He/she had provided 18 answers to 18 questions by a certain commenter named Oleg. The answers were all correct, straightforward, and where necessary, documented.
Not encountering such thoughtfulness very often from the Neocat side, I took the opportunity to ask Anonymous at 2:02 AM about the Neo practice of not immediately consuming the host upon receiving, as well as some other matters:
Well said. You appear to be more informed than the rest. I have often noted those practices which are permitted by the Statute, which you note here as well. Perhaps you can tell us where the permission comes for those practices which are not permitted by the Statute.
As you know, other than what is permitted in the Statute, all other norms as per the "liturgical books" apply. Thus GIRM 161 requiring immediate consumption of the consecrated host applies. The priest is also required to communicate himself before distributing communion. Neither of these norms are followed.
As you probably also know, in defense of these practices we have heard just about every possible twist, from redefining the communicants to "concelebrants" to taking the "as soon as" in GIRM 161 to mean "as soon as" ALL have received. I do hope that you will be able to do better than that.
One final request, the Statute requires your Eucharist to be "open to the other faithful". However, the "other faithful" do not know the locations and times of these celebrations. Would you be willing to at least post the location and time of your community's weekly celebration of the Eucharist and any more that you know of? Thank you.I waited 24 hours. There has been no reply. So I asked again:
At 2:02AM. Waiting. You appeared to have all the answers for Oleg. No answers for me?I have now asked these questions countless times. Aside from the many times I have asked it on this blog, I have specifically addressed these questions to Archbishop Apuron, and Fr. Neil X. O'Donoghue, a noted defender of the Neocatechumenal Way, and listed as a member of the faculty of the Blessed Diego Institute (even though he lives in Ireland). Their answers? The same as from 2:02AM: SILENCE.
I hear that the Archbishop and others are quite angry about this blog. They could shut me up with a single answer. The could simply show me (and others) where they have the permission to do what they do. I would have no argument. JungleWatch would go away.
Yet we get evasions, silence, grotesque twists, mad interpretations, squealing and scratching and clawing. Everything but an answer. Because there is none.