Tuesday, April 8, 2014


In response to an infantile attack (here and here) on Chuck White for his post on David Atienza's view of Chamorro prayers for the dead, Maria writes the following:

6:47am-- Yet, again, a neo sputtering accusations without factual basis for his accusation. But then, we're all used to your lack of substance-evading-the-issue-no-factual-or-documentation-ways in "the way". 

Chuck was sharing a FACT about what this PROFESSOR, HIMSELF, VERBALLY SAID AND TALKED about at that roundtable of the Chamorro’s rosary novenas for the deceased. The professor is the one with the “delusional interpretation” about our practice of saying the rosary for the dead, not Chuck. I know. My factual basis? I was there! I heard this for myself. 

I and two other Chamorro women with me were not only beside ourselves over what we heard, but were offended by this false claim; and as if that was not offensive enough, we were disappointed -- no, we were appalled -- that Archbishop Apuron and Msgr. Quitogua (Jr), present and at the same table as this professor, both said not a thing to defend the very Catholic practice of reciting the rosaries for the dead nor defending the culture of their people!!

You also claim, “I side with a guy who has a PHD” – are you all minions? or simply boot-licking? Really? You side with this person just because a person has initials after their name? And without your taking the effort, yourself, to ascertain whether a claim is based on facts or not, or whether the claim had any validity, or the individual had any credibility, you’re willing to side with and accept the opinion of someone who: 

1) is not from Guam and had not lived on Guam long enough -- nor obviously knew, personally, enough (to warrant such claim) devoted Catholic Faithful Chamorros to whom the rosary for the dead is simply a devotion and a Catholic tradition and valid practice of praying for the deceased. 

2) an outsider individual whose only and primary interest is to push an Anti-Catholic-neo-opinion-and-neo-philosophy-anti-rosary-praying agenda under the guise of academic interest!

Why do you suppose this neo professor resorted to such subtle (very underhanded and very deceitful) manner of attacking the praying of the rosary? Well, it certainly is a clever and roundabout, deceitful and unsuspecting way to attack the Blessed Mother, isn’t it! God help your souls when you pass away; but I will pray a novena of rosaries for you. Esta!


  1. Dear Maria,
    I was not there this "round table" discussion that you speak of but I will like to remind you, that you do not represent the entire chamorro people. You are entitled to your own thoughts and critiques of Atienzas report but this is your own. I do not agree with you. I side with Atienza on this one, based on my personal upbringing and experiences.
    I have personally witnessed on many ocassions where as there are family present at the church for a Mass & Rosary for a deceased. However, it always bothers me to see that there are many people waiting outside the church for the Mass to end so that they can rush in for the Rosary. What is wrong with this picture? On top of this, I dare you to do a survey on how many families who host fiestas, how many are active catholics? You will probably say, "this is our culture". If it is then so be it, but eventually our people must be educated.
    Our Blessed Mother, she always points us in the direction of her son, Jesus Christ. I think the Marian Devotion becomes a problem when the faithful begin to pay attention more to Mary than to her Son. Would Mary want this? I dont think so.
    Who are we to blame for all of this? The Neos? I dont think so.
    Atienza only placed forward the reality, you and others are just in denial or just dont realize that this mentality of our local people does exist.
    Mary, the Rosary, Saints, Statues and Icons, these all serve a great purpose for the faithful. However, for as often as we are encouraged to recite, honor and even venerate these, we must always remember the adoration that is due to the Lord. All these, at the end of the day, they must draw us closer to the Lord, where our salvation depends.
    At one point in my life I was always asked by non-practicing catholic family members if I could obtain for them scapulars. i wondered why they wanted these so badly. I later realized that it was the words that were inscribed on the scapular. The scapular says(not verbadum) "that anyone who dies wearing this will be saved". Now we all know the truth, that salvation is not dependant on a piece of rope wrapped around our necks but in the Faith that we have, it is faith that will save us.

    1. Dear Anonymous (why are you anonymous?):

      I find theses words of yours both instructive and illuminating: "but eventually our people must be educated."

      I agree with you. However, your observation incriminates the Archbishop, the chief teacher of the faith. If after 30 years as the chief shepherd and catechist of our diocese, you side with Atienza's view of the Chamorro people, then something is terribly wrong at the top.

      Perhaps this is why - as Maria observed - the "two" did not say anything. Thank you for helping us pinpoint the problem.

