Monday, March 17, 2014


The post on ZOLTAN CONFIRMS THE NEOCATECHUMENAL WAY IS NOT CATHOLIC has produced over 40 comments, and some of them are as strange as they are instructive. Let’s take a look:
Where does it say were (sic) not Catholic?
It appears that I assume too much. I actually assumed that people would see that treating the General Instruction of the Roman Missal as a book of suggestions would sort of speak for itself. But apparently not. So more explanation is needed. 

Because the Catholic Mass is the “sacrament of unity” as Vatican II calls it, and is in fact the highest Act of the Church, separation from that Act, either in spirit, theology, or in practice, is separation from the Catholic Church. This is why any variance in the celebration of the Eucharist must be authorized, and usually authorized by the Pope (even though he may speak through a Congregation.)

However, this idea that the GIRM is only a GUIDE is so thoroughly imbued in the thinking and comments of the members of the NCW who comment on this blog, we have begun to see that this is not the view of just a few individuals, but a view originating in a higher authority. Later in the comments, we get a bit of a hint, when one commenter says:
GIRM is a document providing us with a guideline how to perform liturgy. Monsignor David informed us it is only a guide and we interpret the document in the light of inculttaration (sic) to our needs and culture on Guam. We are the catholic church on Guam so we have a new way now of doing things. Monsignor David supports this so we are right.
I sincerely hope that Monsignor David (David C. Quitugua) DID NOT say this, but whether he did or not, the view that the GIRM is only a GUIDE and not an INSTRUCTION, certainly comports not just with the majority view of NCW commenters, but in the constant practice of the Neocatechumenal celebrations of the Eucharist. We then get this from Zoltan (emphases mine):
Zoltan March 16, 2014 at 9:55 AM

...when a bishop allows the Way to work under its jurisdiction, then the same bishop consents to the faith life and the practices of the Way. So we do not need special permission from the local bishop, or the Archbishop in this case, to participate in and follow our celebrations. The Way celebrates the Eucharist in the exact same manner in every country of the earth. We are not talking about reception of the Eucharist on the tongue, but under both kinds. Our practice in the Way has been existing for quite some time. Whoever wants to change this, has the burden of proof. Otherwise we follow our practice.

We sometimes have to be wary of impostors being sarcastic or facetious and posting exaggerations, but in this case, we can be sure that the author of the comment is who he says he is. And, Zoltan, as we have come to know on this blog, is one of the staunchest defenders of the Neocatechumenal Way. He is also not uneducated, being a math professor at the University of Guam. Thus, we must take his comments as serious, and his errors, just as seriously. 

But the real question is: Are they errors? Yes. And I will demonstrate so. But No, if he is only repeating what he has been taught. And from the looks of it, he is only repeating what he has been taught. How else to explain the same attitude by Neocatechumenal communities around the world?

Including Zoltan's previous point, we now have THREE main beliefs of the Neocatechumenal Way:

  • The General Instruction of the Roman Missal is subject to interpretation.
  • The permission of a bishop for the Neocatechumenal Way to practice in his diocese is a blanket consent to the "life and practices of the Way," and no other permissions are needed.
  • The practices of the Way are valid because the members of the Way have been practicing them for "quite some time", thus any challenge to them requires a "burden of proof" from the challenger.

Zoltan has been very concerned that I have taken him out of context in the past, so I am making sure that I am quoting him pretty much verbatim. However, feel free to verify the above with his comments. Zoltan is also going to say that he speaks only for himself, but in fact he speaks using "we", not I, so we have to take him at his word: he is speaking for the Neocatechumenal Way.

Let's take these one at a time. 

We have already argued that the GIRM is not subject to interpretation, that it is NOT a "guide", that it is an INSTRUCTION, and there is no variance from it without authorization from the competent authority. In fact, Zoltan agrees with this last part, it's just that he believes that the "community" is the "competent authority", which is why no "permissions" from the bishop are needed. In fact, he told me on the phone, that even if Archbishop Apuron should come out against the practice (the way they do communion), the Archbishop's position would have no bearing on how the communities practice. I do hope the Archbishop is paying attention here. (But then the fact that the Archbishop is not in charge is something we've all known for a very long time. It's just that Zoltan now confirms it.)

