Saturday, March 15, 2014

ZOLTAN CONFIRMS THAT THE NEOCATECHUMENAL WAY IS NOT CATHOLIC

Thank you, Zoltan. We knew if we waited long enough, we would get the truth. No comment needed. Here you go:
Zoltan March 15, 2014 at 8:56 PM
Chuck, I told this also to Tim: our interpretation of the liturgical books allows us to follow contemplated consumption of the Eucharist, while your interpretation would not allow this. So this is a question of interpretation. We accept that differences in interpretation are possible. You should ask for an official confirmation for your interpretation from Rome. Unless you have this confirmation, we cannot accept it and just follow ours. We ask you to, please, respect our community based Catholic lifestyle.
AND NOW FOR A POSTSCRIPT

Okay, I was really hoping that people could connect the dots and I wouldn't have to explain. My opponents are always criticizing me for "having the last word" even though this is my blog and they can have all the last words they want on theirs. Kind of tells you how worried they are about mine and how ineffective their own attempts are.

But before I explain, let me give a little fyi to the non-neo Catholics. I've said this before, but the neos have really done nothing more than take what many Catholics - both clergy and laity - have already done. We have taken it upon ourselves to "interpret" Church teaching to our liking. We have turned Church teaching into "suggestions". We have ignored the mandates on "Eucharistic ministers" (On Collaboration of the Non-Ordained), liturgical music (Musicam Sacram), Chant and Latin in the liturgy (Sacrosanctam Concilium), proper reception of the Eucharist (Memoriale Domini), etc. (Note: I'm saying "we" meaning the majority.)

We have played fast and loose with the liturgy for decades, turning exceptions into norms and norms into exceptions. And now we cry to heaven when the neos do it but all they are doing is what most Catholics have done and allowed to be done in the name of Vatican II for decades. The neos have just taken it to the next level. I say this because if we non-neos wish to do anything, we must first ourselves start conforming to the "liturgical books!" Everyone of those documents already referenced are either a Vatican II document or a post-conciliar document, meaning they require what the Church has ordained in light of actual Council teachings and NOT in the so-called"spirit" of it. 

Get to know your faith, Catholics. Don't be fooled by those who have made a career of fooling you. Google those documents and start reading. Demand (nicely at first) that our liturgies conform to what Rome requires. Don't complain about Kiko's catechism until you have read the Catechism of the Catholic Church. Don't complain about Kiko's liturgy until we get ours right. And especially, Fathers, don't complain about Kiko's catechesis until you start offering an alternative - regularly and consistently as they do. 

But now, to answer your question (the question was how is what Zoltan said a confirmation that the NCW is not Catholic). The very thing that distinguishes the Catholic Church from every other church is that we have a central Magisterium. And as the celebration of the Eucharist is the highest act of the Church, the regulation of the manner in which it is celebrated falls to the Magisterium as its highest duty. Thus the Church, from the beginning, has guarded the liturgy, the thing that Christ said to DO IN REMEMBRANCE OF ME, with the greatest of care. 

This is why EVEN in Vatican II, where all these changes were thought to originate, the Church warned:  Finally, there must be no innovations unless the good of the Church genuinely and certainly requires them; and care must be taken that any new forms adopted should in some way grow organically from forms already existing. (SC 23)

Let us see what else the Council Fathers say:

26. Liturgical services are not private functions, but are celebrations of the Church, which is the "sacrament of unity," namely, the holy people united and ordered under their bishops [33]

Therefore liturgical services pertain to the whole body of the Church; they manifest it and have effects upon it; but they concern the individual members of the Church in different ways, according to their differing rank, office, and actual participation.

27. It is to be stressed that whenever rites, according to their specific nature, make provision for communal celebration involving the presence and active participation of the faithful, this way of celebrating them is to be preferred, so far as possible, to a celebration that is individual and quasi-private.

Aside from the fact that the neos violate the strictures of Vatican II with their "quasi-private" celebrations, the main issue here is that the liturgy is not the domain of private individuals or closed groups, but that of the whole Church. In fact, the word "liturgy" itself means public. Notice also that par. 26 calls the celebration of the Eucharist a "sacrament of unity". So, this is precisely why the Magisterium reserves complete governance of the liturgy for itself. The very "unity", the "Oneness" that Christ prayed and died for, is wholly embodied in the celebration of the Eucharist. 

