Tuesday, March 11, 2014


Here is my offense:
I have judged certain practices of the Neocatechumenal Way to be in violation of its own Statute and other liturgical and canonical norms. I have based my judgment on actual practices vs what is written in the NCW Statute, the General Instruction for the Roman Missal, Canon Law and Redemptionis Sacramentum, which are clear for all to see. 
Their response:
They have judged me: my person, my heart, my soul. (Anonymously of course.)
If nothing else, their comments on this blog have been more instructive about the Neocatechumenal Way than anything we could have ever hoped to learn from Kiko's Catechism. Of course, what we have learned thus far from Kiko's Catechism explains much about their behavior on this blog. But the fact that they continue to hide behind Anonymous, more than anything else, affirms that they have no defense, no answer, and no conviction. Even their prophet, "Diana", continues, even on "her" own blog, to hide behind a pseudonym. 

I will continue to use my name and to witness my convictions with my own person. And when you are ready to do the same, let me know. Meanwhile, I am willing to talk face to face to anyone. Email me at JungleWatch.info@gmail.com. 


  1. To those who think that this is a "crusade" of Tim, know that there have been many more people who, in the past 10-15 years, have not only already begun to reveal the liturgical abnormalities of the Neo, but also speak of the negative psychological effects to those who remain in the way.

    Just one of many examples of testimonial websites, http://anticammino.weebly.com/ acknowledges that some good results have occurred and a few activities of the Neo are to be commended, however, the overwhelming harm it has brought to it's members and their non-neo friends and families cannot be ignored nor dismissed.

    1. Rational Dialogue:March 11, 2014 at 1:01 PM

      To our Catholic Neo family: We are not judging you as one would condemn one to hell. Mr. Rohr and others have judged you as one would judge that a person has his shirt on backwards or has a flat tire. The problem is that you have chosen to ignore that your shirt is on backwards or that you have a flat tire and continue on as though they do not exist. Perhaps you do not think that you have your shirt on backwards. Well, if you do, tell us why and how. Or perhaps you think that we have our shirts on backwards instead. Whatever it is, please tell us. Let's start a rational dialogue on the issues raised, and only on the issues, not on the personality or motives of those presenting the issues and arguments.

    2. Thank you for recommending a dialogue. I look forward to the opportunity. I am easy to reach.

  2. All I can say is the NCW need to learn how to practice what they preach!

    If you preach on modesty, then have your children dress modestly, especially for Church services.

    Young adults do have foul mouths that parents do no hear.

    If you have a handicap child, do not mimic other handicap children.

    If you cover up for someone when knowing it was a lie, the honesty is not a value for you.

    These are just a few examples that I have come across. The one that hit me the hardest was when a mother who is a NEO mimicked another handicap child forgetting that she has one of her own.

    This is where I see the hypocrisy of the NCW. You all talk about salvation, The Lord, the Gospel, yet some members' actions say otherwise.

    The difference between me and the NEO is I don't talk story about my life. My life is private and what I do is between me and my God. Yes, I have faults like everyone else, but at least I don't go around praising God every time I open my mouth then turn around and say ill things about another.

    Show me in the Bible where it states that I need to be scrutinized by lay people and if I am not ready I cannot go to the next level.

    Show me where it states that I have to climb the ladder to reach The Lord!

    If these examples mentioned above are the fruits that you produce then ........

  3. Have we all forgotten that Neos are trying to take over the Catholic Church on Guam, which they view as an unholy or at least less holy institution which needs replacement? What would be the purpose of this dialogue. The regular Catholic Church is under threat of extermination so long as the Neos are here on Guam. I'm really confused as to what Tim hopes to achieve in this dialogue. Perhaps he can just kindly ask the Neos to leave.

    1. Anyone in the Neo is there because they are Catholic. That's why.
      I don't agree with their methods or liturgies, but you'll never hear me deny them dialogue. These are our Catholic Brothers and Sisters who just may benefit greatly because of dialogue.
      Who knows, it may teach the Chancery leadership a thing or two about honest conversation to see the laity engaging in honest conversation. So far, the Archbishop and other Church leaders OF our island are the ones who have been denying us this dialogue. It's been completely one sided on their part.

    2. Glad to be back in Holy Mother ChurchMarch 12, 2014 at 8:12 AM

      In this twisted diocese I just found out what CCD means up on the Hill.... Chancery Cannot Dialogue.

      Tim - I hope your efforts with Diana pay off to start things moving in a positive direction. I have seen many pleadings in past blogs/comments on this site by folks who want to openly discuss the problems that divide us, but so far all we hear is dead silence from those in the Way. May your attempt with Diana be the first fruits to finally open things up.

    3. Thank you, "Glad", I am not hoping at this point for anything more than to fulfill the commandment of Christ to confront your brother. I have a long history of personally confronting those with whom I take offense. And I have, from the beginning of the conversation on this blog, asked those who oppose me to confront me. I've had no takers.

    4. It is because "Diana" may be a conglomerate of persons. Also, in-line with the distortions and manipulations of official documents, "Diana" has to distort and manipulate who "she" is. Meeting with Tim will reveal the deception.
      As long as "Diana" is not identified, anything written on this [her] blog will never be verifiable as well as nobody can be held accountable for the errors.
      It is in "Diana's" interest to never reveal who they are and to never meet with anyone.