But let's grant the neos their druthers. Let's agree (with Msgr. David ?) that the GIRM is only a guide and that is is subject to interpretation as the neos claim. And let us agree that a "community" can decide to take or leave a particular instruction such as the requirement to immediately consume the host upon reception (GIRM 161). And let's say that your parish, since it is a community, takes a vote and says: "You know, we would prefer to carry the host back to our pews and wait till everyone has received, and then consume it altogether as a community, since we believe this would be much more meaningful." (This is how many Protestant churches design their "worship",  by the way. )

And so next Sunday, instead of consuming the host "as soon as" (GIRM 161) one receives it, everyone takes the host back to their pews and waits. In fact, let's forget about the vote. There is nothing that says (since the GIRM is only a guide) that a change in practice even need be approved by a "community". So let's just let every one do as they feel. Let's let everyone "interpret". Those who want to take the host back to their pews and wait can do so. And those who want to immediately consume can do so as well. Maybe we can even fix some of the communion traffic jams and send just one member of a family up to get a handful of hosts for the rest of the family. This would have "meaning" too, right?

So, Msgr. David, just to let you know what is being said in your name, perhaps you, since the Archbishop will not respond, may want to address this? And please let the rest of us "regular Catholics" in on whether it is okay to treat the GIRM as a guide and subject to interpretation. Otherwise, there is absolutely no reason that we cannot adopt the practice of the neos (since, according to Zoltan, no permission from the bishop is needed) and begin taking the host back to our seats where we can look at it for awhile before popping it into our mouths. 

We actually covered both of Zoltan's first two points, so let's go on to the third which is that their practice is valid because they "have been doing it for quite awhile," and that any challenge to conform with the rest of the church requires us to prove something. 

I have yet to figure out what it is that we are supposed to prove, but let's give it a shot. The Catholic Church is composed of approximately one billion believers. The Neocatechumenal Way - at least according to Kiko (ahem) - has about one million members. Zoltan is a math professor so we shouldn't have to do the math, but let's assume nothing. One million is 1/1000th of a billion. So Zoltan is telling us that the burden of proof is on 99.9% of the church that receives holy communion as instructed by the GIRM and, by the way, has done so before long before Kiko was born.

There is much more we could have fun with, but after the last couple days I have realized that in engaging the likes of Zoltan and "Diana", we are but "tilting at windmills". The real villain is the thing that takes otherwise sane minds and melts them as we have witnessed here. How else to describe a university professor who believes that the burden of proof lies with 99.9% of the church to prove to the 0.1% that our "interpretation" of the GIRM is right and theirs is wrong. But then that's not even the point. THERE IS NO INTERPRETATION. THAT'S WHAT AN INSTRUCTION IS FOR. (Hey, maybe that's what happened to that Malaysia flight. The pilot decided to interpret the flight manual. Same result.)

So while we will probably go on engaging absurdity after absurdity, if only for the fun of it,  I believe we can all see that there is something much more sinister and serious going on than just the constant flow of inexplicable delusions from otherwise well-meaning people.  And don't think that we haven't noticed that the "sinister and serious" have remained silent. They know that we know that they know what most of you don't know and don't want you to know. You know?



  1. Tim, the burden of proof is not with the 99%, because the 99% have never said what you say. The 99% is just fine with the Way and steers clear from the obsession of a few who criticize us day and night, 7/24.

    1. You are saying that we need to prove that our interpretation is right. 99.9% of the church "interprets" the GIRM to mean to consume immediately. Only your .1% interprets it to mean not to consume immediately. It has nothing to do with who is "fine with it." Catholics don't do liturgy that way, Protestants do.