The Church does allow for variances in the liturgy to accommodate certain cultural or local needs, but those variances must be petitioned for and granted. In the much quoted letter of the "priest with a Ph.D", it's author, in an attempt to authenticate his claim that the NCW has always been in the good graces of the popes, notes that in 1989, permission was granted to the NCW by the Congregation for Divine Worship to 1) celebrate the Sunday Eucharist in small communities, 2) to receive communion under both Species, and 3) transfer the Rite of Peace to after the Prayer of the Faithful. 

The author makes these permissions granted to the NCW by the competent authority (the CDW) an even bigger issue by noting that a similar request from the USCCB was denied by the CDW. The author is right to make a big deal of these permissions to vary the liturgy because the NCW did it right. The leaders submitted their request, it was reviewed, and it was granted. Hallelujah. The NCW did not just say "well, we have a different interpretation than the rest of the church so we are going to do it our way", as Zoltan would have us believe is okay. No. The NCW did the right thing and this is why there is no complaint about the NCW's practice of those three variances.

HOWEVER, when the same governing body, the Congregation for Divine Worship, came out in 2005 with an official disapproval of a liturgical practice - the manner in which the NCW distributed Holy Communion - and a mandate to change, suddenly, this is a Congregation to be belittled - as Archbishop Apuron did, and to be officially disobeyed, as Kiko did. Suddenly it is a matter of "interpretation", when only a few years previous, a CDW ruling was treated as authentication, as the "priest with a Ph.D" loudly trumpets. 

The reason for the title of this post is that the very essence of Protestantism is the position that there is no central authority, that there is no Magisterium other than the Holy Spirit and one's own conscience, and thus there are as many "churches" as their are interpretations. Zoltan (who is only mouthing what he has been taught) is staking the central claim for authority on the community. The NCW community is the Magisterium. This is nothing new. We have watched this for a long time. It's just that now, someone in one of those communities has actually said it. This position - the claim on private interpretation - IS Protestantism, and the NCW is welcome to it. 

There are a couple other matters to discuss here. First is the competence of bishops, as lawful governors of the liturgy, to allow for certain adaptations and variances required by pastoral needs. The first point is that while bishops may indeed do this, there is normally a prescribed process for the petition of a variance to the liturgy that must go through Rome. There are also some variances a bishop may allow of his own authority. Because I do not know precisely what that might encompass, I have asked the Archbishop to let us know: 1) if the manner in which the neos distribute communion in this diocese is in fact a permission he requested and was granted by Rome, or 2) a permission within his own competence to grant and which he has in fact granted. I am told that the Archbishop will not answer me. But his duty is not to me. His duty is to the Archdiocese. This issue has been at the root of most of the division relative to the Neocatechumenal Way, and not to address it is to continue to promote scandal and division. 

The second matter is that of the different "Rites" within the Church. There are many different Rites or ways in which the liturgy is celebrated that are not governed by Rome or its GIRM, but are still in union with the Pope (Melkite, Marionite, Byzantine, etc.) There are now even different legitimate forms within the same rite: the Ordinary and Extraordinary forms of the Latin Rite. I found it terribly curious that the "Priest with a Ph.D" concludes his argument for the authenticity of the NCW by comparing the NCW liturgy to the liturgies of these other Rites, as if the NCW liturgy itself was a "Rite" of its own. Actually I found this attempt to elevate the variances of the NCW liturgy to the level of a Rite rather staggering given the credentials of the "Priest with a Ph.D". But I also found it illuminating. Here's why.

First, the NCW can never be a "Rite". Rites exist organically and are not suddenly manufactured because a certain group wants to do things differently. These other Rites of the church are ancient and are the remnants of a time when the church was far flung, and while the essentials of the liturgy remain, the externals of the celebration vary due to cultures and historical conditions. They are in union with Rome because they recognize Peter as their head, but they are not subject to the same liturgical laws as the Latin Church, which is how ours is named. 