    2. *ding* *ding* *ding* & the give away phrase -
      "Our Blessed Mother, she always points us in the direction of her son, Jesus Christ. I think the Marian Devotion becomes a problem when the faithful begin to pay attention more to Mary than to her Son."
      aaaaaaaaah...anon, you bleeding coward, 'anon' doesn't cut it...come out, come out where ever you are as you surely have ample vitrol to go around which needs a name attached to it!! ... only a protestant talks like that. now, ponder if you will:
      "The Rosary IS the weapon." St. Padre Pio
      "The Rosary is the most beautiful and richest of all prayers to the Mediatrix of all grace; it is the prayer that touches most the heart of the Mother of God. Say it each day."
      --Pope Saint Pius X

    3. Tim when you say WE, are you including yourself? Your not even from here, why does it matter that you would like the anonymous? The anonymous made a clear point , point your barrel somewhere else. You are not from here, ur self proclaim Guamanian turd.


    4. Don't you just love the cognitive dissonance the ncw spits out: 'the past four Popes said or did nothing then it must be ok' >>> now this neo-archbishop says or does nothing for the past 30 years so it must be OK...yes?

    5. Janet B - MangilaoApril 9, 2014 at 9:13 AM

      Tim - I know who that anonymous is. It is Fr Adrian, who was off-island playing missionary in Denver when the conference took place, so he really does not know what was said.

      Instead, typical of his efforts, he merely tries to support anything neo-kiko.

      Fr ADrian - you should be horribly ashamed of yourself for all that you have done in the name of the Archbishop's office to hurt so many people. While I don't relieve Tony of responsibility for allowing you to carry your your sub-reign of terror...he is a big boy and should know better, we all know you are the mastermind of all the terrible things being done in the Archdiocese these past few years since you got back from Denver. It was no different when one were the stooge before heading to Denver to lick your wounds. Only now, you seem more vicious than ever.

      We know who you are and what you are. We cannot figure out why you are that way.

    6. Gino. Saturday. 10am. In front of the Cathedral. Be there.

    7. Actually, make that Friday. Can't wait to meet you.

  2. Dear Tim,
    I remain anonymous because my identity is of no importance. I do not do this for recognition or to gain favor from anyone, and I am not implying that these are you motives. As I have I mentioned way on in the history of this blog, I do not know of yours(motives).
    I only patronize your blog to witness to the faith that I have. Pope Francis says that we should go beyond the structures of our churches to the poor, the marginalized, our brothers and sisters who do not know Christ.
    I am very much saddened by the atmosphere in this blog, but it is needed, we need a church that is bruised and shaken. I wish though that we would all refrain from the name calling and return to a state of respect for each other.
    I dont agree with you on instances where you have allowed commenters to address the Church Hierarchy on Guam with disrespect. I have not seen this from you in your posts, but by you allowing it, it leads me to believe that you agree. If I am wrong in this assumption, correct me.
    I suggest that everyone takes the time out to read the Apostolic Exhortation Evangelii Gaudium, this has helped me to realize the role of our church in todays times. Pope Francis has asked us to spread the Joy of the Gospel in all matters. What is this Joy? What is this Kerygma? Its the truth in knowing that we have a God who loves us. In the same way he asks us to love one another. I ask your readers to challenge themselves to refrain from the name calling for the remainder of this Lent Season.
    In response to your claim that the problem is at the top, and that I have incriminated the Archbishop. Yes, I have incriminated the Archbishop, but I have also incriminated by parents and their parents and their parents. I have also incriminated the Bishops who came before Archbishop Anthony. The responsibility of the transmission of the faith is in the hands of the family more importantly the parents. In truth, I lacked this form of the transmission of the faith. I was blessed to be inspired by many priests, who I preyed on their strengths and learned from their weaknesses.
    Again, Atienza is only pointing out the reality, that what he has observed does exist. He is not assuming anything. Now my assumption in on the Archbishop, he realizes the problem that exists on Guam, his fault or not, he has to make a decision that will help, he chooses the NCW. This is the best choice he could have ever made. An itinerary of Faith that can help the people. An opportunity for the Transmission of the Faith to exist again in the households. An itinerary that breaks away from the norm of sending our children to classes where the responsibility is forced upon Catechists. This is what is needed for our island.