  2. Dear neos, Keep posting! You are driving me away from you faster than Tim Rohr or anyone else is!

    1. That's on you. Nobody to blame but yourself.

  3. Agree. Monsignor David should at least respond to this posting and explain what is the meaning of his statement that GIRM is only a guide. GIRM is not a guide, it is the official document of the roman catholic church which governs our liturgical practice, and no Priest has the authority to say it is only a guide.

    1. Monsignor David is the heir apparent to the Archbishop when he retires in 6 years or so. If he said this then let him confirm it publicly because I am certain that Rome would like to see his views before they even consider him for Bishop. If it is not true, then he needs to clarify this statement so that the record will be set straight.
      As the Vicar General he should let all Catholics on Guam know how the GIRM affects our celebrations. Especially since the Archbishop has completely abdicated this responsibility by his continued silence.

      So Monsignor the quote attributed to you true and correct? If so please verify so we common Catholics may learn more about our Church. If it is inaccurate, please clarify so we may again learn more about our Church.
      We await your clarification. We will consider your silence to mean that the quote attributed to you is accurate and that you have nothing more to add.

  4. Zoltan's comments are comedy gold. He continues to be corrected by Church documents provided by Tim, and then goes back to Diana's blog for the comfort of denial she affords him.

    How he does not realize that his comments serve only to convince the least knowledgeable of us to avoid the neo is equally humorous.

    Thank you and keep up the good work Tim. And especially you, Zoltan, with your follies.

    1. No kidding! You should see (but really, don't!) the sobbing being done over on his/her site. The sting of Truth has "Diana" feverishly pounding out reactionary post after reactionary post to rationalize Zoltan's errors. Desperation abounds over there most definitely!
      Allow me one closing question: If Diana submits another entry to her blog, and nobody is around to read it, is she still wrong?

    2. for me, the kind of reaction the neos are having is symptomatic of cult behaviour. wake up boys & girls...this is a protest-ant Cult plain & simple.

  5. “The road to hell is paved with the skulls of erring priests, with bishops as their signposts.” St. John Chrysostom

    NO THANK YOU NEO PRIEST AND ARCHBISHOP! I'll stick with the Magisterium thank you.

    1. And now you are saying that the NCW pave the road to hell? Awesome! Nice criticism.

    2. Anon @ 11:30 pm. Don't be so quick to assume. The source of the quote is provided. Go research the quote with the context of this post in mind, and then revisit your analysis. You will see the correlation.
      The simple answer to your accusation is no, that is not what 10:04 is saying, but it would be better if you understood what the quote means for yourself.

    3. Anon 11:33pm: The Saint lived in 347, imagine he's already making this bold statement during his life time, maybe he was prophesying today's clergy, NEO or NON-NEO. This is not a 'criticism', but Interpret as you may, the Saint said it not me and so i'm inclined to believe the Saints over any NEO priest put forth.

    4. Glad to be Back to Holy Mother ChurchMarch 18, 2014 at 10:00 PM

      Anon 11:33pm - you are an idiot who has been fooled. That is sad but not irreversible. This blog is about trying to resolve a problem, real or perceived.
      Since our Archbishop refuses to address these issues, we lay people must try to muddle through as best we can until Rome gets involved, if ever. Regular priests are rightly scared to speak out against their spiritual leader whom they pledged obedience to. I am sure the Neo priests have been very active in their comments, also anonymously. But while they remain anonymous, they are not priests.
      In order to make this blog productive, you should carefully read what is presented, leave your Neo-emotions aside, and try to give some thoughtful input. If you don't understand what someone has said then ask for clarification. Then when you feel ready, address the issues. But please refrain from petty, insignificant, self-centered, knee-jerk comments. We have already seen plenty of these. Lets get serious!

  6. "You try to make a lot out of the "as soon as" addition in GIRM regarding the reception and consumption of the Eucharistic Host. Following the unity principle of the Catholic faithful, our discernment is that a community is one unit at the celebration of the Eucharist. Therefore we consume the Eucharistic Host as soon as the whole community has received it. This is 100% Catholic! I hope this helps to ease up your reservations about the Way." - Zoltan

    Is it possible to interpret this to mean that the NCW sees the community as the "communicant" as mentioned in the GIRM (following Zoltan's aforementioned "unity principle")?