The Neocatechumenal Way began as a catechetical experience within the Latin Church and has always been subject to it. It is not a "Rite" and can never be one. But, and here's the second point, the fact that a theologian as credentialed as the "priest with a Ph.D" would even think to justify the liturgical practice of the NCW by comparing it to the other Rites of the Church gives us the best clue yet as to where all of this is going. The NCW sees itself as a Rite. This is why they are always talking about the "Eastern church." But because the NCW has no authority to make itself a Rite, it must work from within the Latin Rite and transform it from the inside out. And this is the problem we all feel. We know something is afoot. We know in our bones that something is wrong, that something doesn't feel right. We lash out with different adjectives and protestations trying to name it, but all we really know is that something is wrong. And something IS wrong. And, thanks to Zoltan, now we know. 





59 comments:

  1. Where does it say were not Catholic?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. 9:40 PM, 3-24-- Actions speak louder than words!

      ...but the correct question is: where does it say that the altered neo way of distributing and receiving the Real Presence of Christ in Holy Communion and the neo "interpretations" are Authentic Catholicism?

      Authentic Catholicism existed for over 2,000 years! When did kiko start his neo movement based on his own personal interpretations and his own personal opinions and his own personal version of Cathlicity?

      How arrogant and pompous of Kiko to overstep the Magisterium and personally re-fashion, re-define and re-institute The Holy Sacrifice of the Mass and alter the Authentic Catholic reverent manner of regarding, respecting and receiving Holy Communion!

      Delete
    2. If I understand correctly, the jurisdiction of the bishop is at question here. Can the bishop deregulate a Church sacrament? Can he deregulate the consumption of the Eucharist under one specie or under two species? Can Eucharist under two species be offered at each mass? These are important regulatory questions.

      Now, the proof of burden is never on those who would like to maintain an already existing practice, like the reception on tongue. The proof of burden is on those who would like to change it!

      I would like to see the secret teaching of the neo-catechumenary on the consumption of the Eucharist. Why is it not yet been published? Why the secrecy? One thing for sure: without the priest believing in the transubstantiation wholeheartedly, the Eucharist becomes a farce and abomination.

      Delete
    3. http://www.waragainstbeing.com/parti-article2

      Delete
    4. In the beginning it was study and they still allow to practice the new mass.

      Delete
    5. Oleg, see postscript above.

      Delete
    6. Oleg, 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.

      There is no secret teaching on the Eucharist. Who told you this? We not only profess the teaching of the Church, but even make it more popular among the faithful. The same goes for transubstantiation. Feel free to ask more questions that may arise in your mind.

      Delete
    7. So you see everyone, they are right because they've been doing it a long time.

      Delete
    8. Gosh Zoltan, you are not getting it! The Church and its practices are Ancient. How can you say you don't have the burden of proof when you change the whole thing?

      There is no secret teaching?! This is a good one! When had the neo-catechumenary ever published its Catechetical Directory? For some reason it is not available at the bookstores...

      You guys invade Guam as missionaries. But it is an island of 85% Catholic population. Is this some kind of joke?

      Delete
    9. Oleg, why do you speak like that? I did not invade anybody, I am living and working on Guam. The Pope just approved 75 mission families from the Way to go to China, India, etc. for mission.

      "The Holy Father, with a special prayer and a solemn blessing, will send about 75 families who have offered their willingness to leave everything (work, home, family... ) and go on a mission in any city in the world."

      Text from page http://en.radiovaticana.va/news/2014/01/15/pope_francis_to_meet_neo-catechumens_on_february_1/in2-764294
      of the Vatican Radio website

      FYI my community in Chalan Pago will support 2 or 3 mission families from our own members who responded to the calling!

      As about the Catechetical Directory, as you call it, it is a guide for the catechists. It is, in fact, not commercially available. Is this a problem for you? Do you want to catechize?

      Delete
    10. yeah, & he just sent a bunchload to the Boston Archdiocese too & it's a big freaking-mess!! but here it is Zoltan baby...these NeoCats aren't looking after their own kids very well. all the ones who are now propagandizing us, came up violently disliking what their 'missionary' parents had put them through. a little research on line revealed some not so great tales from neo-defectors of 'unhappy' missionary children always being left w/ some new babysitter while their parents went out & saved the world. it all came home to me when one of them apologised to us for having to bring her new born w/ them because they couldn't find a baby sitter!!...i didn't get that at first...then i did some net recon.