    1. So what would Jesus do? Would he keep his name hidden? How can you proclaim anything if you are unwilling to put your name and face to it? Is this what the prophets and the apostles did? You discredit yourself with your false humility that who you are doesn't matter. In fact you pervert humility behind cowardice.

      But thanks for confirming what we already know when you say:

      "Yes, I have incriminated the Archbishop, but I have also incriminated by parents and their parents and their parents. I have also incriminated the Bishops who came before Archbishop Anthony."

      So there was no real Catholic faith on Guam before Kiko. Thanks. Got it.

    2. Anon 3:06am. One need not be a psychologist nor have earned scholarly titles or academic initials beside one's name to be able to decipher and plainly recognize a transparent false humility being displayed; in fact it would be arrogance to yell “name-calling” toward the ones who see thru the sly-written responses when its transparently displayed in the ncw responses in this blog.

    3. Apr9 3:06am Transparency, honesty and not hiding one's identity is the only way you would gain any credibility and validity to what you say or do, and remove our conclusion about your counterfeit humility or modesty. It's a simple rule to follow. Esta.

    4. Janet B - MangilaoApril 9, 2014 at 12:57 PM

      To Anon 4/09 @ 3:06am (aka Fr Adrian):
      Regarding respect. My grandmother, whom I respected dearly, always taught me that respect is earned, and not a birth right. When I was growing up the military demanded respect from us, but did little to earn it. Yes, maybe he had climbed to the rank of Captain or Commander, but that didn't automatically demand respect.

      Tony may be the Archbishop of Guam, but that doesn't entitle him to any respect. Like all in positions of leadership he is required to earn it. He does this by being a true leader of the people entrusted to his care. In the case of any bishop, he earns it by being an example of how God can affect ones life. Like you, Fr Adrian, one can only guess at the complexities involved in this position. But there is no need to guess that when a diocese is in crisis what the bishop should do. He needs to address the problem. Hiding from all the problems we face is merely a cowards way out. If leading is too difficult for Tony, then might I suggest he step down for the better of the people of Guam. At least he could go out a leader in recognizing that the solution to these problems is beyond his ability to address.

      Per your request, for the remainder of this Lenten season, I will refrain from other disrespect such as calling you three in leadership the three stooges. I will find other, more respectful ways to create an image of what the true situation is.

      But now to your ramblings on how David Atienza is only pointing out the reality. What you fail to realize, is that you are assuming what he says is reality, but in fact it is only his perspective and not a reality. He does not cite any hard evidence or studies to support his theory, so it is only his observation and not a reality. You really should be careful and precise when you make such broad statements.

      You lament about how your parents failed to pass along the faith to you. Fr Adrian, I hope your mother does not read this blog because she is likely to disagree with your statement. However, if indeed your parents did fail to pass the faith on to you, do not be so quick that other parents have done the same. My mother and grandmother were absolutely instrumental in bringing me to Jesus. My father was strong, and lead by his example, attending daily mass, even on the day he died. It was never easy for him, but he showed what a true Christian was.

      Regardless of all that, you are now a grown man, Fr Adrian, and as any adult knows, our parents can only do so much. When we turn adults, we assume that responsibility ourselves. The Church on its part also assumes the responsibility to help the parents in bringing the faith to their children. For thirty years I have seen this Church on Guam struggle with this responsibility, and yes I absolutely blame Tony for this, and you as Chancellor, and David as Vicar General. You have failed in every way possible.

      So what is the solution to this failure from you three? Force a parallel church down our throats! Let's review what you said: "...he has to make a decision that will help, he chooses the NCW. This is the best choice he could have ever made. An itinerary of Faith that can help the people."

      Again your idea of reality is different from most regular people. You always assume the neo is the only solution to our problems. Period. End of discussion. I, and most other reasonable people, assume that there are benefits to this neo movement, but that it is not the one and only solution. Kiko may be good for you and Tony, but he is not good for all. The damage he (and you and Tony) has done is far reaching. You and Tony have totally abandoned the Church that people love for the table you dance around. That might work for you but it is really time for you to realize it ain't for everybody.

      to be continued...

    5. Janet B - MangilaoApril 9, 2014 at 12:58 PM

      Dear Fr Adrian:


      The damage he (and you and Tony) has done is far reaching. You and Tony have totally abandoned the Church that people love for the table you dance around. That might work for you but it is really time for you to realize it ain't for everybody.

