beer whether either of us thinks it is a good idea or not.
This is obviously the case and, as has been said, is disappointing from my perspective. I simply choose to continue to argue a losing case.
That's Hops bro!
Spencer Trappist Ale, Spencer Monks’ Reserve Ale and the Trappist Holiday Ale all fit into styles brewed by the original 7, Belgian Pale Ale, Quad and Belgian Strong Dark Ale.
Indeed they do and I have no problem with them. The rest of their beers, however, are a different story. Although I feel that the following is purposefully left open to interpretation, when the ITA states: The beers are brewed with the "Trappist Yeast specific to each Trappist beer", I believe that it really means, "Trappist yeast specific to each Trappist brewery", as that's what the original 7 breweries have done and what every brewery since them has done. In other words, every brewery, with the exception of Spencer, has a house yeast and that yeast strain is the only one that is used in the brewery and it is meant to establish a specific and unique character for the beers of that specific Trappist brewery.
On someone's trappist style comment: It's made by a trappist monks, it can be anything they want it to be, I would say the trappist style you are referring to is belgian style, and this beer is not belgian so....yeah there you go.
Please see the comment in post #35.
I wonder what yeast La Trappe uses for the Bockbier they make.
From the reviews, it sounds like their house strain:
Let me see. Your claim here is that the underlined phrase actually means that all real Trappist Abbeys uses only a single house yeast strain.
You claim that is true for La Trappe and brewing a lagered beer or a beer that they have mislabeled as being a Bock.
Now, Spencer is a Trappist Abbey whose beers have been approved by the ITA. That means Spencer uses only a single house yeast strain for all their beers.
Then that makes it quite clear that you've been wrong all along and that Spencer actually does use only a single house yeast.