      1st BIG sign of a cult is how they really treat their children.

      finally zoltan, the 1st mission of every parent is their Family.

      Delete
  2. I also didn't see Zoltan saying the neo-catechumenate movement isn't Catholic. I don't like the NCW either but, Tim, please clarify.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Tim's goal is to make anything a member says seem negative. He translates it into want he think he believes. And of these documents were copyrighted he would be at fault for plagiarism. Due to false paraphrasing.

      Delete
    2. Clarification in Postscript on original post.

      Delete
    3. I love these demonstrations of intelligence from the opposition (6:27am). Can't you think of a better way to start your Sunday morning than to come to a place where you're going to get blasted? The fact that you can't says much!

      Delete
    4. Anonymous (March 16,2014 at 6:27 AM): As with other NeoCats who came before you, it seems that your goal is to remain in the darkness, instead of coming out into the light of the truth. You mention that since the documents Tim uses in his explanations and analyses “were copyrighted he would be at fault for plagiarism. Due to false paraphrasing.”

      Please note that, according to Webster’s Third New International Dictionary (Unabridged), PLAGIARISM is the act of plagiarizing, which is the act of stealing and passing off as one’s own (the thoughts or ideas of another) OR using (a created production) without crediting the source.

      Are we reading the same things, Anon @ 6:27 AM? From the beginning, Tim has been very meticulous in citing his sources and then quoting verbatim. He (1) introduces his premise, (2) includes direct quotations from credible sources, and (3) explains how the quotations support his premise, often cross-referencing other reliable sources. He has NOT tried to pass those copyrighted sources as his own; but having stayed in the darkness for so long, you might not be able to recognize that.

      You may not agree with Tim’s analyses — especially when his sources support his premise AND are in conflict with what you and other NeoCats have been led to believe. BUT he cannot be accused of “false paraphrasing.” Maybe you have a hard time accepting that Tim has Church documents to support what he believes; maybe you should take the time to read those documents. In the meantime, what do you that you and other NeoCats have? Oral directives from Kiko, Carmen and “interpretations” from experts like “Diana” who, as I recently discovered, uses Pintrest as one of her “objective” sources. Church documents vs. Pintrest? So just WHO is using “false paraphrasing”? It's certainly not Tim.

      Delete
  3. Found this question to be interesting....so if any member of NCW can answer please do?

    How is it possible for the Founders of the NCW to have the same dignity of the Bishops both in the training of priests and in the foundation of seminars? They’ve even a greater dignity, since only the diocese is under the Bishop’s jurisdiction, while all the seminars in all the dioceses of the world are under Kiko’s jurisdiction.

    ReplyDelete
  4. It didn't say it's not Catholic at all. Zoltan said "interpretation."

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Ummm, Catholics don't get to interpret the GIRM. Protestants construct their own "liturgies" based on interpretation. Catholics don't. The fact that you don't know that confirms what we suspect.

      Delete
    2. Tim, I represent myself and never said otherwise. The Way follows the Magisterium and does not offer an interpretation of the Bible apart from the Church's teaching. We read the Bible and apply it to our daily life through discernment. It is in some sense "interpretation" but strictly along the lines of the Catechism of the Catholic Church. Whatever official interpretation is given by the Church, it is maintained and enriched by community based discernment. We have to acknowledge that some Protestant denominations offer some interpretation of parts of the Bible that is not in conflict with the official teaching of the Catholic Church.

      However, this discussion is NOT about the interpretation of the Bible, it is about the discernment of the General Instructions of the Roman Missal (GIRM). 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.

      For more information, please, read an extensive discussion of the issue at Diana's blog. Thanks.

      Delete
  5. He was referring to your and his interpretation of the GIRM. Catholics don't get to interpret the GIRM? Then why are you interpreting it to mean that the NCW is wrong?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I don't have an "interpretation" of the GIRM. What I have is how the whole Church receives communion as instructed in the GIRM, except for neos. The whole purpose of an INSTRUCTION is so that practice does NOT rely on interpretation. The level of thought in the neo is much worse than I had thought!!