      And, from you mean and vindictive style, I really question how much benefit it has been for you, Fr Adrian. As a priest, I am shocked at how vicious you have become, so much so that I really wonder if the neo brought you to this state of being.

      If it is good for some people lets look at that. The neo loves to point to the fruits. But even fruits can turn rotten. When people are taught heresy, when people are pulled away from their blood family in favor of their neo family, when the neo movement creates huge division among the faithful, then isn't this something that should cause concern to loving leaders?

      All over the world, the neo has brought division and problems. Why? Is it because the neo is brainwashed that their way is the only way. Focolare, Cursillo, Couples for Christ and others have been around for about the same length of time, yet we never read about any problems with divisions caused by these movements. Only kiko followers seem to tear at our Church.

      One could ask a simple question: What support do Tony and Adrian give to any other movement on Guam?

      In conclusion, Adrian, your itinerary is forced upon people and they are now starting to reject it. You continually have new catechesis but your numbers do not grow. More people are going back to the true Church and leaving this old way behind. Until you start supporting all Catholics, and until you start following Church magisterium, I will have no respect for you or Tony, and will continue to hold you in utter contempt.

      Stop insisting that your beloved neo is "what is needed for our island." All we need is a leadership who can pull their heads out of that dark orifice and see the reality that people on Guam totally reject you and your way!

    6. 3:06
      That was very nice, honestly.
      Could you then ask the ArchBishop to respect the Pope, heed his admonishments and correct the errors NCW is promulgating, that's all and thank you.

  3. The Neocatechumenal Way does this OFTEN. They push into a foreign country and try to push their views on its people, and mock their local people and customs (it is happening in Australia with the St. Vincent Redfern parish)

    This is because they are actually following the Talmud and nto the Bible:


    1. & it's happening in Boston! ... & pushy would be an understatement!!

  4. I agree, Why do the Neos lay all of the deficiencies with the present practice of Catholicism on Guam with Chamorro culture? Do you think Padre Palomo would have tolerated the abuses we see today in our liturgies. He was a polymath who could speak several languages and could converse comfortably with people as disparate as William Safford and Don Juan Marina. No, I suspect that a lot of the problems that we see on Guam are of relatively recent provenance (i.e., the last generation or two). With respect to the concerns raised about the rosary and the scapular, this is what happens when all of the substance has winnowed away: you are left with disembodied vestiges which, out of context, make little sense and are subject to abuse, e.g., use of the scapular in a totemic or talismanic way. The magisterium must to be taught and re-taught to subsequent generations; otherwise, what we see here on Guam now happens. Institutions, including the Church, can only maintain themselves for so long without continued building. This is particularly the case when the Church no longer controls most of the channels of information and when a competing secular and hedonistic worldview predominates in the media. So, I think it's great that we are getting honest about deficiencies in our practice, but I think if you take a broad view of things you will see that the Chamorro culture is not to blame. The real problem, in my view, is the man who has been at the helm for the last 30 years. He does not lead and he does not teach. Under him, the local Church has foundered for decades. It will continue to do so until he is replaced. If we wait too long, however, I'm not sure that there will be any Church to save. That, if we are going to be honest with ourselves, is the real issue.

  5. "I side with the guy who has a PhD"
    This is the type of answer you will expect when you question them on anything. A simple question about the way or kiko and they become super defensive especially the catechists. This neocat has sided with the PhD because he shows ignorance on the topic. So like the catechists who never admit being wrong he ignores the facts and resorts to personal attacks.

    1. how do you know you are dealing w/ a cult...?..."they become super defensive".

    2. Anybody will defend what they love. Comparison to a child who loves his mother. If the mother is threatened and talked about, whether it be factual or not, the child will still choose to stay on her side. I would like to apologize for the brother and sisters who lash out with negativity on this blog. I ashamed of those who have done this, especially with Zoltan. Like I have stated before, we must wait until the end of this to find out the outcome.

    3. David, is that like Nancy Pelosi/Obamacare "we have to pass it in order to find out what's in it" ?!

      If my mother was a hooker & destroyed my siblings w/ her life style I would pray for her but would NOT defend her. This is the Bride of Christ we are defending from serious & very aggressive heretics...I know, strong word... & politically-correct-squishy-around-the-edges is NOT going to cut it.

      Kiko's 'Way' is not the Way of the One who said "I am the Way, the Truth, the Light & the Life'.

