Tuesday, February 4, 2014


Since December 1, 2005, we have only ever asked one question:


And, since December 1, 2005, for asking this one question, we have been reviled, spat upon, abused, mocked, belittled, and labeled "persecutors", as born witness on this blog.

It is critical that everyone understand why we ask this question.

On December 1, 2005, the Neocatechumenal Way was directed to conform their manner of distributing communion to the liturgical books, which means to receive communion like the rest of the church.

The reason this continues to be such a hot button issue is because the leaders of the Neocatechumenal Way, worldwide, REFUSED to do so.

On Guam, this refusal was made glaringly and brazenly public by the Archbishop himself when he went on the radio and openly called into question the credibility of the directive, even though it came from the highest authorities at the Vatican and in the name of Pope Benedict.

More incredibly, the Archbishop publicly reframed the papal order to cease and desist as a PERMISSION to continue! In fact, the Archbishop went further saying:

...it is the first time in the history of the church that we were given permissions for the variations that is being done in the Neocatechumenal Way, officially by the pope. 
Listen to it here or on YouTube below

Compare what the Archbishop said to what the letter said:

On the manner of receiving Holy Communion, a period of transition (not exceeding two years) is granted to the Neocatechumenal Way to pass from the widespread manner of receiving Holy Communion in its communities (seated, with a cloth-covered table placed at the center of the church instead of the dedicated altar in the sanctuary) to the normal way in which the entire Church receives Holy Communion. This means that the Neocatechumenal Way must begin to adopt the manner of distributing the Body and Blood of Christ that is provided in the liturgical books
Had the Archbishop not gone public with these comments, most of us would have continued to ignore the illicit practices of the Neocatechumenal Way. But because the Archbishop: 
  1. went public with his rejection of the papal directive, 
  2. thumbed his nose at Pope Benedict by questioning the credentials of his messenger, 
  3. attempted to deceive us into believing that the "stop order" was in fact a permission to continue, and 
  4. publicly took sides with the Neocatechumenal Way AGAINST the rest of the flock he was consecrated to care for, ummm, well, we took notice. 


But the neocatechumenal priests and catechists are telling their people not to respond, not to engage, not to answer, not to "play in the Jungle." Why? BECAUSE THEY HAVE NO ANSWER! They are outside the Church, and so is the Archbishop. And this is why the weaker among them squeal like stuck pigs when we dare lift the veil on this grievous lie. 

In the end it is a choice to obey Kiko or the Pope. The Archbishop and the Neocatechumenal Way have chosen Kiko.  So we now choose to petition Rome for an Archbishop in union with the Pope and with the one, holy, catholic, and apostolic church. The current one can either decide he is that man, or wait for his replacement. 

To the Papal Nuncio, Archbishop Martin Krebs: We will go to Rome if you won't.


ABA: Actually experimentation was granted in the year 2005...for five years, so it doesn’t expire until 2007, and with this recent letter* - it was supposed to be confidential,  but like the NSA, was leaked to the press...and really they have their own interpretation. We were granted two more years. And in fact, really looking at the letter, mostly, beside the interpretation of the two columnists...it is the first time in the history of the church that we were give permissions for the variations that is being done in the Neo Catechumenal Way, officially by the pope. The late Pope John Paul gave it for five years ad experimentum so this gives us even two more years so really to 2009 if you count 5 years from 2002 for the first experimentation, 5 years is 2007 plus this giving us 2 more years, especially in terms of the eucharist itself and the manner of receiving the eucharist. 

And as you know, it was made public that I argued first of all for the kiss of peace to be moved, or at least the possibility of having to move the kiss of peace at before the offertory after the homily, before moving into the liturgy of the eucharist as is done in the eastern church. And that’s what separates us from the eastern church but it had been the much earlier practice of the church in the primitive church, the receiving communion seated.

My argument, and in front of the pope and the bishops there, cardinals, in fact Arinze’s there, and Arinze, to tell you the truth, is really not for the Way, and I don’t know what credentials he has, I mean I don’t want to get into an argument in terms of an individual but Cardinal Arinze, with due respect, uh, I, you know uh, I don’t know why he uh uh wants us to conform to what...and you know the...I heard earlier the discussions about kneeling and standing and showing respect....


  1. What is the position of Archbishop Krebs as of now? Does this mean we have to really go straight to Rome?

  2. Just finished listening to the audio....what gives Apuron the right to question the credentials of Arinze? The comment of he is not for the "Way" says something. Like you Apuron, you made it loud and clear, that if these priests from Manila do not join the way, they may back their bags.