    1. Zoltan - is that really you speaking? If so, I am glad all my kids are through with college. Your utter foolishness in dialogue is simply scary. You seem to be as far from objective about the situation as Goliath was in assessing David.

      I would expect more deep thought from a university professor. I guess tenure does have its privileges!

      If you want to see what the Catholic Church really does with the Eucharist, tune into EWTN (does Kiko allow that if he is not on the program?) and watch a papal mass.
      Notice how all the con-celebrants receive Jesus first and consume him, before the ministers go to the congregation? What do you think?

      At this point you will no doubt say that is because it is impractical to wait so long because the crowd is so huge. So go to any other (non-Neo) mass and see how communion is distributed. Celebrant first, then con-celebrants, then the congregation. Plenty of masses are shown on EWTN, so take a look at them, and then report back what you find.
      BTW - have you ever actually read the GIRM for yourself? It would be very interesting to hear your verification once you read it, then which section you think is open to legitimate interpretation.
      I hope you are eligible for retirement before my grandkids go to UOG. Your reasoning is frightening to the average person.

  7. John from Chalan PagoMarch 17, 2014 at 11:33 PM

    Zoltan is not only not careful, he is reckless in how he treats Church doctrines, teachings, and instructions. As a mathematician, he understands that any deviation will lead you to the wrong answer or path to an answer. If the dean of his department informed him(his interpretation) that 1+1 = 3, and thereafter teaches that the sum is now 3, not 2, he will be committing a grave error. He should question and confront his dean on the correct answer, not accede. Zoltan should question his Neo superiors on the errors that we have exposed in order to arrive at the truth, but he has concluded that he does not need to do so because it is a matter of interpretation. Strange logic indeed!

  8. Thank you Tim for helping us make sense of what is happening. Many of us are now fearful where all this is leading for the church on Guam. The fear that archbishop Apuron placed in the minds of Guam Catholics is a reality or us.

    1. & many of us are fearful of where all of this is going in Boston!! ... which is why there are so many 'anonymous' in the comment section.

    2. Glad to be Back to Holy Mother ChurchMarch 18, 2014 at 10:30 PM

      Anon 8:52am - are you from Boston? If so we would love to hear your thoughts and observations of the neo-crisis way in Beantown.
      Some have said that Guam is different in many respects to other NCW locations. They have blamed it on Fr Pius, and our Archbishop who is the only Bishop in the world actually walking the "Way".
      But I believe the core problems are most likely universal. We have heard of the devastating effects of the Neo in Japan and the Philippines, but would like your perspective from the East Coast.
      I walked for quite a few years and got out, not without a deal of pain inflicted upon me by their constant haranguing to pull me back in. I am out long enough now that they have given up on me, to them I am a lost soul. While the experience had definite benefits, it got to be a bit much with family always being pushed aside, and the financial expectations applied to adults but not the youth in our community. The parents wouldn't cover their costs so we had to make it up as the adults. Other reasons to. But it would be good to hear if Boston is growing concerned. Is it because Cardinal O'Malley, or more direct factors? Any input would be anxiously received.
      It would be very effective if there was a more global input. We know readers are out there, and today we heard from a beautiful Irish RMS nun in Chicago, who will be helping a badly confused NCW. Always good to have fresh input.
      God bless!

  9. I don't understand why the Neo view that that there are two churches: the legitimate Neo church and the deficient regular Catholic church, is being treated as a new revelation. The Neos are very clear on this point when they proselytize at our regular Catholic Mass.

  10. Folks, here is a thing about the Eucharist: the tiny little wafer, we call the Body of Christ is pure energy. As soon as it is transformed and substantiated it is not a "tiny wafer" anymore but awesome power, the power of God! The enormous energy coming from this wafer is capable to save you and wash away your sin!