    5. Yes, you are most likely right about this. However, I have no interest in knowing who Diana is personally, and I told "her" so on "her" blog. I am interested in doing what I have always done, meeting with people to get to the bottom of things. The actions of the Archbishop in the matter of Fr. Paul, Aaron Quitugua, and the conveyance of title of the Yona property to the Gennarini's have exposed a new "bottom".

      But as mentioned in my invitation, I intend only to listen, and for my part, to at least fulfill the commandment. Once fulfilled, we are then justified in shaking the dust from our feet.

    6. By you placing yourself in the front and actually using your name, credibility is on your side Tim. I really hope this 'Diana" sees that no matter what she or he writes, nothing can be taken seriously on their part as long as they remain hidden behind a lie.

    7. Thanks. I would never even think of posting an opinion without my name, so I guess I just don't understand others. That said, I do understand why many commenters don't. There's a price for it and sometimes it is not worth that price...yet. However, when someone starts an actual blog or website or presents opinions regularly in a public forum of any sort, then that person undermines themselves and their credibility by remaining hidden.

  4. It is funny that Churches have different rules. Niño Perdido in Asan has no holy water in their fonts. According to Father, when asked why, his comment was that during Lent it should be dry. I know that the directive is that the holy water should be removed during the Sacred Tridium beginning with Holy Thursday. We were shocked at this. I guess, the priests in the NEOS make their own rules and do not follow the directives of the Archbishop. Like Father like Son!

    Now we have jungle rules in the church. So disappointed with the Catholic Church!

    1. Unfortunately, it is the just the Neo priests who have strange practices, in the past priests were even denying baptism of infants during Lent. I believe that is now locally outlawed, I hope. However, in answer to your question, I recommend you present Father with the following letter:

      Prot. N. 569/00/L

      March 14, 2000

      Dear Father:

      This Congregation for Divine Worship has received your letter sent by fax in which you ask whether it is in accord with liturgical law to remove the Holy Water from the fonts for the duration of the season of Lent.

      This Dicastery is able to respond that the removing of Holy Water from the fonts during the season of Lent is not permitted, in particular, for two reasons:

      1. The liturgical legislation in force does not foresee this innovation, which in addition to being praeter legem is contrary to a balanced understanding of the season of Lent, which though truly being a season of penance, is also a season rich in the symbolism of water and baptism, constantly evoked in liturgical texts.

      2. The encouragement of the Church that the faithful avail themselves frequently of her sacraments and sacramentals is to be understood to apply also to the season of Lent. The "fast" and "abstinence" which the faithful embrace in this season does not extend to abstaining from the sacraments or sacramentals of the Church. The practice of the Church has been to empty the Holy Water fonts on the days of the Sacred Triduum in preparation of the blessing of the water at the Easter Vigil, and it corresponds to those days on which the Eucharist is not celebrated (i.e., Good Friday and Holy Saturday).

      Hoping that this resolves the question and with every good wish and kind regard, I am,

      Sincerely yours in Christ,

      Mons. Mario Marini

      Here is the link to the letter: http://www.adoremus.org/0403HolySeeResponds.html

    2. Thankfully, I will be the proud godfather to a newborn baby this Sunday, during Lent. In the past we were told that baptisms and weddings couldn't take place during lent, but this seems to have been corrected. I hope all the priests follow the same rules, but it is hard to expect that when our own faith leaders seemingly make up their own rules whenever they like. I pray that they become leaders we can follow rather than puppets we only scorn.

    3. I guess neo priests dont always talk to each other. Our pastor told us the archdiocese regulations say the holy water founts should not be emptied of holy water like some priests do in their parish. Neo dont always listen to neo archbishop! thats a new one!

    4. As mentioned, it isn't just Neos. In the past, this was quite common everywhere. Sadly one of the "fruits" of Vatican II is that many simple things need to be taught all over again.

  5. And as found in the Umatuna:

    2. Fonts: Holy water fonts in churches should not be drained or replaced with any other substance during Lent. The season of penance actually benefits greatly from access to the sacramental that reminds us of baptism. Holy water fonts should only be emptied of water during the Sacred Triduum—from Holy Thursday until they are refilled with the water blessed at the Easter Vigil.


    1. 3. Baptisms during Lent: Nothing in Church law prohibits infants from be- ing baptized during Lent. Please refer to canon 867, §1 of the Code of Canon Law (CIC) and canon 1250 of the Catechism of the Catholic Church (CCC). The reason to delay baptism should be for pastoral reasons when the parents are not yet prepared to profess the faith or to undertake the duty of bringing up the children as Christians. The penitential season of Lent does not qualify as justification to delay or prohibit the baptism of infants. Therefore, in the Archdiocese of Agana, clergy may not prohibit or delay the baptism of infants during the season of Lent unless there are serious and pastoral reasons to do so in accord with canonical norms.


      Note: The directive is still of some concern: should infants EVER be denied baptism given that we teach it is a condition of salvation? The local directive is in harmony with the magisterium, so this is a larger question the church may one day need to engage.


Recommendations by JungleWatch