      The gates of hell shall not prevail.

    4. From what is presented the findings and facts that are presented may be true. All we can say is the teachings of Kiko may be illicit (from what is said). But the assumption of how the members of the NCW act are false. Some people (members of the NCW) do not know how to channel their anger in such a way of it comes out with respect. Many have lashed and many have called names. I am not here to say Tim is wrong, but for people to say that that we work with the with Devil and "The gates of hell shall not prevail" (safe to say you speaking of the NCW) is quite disrespectful. I am a member myself but i do not act or think the way people assume.

    5. It's not that anyone person "works" with the devil. The devil works with us, uses us, and often uses us while we think we are doing good. This is why faithfulness to the magisterium is critical, lest we act according to our own understanding, which may well be the devil. This is why I never posit anything against the Way without referencing the Magisterium. Kiko's modus operandi is to NOT reference the magisterium where he is at odds with it, but to show numbers of bishops and pictures with the pope. This would be typical of the devil.

    6. Glad to be back in Holy Mother ChurchApril 9, 2014 at 10:31 PM

      Dear David G - what you say may be true for children, but as adults we are called to make a mature assessment of a situation, and do what is right for our salvation.
      If a NEo sees problems in that movement and fails or refuses to speak out then that becomes his problem as well.
      As a former member I know the problems, I saw the problems, and I got out. I sometimes wish I had stayed in to make changes from within, but I think the hierarchy is too embedded in their power to defeat by the common people who want to grow with God.
      My only alternative was to either turn a blind eye to the very real problems with their teachings, egotistical behavior, and divisive actions, or to see them for what they were and get out. In good conscience I could not condone their actions so I had to get out.
      I pray that others who see what I saw will have the courage to do the same. And I still pray for a new Neo that will be true to the magisterium, be one with the true Church, and realize it is only one of many ways to bring people to Christ.
      David G - grow up, be a man, and see what is right and wrong and come to the right side of faith. I pray for you and others in that difficult phase of step further into it, or step out.
      Glad to be back in Holy Mother Church!

    7. You guys just want to follow people with a PhD they just want to follow the world teachings instead of following gods will

    8. Glad to be back - I still do not understand what you mean by "come to the right side of faith." We are on the same side. We are Roman Catholic. I respect your opinion, but have to come to a disagreement. I do not know you, and do not know how long it has been since you have "returned to the holy mother church." (who ever said you left in the first place) like it has been said, by not showing your name, discredits to your claim. For all we know, you are not or were a member of the NCW, and that is why it seems sketchy when a "former member" comments on this blog. You may say I am avoiding what you have to say but I am not. The teachings can be interpreted many ways, for somebody who opposes the way or who is unfamiliar with what is being said, of course, would have a hard time understanding what is said. Many people in the NCW have an "egotistical behavior" and so do those who oppose the NCW. Divisive action? please elaborate
      I thank you for the prayers and I as well pray for unity and peace and those who do not "fully".understand the NCW. Like I told Tim, I understand where, those who oppose the way, stand. I understand the questions and I myself would like to know the answer. But sadly I can not answer it for you. I am just a member, I have "power" and to be honest, I am actually the type to question the catechist.

    9. Anon 2:52am - Another false assumption. And tell me, what is God's will? (God is capitalized). Unless your speaking of a non-christian god for example: Zeus, Thor, Ra, etc.

  6. I thought the Pope ordered the NCW to respect local cultures? Where was the respect in that article. I guess it doesn't help that the Archbishop is tool and won't stick up for our customs. We need a real leader.


  7. "Again, Atienza is only pointing out the reality, that what he has observed does exist"

    Fr. Adrian(?)

    Respectfully. Dr. Atienzas' paper is faulty and begs of more research, he used the testimony of one or two individuals on the island to summarize the entirety of the population. Did he just throw scientific theory out the window?

    To be fair, he wrote that the paper is a hypothesis and as far as i can tell hasn't passed from draft to final publication of his findings. But if there is an ulterior motive or propaganda to his paper then i am sad for our island.

    To Gino. Don't insult a man behind anonymity it is cowardly and childish.

  8. NCW paintings are Illuminati-esque. Now that is frightening. Do some research on the Illuminati. Illuminati's mission is to destroy the Catholic church.