    Now, I wonder how the neo-catechumenary is treating this awesome energy. The fact is that keeping a transubstantiated Body in your palm for a longer period of time may cause burn and stigmata. Just think of Father Pio! It is because of the enormous energy coming from the Host. But I have never heard anyone in the neo-cetechumenary of complaining about stigmata. How come? Would not they have it?

    Just think about it, in a large crowd, they keep the Host in their palms for about 30 minutes until all have received. If it is the true Body of Christ, keeping in the palm for such a long time would definitely cause stigmata. But theirs don't! Therefore it is true what I suspect: their transubstantiation is lacking! Because their priests don't believe in the true presence of Christ in the wafer, it is actually not changed to the Body of Christ at all. It remains the plain piece of wafer that it was forever.

    What would this tell you about the neo-cathechumenary, folks?!

    1. Not sure about the stigmata, but am sure about receiving unworthily 1Cor 11. It will kill you.

    2. The question is about respect. How we receive the body of Christ. Not concerned about the stigmata. For me it is about respect and following the documents and official teaching of the church.

    3. Oh really? This is getting ridiculous! Please do not refer to Fr. Pio here. His stigmata did not come from the Eucharistic Body. We don't use wafer and we believe in transubstantiation.

      Actually, Kiko has an excellent explanation as of what happens when the bread turns into the Body. In fact, the texture of the bread remains bread and the make-up of the wine remains wine. But the Body of Jesus will appear mysteriously in it in a real sense. The same real sense as he is present in the communities and in His Church.

    4. Zoltan, you should have quit while you were ahead. I agree with you about the unnecessary reference to the stigmata, but you just gave us an extremely irregular account of transubstantiation. I've suspected Kiko had something weird, but you just have us the clue. Back later.

    5. The same 'real sense as he is present in the communities and in His Church'?

      No, here is the grave error. Please read the Catechism par 1373 to 1381.

    6. Oleg - I don't think what you say is correct. If so, then many other priests would also be affected with stigmata.
      But what Zoltan said at 11:00am...hasn't the Church already declared that to be heretical?
      Tim - I look forward to your usual, insightful review and analysis. Your gift of researching the truth and filtering out the chaff has become very important to our seeing how very far wrong this NCW group is trying to lead us.
      I used to feel sorry for Zolton, but his blindness is entirely his fault if he refuses to look at both sides of the argument.

  11. "My Son’s Church will suffer, it will be tried, it will be invaded by new ideologies that do not commune with the true being of the Christian. Remain in grace so they do not lead you astray. My Son’s Church will again be scourged by those who with a pompous finery commune with Her. Masonry has seized great power within My Son’s Church and you, knowing the Divine Word, must take steps within the Trinitarian Will so that you are not seduced by blunders. "
    revelacionesmarianas, 2/23/14

    "My dear ones, please pray and fast for your holy Pope Francis. He is in a grave situation and needs your prayers. The men who want to destroy the Church have devised a scheme to get your Pope out of office. He is well aware of what they are doing and who they are. You would be shocked to know who these men are. Pray for their souls."
    Messages from Jesus Given to a Chosen Child in Chicago March 10, 2014 (9:34am)

  12. Mr. zoltan, your understanding of Eucharistic theology is rather unhinged. In other words you lack an overall understanding of the teachings of the roman catholic church on the Eucharist. Suggest that you take some time to study catholic theology prior to writing on this post. Thank you.sister Margaret Mary Rsm.

  13. ZolTan. The last half of your paragraph is not catholic theology. After school today I will find time to respond to you because it is important to have a correct understanding of theology. Thank you. Margaret Mary Rsm.

  14. Understand that he is repeating what is taught in the Neocatechumenal Way that is here at the invitation and protection of the Archbishop. Send him a letter.

  15. I'll be looking forward to it, dear Sister.

    1. No need to wait. Once again you've earned your own post. Sister will probably tell you the same thing. The best that I can say is that up till now, your errors are not your fault. But you had better start reading the Catechism of the Catholic Church and learn what the Catholic Church actually teaches and not what Kiko teaches. Because from now on, it is your fault.