    We lost one of the BEST homilist on the island, Father James Bejer. You don't know how good a confessor he was to many people. He was one priest who minded his business, took care of ministering with love, and his homilies hit hearts, a lot better than yours. Now I know this part of the story. Always wondered why Father Bejer left.

    NO NEO PRIEST who came from the Redemptorist Mater Seminary can give a homily. Everything they say is a repitition of the Gospel. I don't need the Gospel to be repeated over and over, give me the punch line that is directed to lessons which can be learned in life. YOUR SEMINARIANS NEED to PREPARE AHEAD OF TIME!

    1. In fairness, and true to our commitment to truth. Fr. Bejer was not one of those priests from the Philippines who was given the neo ultimatum by the bishop. Fr. Bejer is a member of the Paulist order and was on loan to us to assist in the development of the Cathedral bookstore. He was on Guam twice. He has since been asked by his order to return. If someone knows a different story they are welcome to share it.

  3. Do you have copies of the permissions granted by John Paul II? I'm curious to know what he actually said to them about their practices.

    1. The only permission granted by JP2 was the permission in 2002 to proceed "ad experimentum" for five years at which time there would be a full review of the NCW, and the development and promulgation of a governing statute. JP2 died 3 years later and the task was taken up by Benedict XVI, resulting in the Statute in 2008. The Statute is a very terse document emphasizing the necessity for the NCW to be in communion with the church and submissive to its pastors. It can be found here:

  4. Tim is correct. I am in the NCW on Guam and i remember reading this letter however we don't practice some of the instructions.

    On #5 I remember Fr. Pius saying at the annual convivance that something about the receiving of the Eucharist was still being worked on. However this big change that was implemented was to stand when the priest approaches your seat. whereas we'd sit originally. Clearly we don't follow the instructions as written or was this the negotiated agreement Pius was mentioning between the Holy See and NCW. I don't know.

    On #1 i joke with my spouse repeatedly about this, because the communities have never, ever, en masse celebrated with the parish on Sunday. The only exceptions i've witnessed is attending the feast day of the patron saint and this is usually on a saturday afternoon.

    Few years later a letter From Pope Benedict, saying that the ultimately when one's faith has been restored through being in the Way, he encourages us to return to the Parish. This too i've joked with my spouse when i don't feel like coming in on a Saturday night.

    On this point i remember Monsignor Bibi reiterating the letter. To come back to the St. Anthony parish. Fr. Bibi i can see is sensitive to us as we are part of the Tamuning parish however i can see the strain it has caused. No priests from Tamuning parish celebrate Neo masses anymore.

    On another note, the newly ordained priests, i can see their loyalty and i admire them for that. One priest during Eucharist commented, "I follow St. Peter." Which means i follow the Pope. Which means i follow the Bishop." However faulty our Archbishop is, this priest, at least in public draws his lines. If Fr. Paul is just in the merits of his case, then the more power to him as right makes might.

    I've grown up seeing the Archbishop on the island. I was in the color guard standing over Archbishop Flores during his burial at the Cathedral. I remember seeing our new Bishop celebrating a mass at our school and at the time i remember his fellow Capuchin brothers joking to us about how he drives a new camry, albeit a gift from the Apuron family. I respect our Archbishop but i acknowledge that he too is just a man and i've made many many many mistakes, some have acknowledged, and suffered for them. He should too.

    I'd like to say though that the NCW at the individual community level is great. the brothers talk about their problems, share, network business, etc. like any other social group but centered on personal faith. when the big impositions come...go out and do two by twos, etc, etc, give 10% of your gross...give 10% of your gross and there is only a verbal report of what will go where....something itches at you. our cathechist will tell us that is the devil working, hmm. maybe..

    It is also true that the Archbishop takes orders or parlays with the NCW. Fr. Aurelio, one of the newly ordained priests from RM, said to us during his homily. .."The Bishop pulled me aside and said i am going to Asia. They've given me a seminary, (and other that i don't recall), now i have to give them something back. So i have to send you to Asia."

  5. Camry cars at that time were not from the Apuron family. Same with the Lexus cars they were not given by the family. Just process the logic first. He was an ofm cap. When he was a seminarian or young priest do yo think the Apuron family gave him cars. The cars began appearing when he was made a bishop, and evolved from that date. He wanted to,compete with archbishop Flores if you remember the history. Apuron went wrong after his consecration as a bishop that is the problem.