    1. The NCW is not trying to destroy the church. That is actually the opposite of what its mission is.

    2. Luther was trying to save the church as well. So was Arius, Nestorius, etc. We have only ever asked "by what authority" Kiko departs from the Magisterium, specifically in the manner in which he treats the Holy Eucharist (distribution). Please provide.

    3. I understand where you point is. You want the actual "black & white" document that justifies Kikos actions. Even if I walk with a community, I am cannot produce this document. The understanding that the Pope allows and approves of our actions through the past Popes can be the reason of the continuous practice. The time will come when or if the document is presented. And if not authorized to do so, The Eucharist may change. And from you presented, the letter in which was passed down to Kiko; Kikos "I will not obey" letter in reply, we can only assure that it was a request. I am not here to argue and I fully understand your stand point Tim. But if Kiko actually intended to disobey the Pope, wouldnt a letter be sent back informing Kiko that it is a request but an order. I understand that there was time for conformity and what was asked to change was changed. And I am sure the Pope requested, at the end time of this request, that somebody participate with the communities during the Eucharist to assure that what was asked was followed. I am just thinking logically of what a Leader would do. I am not saying you are wrong, and that we are right. If the "illicit" practice continues I am sure the Pope will recognize this once again, and either request that it be changed once again. And if not followed, the way we practice will be eliminated not by request but by order. Rest assure, the NCW is not trying to break away from the church either. I am positive that if the NCW is terminated, all members will still follow the Roman Catholic faith. There is no war with the members, the war is against the people who oppose the way and the initiators of the NCW.

    4. @11:13PM: I oppose the Way; so, I guess I am one of those that you are at war with. I oppose the Way based exclusively on what members of the Way have stated during their testimonies given at Mass. These members -- who spoke at the behest of the archbishop and in front of Msgr. Quitugua as part the Way's annual effort to proselytize to regular Catholics -- stated that we (us regular Catholics in the congregation that day) were lukewarm in our faith, and that we were spiritually dry. The speakers implored us to answer the call of Jesus. How did these speakers know that we were lukewarm and spiritually dry, and had not already answered the call of Jesus? Because we were not members of the Way; or put another way, because we were members of another church (i.e., the regular Catholic church) which is unable or unlikely to lead its members to an ardent and spiritually fruitful relationship with Christ. The Way espouses over and over again that the regular Catholic church is inherently deficient and unable to meet the spiritual needs of its faithful. I strongly disagree with this view.

      I just wanted you to know why you are at war with me and other people of goodwill and why I pray for the termination of the Way.

      I don't think that you will respond to this because there is nothing that you could say to refute anything I've said here.

  9. Ch 2. Man Cannot Offend God - Heresies in the Neocatechumenal Way

    - Kiko is not able to think of sin as an offense of God; he only thinks - and it is obvious, as in the Church all the theologians have always taught many centuries before him - that man cannot "steal from God his glory..."; he "cannot hurt God (...), because in that case God would be vulnerable and would not be God..." (p.182). Who could have ever supposed that?... Therefore, it is far from the sense that the Church has always attributed to sin as an offense to God: precisely the sense that Kiko ignores, explaining - we will see it soon - how he cannot conceive of the duty to atone.
    Let him know - and with him all those who follow him - that man with his sin, even though only offending himself, o f f e n d s God by committing the injustice of denying Him that what is due to Him: the cordial recognition of His sovereign dominion, and thus His dignity of Absolute Value, Supreme Law, etc... Man, by sinning, refuses Him, so much as that if it were possible, he would suppress his relationship with God, as he cannot stand this radical subordination to the "OTHER" (God); and it is in fact all the intrinsic perversion of human will, consists in this attempt, and in this sense we must talk of "offending God", even if God, in Himself, remains unaltered. Isn't it Jesus who talks of "our dues" towards Him? (Mt 6,12) Isn't it justice commanding to satisfy them?
    David, after having committed adultery and murder, REPENTS and asks God for His Mercy, he asks Him: "I have sinned against you, only against you I have sinned..." (Ps 51, 6. Cf. 2 Sam 11,14-17) Even the prodigal son of the parable is convinced of having sinned first of all against Heaven, even though he has abandoned his father. (Lk 15, 18, 21)
    - Even Vatican Council II, talking about the forgiveness obtained from the Mercy of God, talks about "the offenses made against Him" ( LG 11); and Saint Thomas, the most authoritative interpreter of the Church's doctrine, summarising and anticipating the thoughts of a real army of Church fathers and Theologians, sees sin as a real offense against God (S. th., I-II, q. 47, a. 1, 1um; q. 71, a. 6, 5um; q 73, a.8, 2 um; q. 21, a. 4, 1um; Suppl., q. 13, a. 1, 1um).
    All of this can be summarised recalling the most supreme of duties: that of loving God, thus refusing to love Him means offending Him.
    "It is therefore vain to hope that there will take root a sense of sin against man and against human values, if there is no sense of offense against God, namely the true sense of sin." (Pope John Paul II, Reconciliatio et paenitentia , 18)
    Kiko, negating such a possibility, negates the necessity of reparation and the resulting benefits of redemption, like the recovery of all the blessings deriving from the love of God. The Church has been founded by Christ because, with the grace of the Sacraments administered by it, man can participate in the atoning and redemptive Passion... If, in that sense, it does not continue Christ's work, what does His mission reduce itself to? how can it affirm to "serve" the world and to justify its own existence as a society superior to all the others...