    2. Mr. Zoltan, please leave your phone number, and I will phone you. Margaret Mary Rsm.

    3. Sister, Zoltan will probably not want to put his phone # on a public website, however, Zoltan will see this message and he is welcome to send it to my email and I will send it to you if you will send me your email at the same address. Thank you for taking the time to help him.

    4. However, I suspect that if this is in fact a "sister" that is trying to contact Zoltan, it is either a pseudonym or is an RSM from somewhere else, as there is no Sister Margaret Mary RSM listed in the Archdiocesan Directory. If Sister Margaret Mary is in fact a nun, email me so that I can verify as I will not let someone impersonate a nun or a priest. Sorry. Have to be firm on that.

    5. Tim, I must admit I was intrigued when I read the 12:04/12:09 PM posts and saw the name "Sister Margaret Mary, RSM." When I attended Cathedral Grade School back in the 1960s, Sister Margaret Mary, RSM, was one of the sisters who taught there. I've lost track of her since then, so I don't know if the writer is appropriating her name or if it is the Sister Margaret Mary, RSM I once knew.

      Another possibility is that she may have reverted to her baptismal name, as several of my former teachers have done, and is now listed by that name.

  16. Excerpt from Zoltan: "Following the unity principle of the Catholic faithful, our discernment is that a community is one unit at the celebration of the Eucharist. Therefore we consume the Eucharistic Host as soon as the whole community has received it. This is 100% Catholic!

    If we are one unit as a community in a regular Sunday Mass for example the 9:30am where the Archbishop presides, why doesn't he impose this rule upon us? Are we not the same celebrating the Eucharist as a community?

    So confused!

    1. Janet B - MangilaoMarch 18, 2014 at 9:43 PM

      Dear Tony -
      Do you now see what a mess this is becoming? The more we find out what the Neo is teaching, the more people become confused.

      Poor Anon 03/18 @ 1:42pm doesn't know what to think. Is your practice at the Sat evening Neo mass licit, or is the practice at your 9:30 Catholic mass licit? Are they both licit?

      I have personally seen where a priest or deacon followed a person at the Cathedral because they did not consume the eucharist right away. Is it permissible to go back to the pew and contemplate?

      I used to be a eucharistic minister at St Therese and we were always instructed to make sure they consume immediately.

      Your silence is KILLING peoples faith in the Church. All these questions keep being asked, and you remain stone silent. These are the very same people you promised to bring to the faith, to teach and build.

      It seems clear that there are two churches here on Guam. The Neo Church, and the Catholic Church. The Neo Church has you as their bishop. The Catholic Church has no one as their bishop. We are now sheep without a shepherd. We wander the wilderness of this lent, wondering when a true shepherd will be found.

      BELOVED VATICAN - we desperately need your help. Our bishop has abandoned us for another flock. Not only does this hurt our flock, (the traditional Catholics on Guam), but he also risks the salvation of hundreds of souls who follow him. They also adamantly follow Monsignor David Quitugua the Vicar General, Fr Adrian Cristobal the Chancellor, and most especially they follow the Vicar of Kiko, Fr Pius Sammut.

      We urge you everyday in our prayers, and through these pleadings to please help us, all of us. We are a people who have faithfully followed the Magisterium since Blessed Diego introduced it to our ancestors 400 years ago, and only you can correct the course that is leading us away from the true teaching of the Church.

      While Guam may be small in numbers, this blog is an example of problems we are aware of throughout the world. So you see that we worry that not only hundreds at risk, and thousands left to feel abandoned, but these problems potentially affect close to a million souls. Guam just happens to be a good study case because we are small enough that everyone knows what is happening. In other, larger communities and diocese, very few understand because of the immense size of their diocese.