      Delete
    2. Tim, we are members of the same Body, that of our Christ. We are all unified in the Eucharist, when we are one unit, one big community, one Church. We receive and consume the Body as one! The Church regulates small faith communities properly:

      "The community includes single people, single parents and their children, godparents, relatives, neighbors, or anyone called to share in family life. Not all members must live under one roof, but all the members should be trying to share daily God's word, the Eucharists, prayer, time, possessions, and meals with at least some of the community's members."

      http://www.presentationministries.com/brochures/IntroCommunity.asp

      You misinterpret what I am saying. I have never said the Way is not Catholic What I said is the exact opposite! Please, do not give false interpretations and distortions to your readers.

      Delete
    3. And do not give "false interpretations and distortions" of what I am saying. I did not say that you SAID that the Way is not Catholic, I said that you CONFIRMED that it was not by your statement that your communities are not subject to the GENERAL INSTRUCTION OF THE ROMAN MISSAL. All Catholics celebrations of the Eucharist are subject to it. If you have been told otherwise, then you were lied to.

      Delete
  6. 1039pm. In early church history lay people were ordained bishops. The bishop is just a ministry like ministry of door keeper. The bishop does not have an important place in the community. All brothers are the same. Brother tony is same as brother mike who works as a greeter in Kmart. If the community want brother mike to lead he become like brother tony, and has the place of catechist leader. The bishop is of less importance in neo. This is how kiko wanted the new church order. He teaches we replace the old order with a new order, which will become the new society of the new world church.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. 9:57, 3-16 You posted: "The bishop is of less importance in neo. This is how kiko wanted the new church order. He teaches WE REPLACE THE OLD ORDER WITH A NEW ORDER, which will become the new society of the new world church." !!!

      Catholic Faithful beware; be alert and take notice of those words. What does the description "New World Order" mean to you? And doesn't the neo movement have all the trappings and makings of exactly "The New World Order?

      This is where I step up my prayers to St. Michael and all the Angels and Saints for our Catholic Church on our island. Esta! JMJ

      Delete
    2. This comment has been removed by the author.

      Delete
    3. "..the new society of the new world church"? at some point in time them NCW will separate from the Roman Catholic Church, (the old world) if i follow your train of thought?

      Delete
    4. The NCW will not separate it's self from the Roman Catholic Church. If we are told to eliminate the NCW it will happen.

      Delete
  7. The neo community is simply building a new church order to replace the old order. Notice since pope Francis arrived. He is removing the old structure replacing with new order hence cardinal o mallley of Boston helping the new order. This same thing we do on Guam. We remove the old order, the weeds that grew around church property, and replace with new flowers, which are a symbol of the new church order on Guam. The order is the vision of kiko inspired by God. Kikos vision of the new order is inspired by the Holy Spirit.

    ReplyDelete
  8. The community is simply building a new church order on Guam, a new creative order ,a new creative spirituality, built upon the vision of kiko, who was inspired by the Holy Spirit, to come to Guam, to create the new order in a church that had lost faith in the lord, and needed new missionaries, of the new creative order to kick start it again. Once the new order is strong the neo may leave and go to western Samoa to create there. The leaders responded to prayer to come to Guam and Saipan to create the new order. Guam was fortunate we stayed here.

    ReplyDelete
  9. 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 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.

    ReplyDelete
  10. Anon 10.12am. Please can you explain in the light of catholic teaching what you understand by the inspiration of the Holy Sport. The books of the old and new testament were inspired by the Holy Spirit. however, surely, you are not saying kiko is inspired by the holy spirit, in the same way as scripture. Please explain trying to understand where you are coming from.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. The NCW way believe that when they speak, it is through the inspiration of the Holy Spirit. This is one reason that NCW ordained priest do not prepare their sermons. They wait for their inspiration.

      You tell me, that it takes about a minute or two to be inspired? I doubt it!

      If it is, then I am now inspired to say, that you all follow the rules of a man and hold his teachings as the gospel truth.

      Delete
  11. Speak for youself AnonymousMarch 16, 2014 at 10:12 AM!
    "a church that had lost faith in the lord," Hello??????
    Is ev1 hearing what this guy is saying???? go start your own neo church buddy.
    The real RCC was here before you and will be here when you are gone!!!!!!!!!!!!!