      Please come and see for yourselves, and we will open our hearts to you. Faithfully yours,

      Janet B - Mangilao, Guam

    2. Glad to be Back to Holy Mother ChurchMarch 19, 2014 at 1:09 AM

      What Janet B has to say raises a question. She says that in larger diocese the problem does not appear as clearly. Another way to look at that is to say, that in larger diocese the Church is less able to correct errant teachings and organizations that develop. This would then lend support to the Kiko teaching that smaller communities are better because they are easier to control.
      Does this then develop into a long term plan to mess things up so helplessly in the big Church that it opens the doors for just this philosophy to prevail? Smaller is better.
      It is late and my mind may not be as sharp, but I think this thread needs to be followed on by smarter minds than I, because it may show a more devious plan than I originally thought. I just assumed it was a bunch of over-hyped Catholics wanting to reconnect. But do we now see an indication that at the top of the Neo Kingdom is a real desire to completely overturn and throw the Church into chaos, thereby making the next step of growing from a small cult to a significant sized group within the Church?
      Guam must be an excellent test case for the top-top NCW. Confuse, divide, introduce chaos, and then swoop into to rescue the day with the NCW message.
      And the NCW has the Archbishop in their pocket. They now force all vocations to go through NCW indoctrination. Some Neo parishes force people to join the NCW in order to receive Confirmation and sacramental marriage. Neo priests now force penitents to go to Neo indoctrination.
      This is getting quite worrisome because I can now see Janet's point - will all her grandchildren be forced to learn these NCW heresies at Catholic Schools. And we cannot avoid it by sending our kids to other schools, because they will be forced to learn these heresies at CCD.
      It really sounds like a far fetched 1984 type of idea, but it is starting to sound more plausible the more we learn, and the more the NCW reveals it's serpent head on Guam.
      If this scares the hell out of the rest of you as well, then I think we are just about at the point where we need to invoke a holy revolution, or risk losing our beloved Church for generations to come.
      Do others feel the same way?

      I got out and am Glad to be back in Holy Mother Church...
      and I do not want to go backwards again!

    3. Parishes CANNOT force engaged couples to join the Neo in order to be married. If you've got proof of this, send it to Tim.

    4. "Force" is not the right word. But to the uninformed, it can certainly appear that way. A parish cannot "force" a parent to send their child to CCD in order to get the sacraments either, but the parent is under the impression that there is no option and no option is ever given. It is well know that to be a Deacon in this diocese, candidates had to "join" the Neo for a year. It is not technically "force", but the choice was join the Neo or don't be a deacon. So it is very possible that engaged couples are treated similarly, which is a crime. So yes, let me know where this happens.

    5. Glad to be Back to Holy Mother Church, in my view this is exactly their plan.
      As far as the church being less able to correct errors, I feel that depends on the Bishop and the priests in any given place.
      It also depends on what is preached Sunday to Sunday. As far as the children are concerned, an FYI to all parents: It is your "job" to teach the faith to your children! not CCD or any other thing. Read the CCC!
      PS. there are some places in the states where if you mention NCW they will look at you like you killed their grandmother!

    6. Dear Tim I can tell you at what some have called the "Neo Cathedral" in Barrigada has forced couples seeking marriage to go through a Neo inspired couple course. The "presbyter" also made those seeking RCIA go through the cathechesis in order to get their sacarements. It's very scary that this is happening. Please pray for our parish.

  17. Zoltan, if any of our priests or bishops or sisters are part of this Neo, they have been mislead. A family member was lured into NEO several years ago n swore that it was a good thing until she found out what it really is. Go figure. It's so sad. We need to fix the issues in our Catholic Church not create new ones.

  18. NOTE TO THE PERSON WHO SAID THE ARCHBISHOP SHOULD BE SENT TO THE PHILIPPINES WHERE THEY PRACTICE THE NEO WAY. They do not practice the "Neo Way" in the Philippines. In fact, the Philippines has begun to join the Japanese bishops in ousting the NCW. Read here:

    1. The church in the Philippines does not look kindly on this movement. Tim is very much aware of this .

  19. Sister Margaret Mary whenever I see a Nun in their habits I get this overwhelming feeling of joy as they remind me of our Blessed Mother! I have so much love for her. Thank you for your love and sacrifices.