    ReplyDelete
  12. Hello Mr. Archbishop...have we seen enough damage yet to our Holy Mother Church in Guam?!!! YOU have an obligation to ALL of US CATHOLICS and YOUR NEO COMMUNITY to step forward in the process to heal our island community. I do not understand why our religious leaders are not at the forefront of this crisis

    ReplyDelete
  13. To Anon May 16th at 10:05 you are "simply" re inventing practices that are sacred to the teaching of Christ in the Catholic Church. You are following the voice of a man that does not appear to be a "friend" of Catholocism but bent on damaging our brothers and sisters in the Neo Community by controlling and confusing them.

    ReplyDelete
  14. I probably need to step in here. That new world order stuff is probably someone playing a trick. However, I can pretty much demonstrate that they intend to be a new rite as per my post.

    ReplyDelete
  15. DianaMarch 16, 2014 at 1:56 PM
    Dear Anonymous,
    It appears that Junglewatch is pretty much Anti-Catholic, because they are already criticizing not only the Archbishop, but also priests of the Catholic Church. It will be a matter of time when they will criticize the Pope. Sanger Magister is anti-Neoist like JungleWatch, and he already criticized against the Pope.

    http://neocatechemunal.blogspot.com/2014/03/sandro-magister-criticizes-pope-francis.html

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I want to thank you Diana for stating that I am very Anti Catholic by voicing my opinions on this blog. See you in hell!

      Delete
    2. I want to thank Diana for labeling me an Anti-Catholic because I voiced my opinions on this blog. You are right, you are more righteous than I am.

      Delete
  16. Alarming ecclesiology appearing in these comments.

    ReplyDelete
  17. It is all in the scriptures. As my catechist shared. Before the neo came to Guam the island had lost its faith. It was a land of dry bones as prophet ezk tells us. The neo gave life to the bones to create life again. Life began and now we just direct this life to the new order, the new rite , this creates the new image of church.

    ReplyDelete
  18. Peter. The new order will consume the old order so at some point we arrive at the new Jerusalem,, which is the new creation. We become one. All that matters is the ordinations. As long as the new order has ordinations from the hands of archbishop Apuron so we have ordained priests, the new order will evolve. It's a community within the church, but we have our own order to now follow. I hope this helps you . I not be able to write again because today catechists angry and suspecting people who wrote on this page. Some already being blamed. Even priests angry with the new order comments which are not for outsiders. Guam will become the new order, the new liturgy, and be the entrance point for the new Jerusalem.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. "....It's a community within the church, but we have our own order to now follow." Sorry.....What? Sounds very machiavellian...please explain more.

      Delete
  19. Could you please stop this "new order" nonsense? It was Pat Robertson at the end of the eighties who invented and inundated the mass media with this fake "Christian" notion... Now, this notion is absolutely dead! No more new world order. Nobody needs this Pentecostal b.s. anywhere, anymore! Okay?

    ReplyDelete
  20. This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

    ReplyDelete
  21. What is this dry bones image. Guam was always rich in its catholic faith and tradition. If your saying the faith of our people was dry before 1995 you have little knowledge of the history of our people. We are a rich community of faith , we lived our faith before the arrival of the neo, and we will live it, long after they have left. With all due respect to you.

    ReplyDelete
  22. Guam needs an intervention from a higher church authority to now clean up the mess. I don't know about a new order. But I do know for sure that we have an archdiocese that is now completely Out of Order.

    ReplyDelete
  23. This is a note to close off the talk about the "new order" thing. We don't need to go there. The fact of the matter is that the Neocatechumenal Way considers themselves to be outside the normal boundaries of the Magisterium when it comes to the its celebrations of the Eucharist. I have documented this numerous times. Zoltan's explanation above illuminates that fact in stating that the GIRM does not apply and is open to interpretation. The rest of the world doesn't believe that, only the Neocatechumenal Way. The obstinance of the NCW against the Magisterium of the Church in this regard is all we need to know. They do in fact believe in a "new order", but not in the sense that most people understand it "new world order". So let's leave that term aside. What they do believe is that they are the "new Church" and the old, ours, is passing away, and even must die. I will prove all of this later.

    ReplyDelete
  24. As we expected mr. Tim Rohr has provided readers with a balanced and correct answer. No doubt in our minds that the writer of the new order and the new church order is a member of the neo community repeating what was learnt. No matter what language is used Tim is correct. Their intention is to create a church of their own and this we must never allow on Guam. There is only one catholic church

    ReplyDelete
  25. Tim. It does appear we have people living within the catholic church receiving the Eucharist, but only accepting certain elements of catholic practice. Are these people still in full communion. Comments over the weekend wrote of ordinations. All the seminarians will be ordained by archbishop Apuron, so they will be validly ordained. The neo has valid ordained priests. But the concern is, Could it be true, they intend to make this community on their own. If so what is Rome doing to clean it up. It appears nothing but junglewatch is warning people about this.
    At same time today I talked to six people who read the new order comments, we find it worrying. One lady called chancery to ask the archbishop to please make a statement about this. She did not get through to him on the phone.

    ReplyDelete
  26. Former Neo MemberMarch 17, 2014 at 1:04 PM

    To Zoltan and Others:

    Be careful. If it is just a matter of interpretation, and awaiting Rome's objection to do otherwise, then I am free to interpret Church doctrines and teachings in the same way. If your Father directs clearly not to do something, you may disagree with the wisdom of his directive, but not to disobey. When you disagree, then you should try and convince your Father otherwise, but in the interim, you obey and conform. Many times, it is through that effort to convince your Father otherwise that you discover the Wisdom of his directive. The Pope looks beyond what Kiko sees, and leads the Church in its entirety, not just a part of it, and he expects his leaders, such as his bishops, priests, etc., to obey and follow his directives and lead. Unity within the Church is crucial, because it brings unity with Christ, and when a part starts branching off based on a disagreement, unity crumbles, and the Church suffers.

    Kiko, I think, is disobeying by not complying with the directive from Cardinal Arinze who spoke on behalf of the Pope. Kiko is hoping that the Pope will change his mind and see it his way. That hope coupled with effort to show why is good, but in the interim, he must obey and comply, as we all must do to bring unity with Christ. But I personally knowI(I was walking at the time and heard Pius,the archbishop, and other Neo priests talk about it) that the directive came down from Kiko and his subordinates to continue with the practice that does not conform with liturgical norms because they are working on changing the Pope's mind. This is disobedience. We need to acknowledge this, correct it, and bring unity back to the Church. We don't need Kiko to do it. Our archbishop can.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. You're dreaming. Archbishop Apuron doesn't lead; he is told what to do and he does it. He is a follower. This is the bottom line of our problem.

      Delete
  27. Yes, there is but One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Catholic Church on Guam and it is not with the ncw/neo!

    If we do nothing about curtailing and limiting this archdiocese appeal however, we will be contributing toward the demise of our One Authentic Catholic Church on Guam and tragically, toward the spread and strength of the neo church under Kiko's authority!

    Let's do our parts to inform and educate the rest of our Catholic Faithful of the truth about where the appeal money is really going towards because it is not going to benefit the expansion of our One True Catholic Church but to Kiko's church!

    ReplyDelete
  28. What is the difference between Opus Dei and the NCW? What are the similarities? What controversies did both encounter?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Opus Dei is a personal prelature. It was begun, primarily as a path to holiness for the laity, by St. Josemaria Escriva. It does not have its own liturgy as does the NCW.

      Delete
  29. Today talked with a neo priest about this new order new church ecclesiology on this page. He informed me yes it is true what this writer commented. But it is to be seen as a more of a " new dawn " in the church. The new dawn is to return people to the eucharistic table as it was after the last supper . The priest said Vatican was miss guided, and this new dawn, is to return the church to what Christ intended. Was puzzled because that statement means the church went wrong after vat two, and only being corrected now with kiko and the neo. This cannot be true. But the new order stuff I'm told is true, but the teaching is a new dawn, being taught as a new order.

    ReplyDelete
  30. If comments reach 20 then we stop to read them. So when this article reached 50 we really studied comments. The central problem on Guam today is that the archbishop is no longer supporting or defending the teaching authority of the church. He has allowed abuses in teaching, abuses in the Litirgy, he has shown complete disrespect for the congregation for the sacraments, and much more. On these grounds alone the Vatican should ale a closer look at his leadership and the leadership of his chief of staff.

    ReplyDelete

Recommendations by JungleWatch