    1. I am puzzled. If man cannot offend God, then why do the NCW have public confessions? Or any confessions at all?
      Can anyone explain this seeming paradox?


    The Mass, for Kiko and Carmen, is only “the memorial of the Pasch of Jesus, of his passage from death to life”, and again: “The notion of sacrifice is a condescension for the pagan mentality (…). At the beginning of the Church, in the Theology of the Mass, there was no sacrifice of Jesus, no sacrifice of the Cross, no Calvary, but only a sacrifice of praise.”
    This is a typical Protestant conception of the Mass. Let us quote here some canons of the Council of Trent (22nd Session):“If anyone say that in the Mass, a true and real sacrifice is not offered to God (…), let him be anathema (Canon 1). If anyone says that the sacrifice of the Mass is that only of praise and thanksgiving, or that it is a mere commemoration of the sacrifice consummated on the Cross but not a propitiatory one [that is, a sacrifice to appease God – ed.] (…) let him be anathema (Canon 3).”
    Kiko and Carmen ridicule the traditional practices of the Catholic Church: “the tabernacles, the Feast of Corpus Christi, the solemn expositions of the Blessed Sacrament, processions, adorations, genuflections, visits to the Blessed Sacrament, to think that by communion we put Jesus in our soul, thanksgiving after communion, private Masses without faithful (…) all these practices minimize the Eucharist and are far from the spirit of Easter.” But, what really is important for them? “The most important thing does not consist in the Real Presence of Jesus Christ in the Eucharist, but in the Eucharist as it is the mystery of the Pasch (…). As God was present in the first Pasch, when the Hebrew fled from Egypt, so Jesus is present by his spirit, resurrected from the dead.” To this unusual and strange definition of the Presence of Jesus in the Eucharist, dangerously similar to the Protestant doctrine, let us quote the definition given by the Catechism of Saint Pius X: “The Holy Eucharist is a sacrament in which, by the marvelous conversion of the whole substance of bread into the body of Jesus Christ, and that of wine into His Precious Blood, is contained truly, really and substantially, the Body, the Blood, the soul and Divinity of the same Lord Jesus Christ under the appearance of bread and wine.”

    Kiko and Carmen write: “The memorial Jesus left us in His resurrected Spirit from the dead (…). How did the Apostles see Jesus Christ resurrected? In themselves, made a vivifying spirit.”Kiko and Carmen forgot that in the Catholic Church, when it is spoken of the Resurrection of Our Lord Jesus Christ, it is the resurrection of His Body. In its commentary on the Creed, the Catechism of the Council of Trent writes: “On the morning of the third day after His death, the soul of Jesus Christ was reunited to His Body, and thus He who was dead during those three days arose, and returned again to life from which He had departed when dying.” Kiko and Carmen forgot that the Resurrection of Our Lord Jesus Christ is a dogma of our Faith: “If Christ be not risen again, then is our preaching vain, and your faith is also vain.” (I Cor. xv, 14)


  12. Ch 6. "We Are All Priests" - Heresies in the Neocatechumenal Way (Author: Fr Zoffoli)
    The bold quoted text as usual are quotes from Kiko and Carmen's "catechesis documents" with the page numbers in brackets.
    The Church, visible and hierarchical society, bases its own juridical structure on the sacrament of Ordination, which distinguishes essentially the "ministerial priesthood" from that common to all the faithful who are simply baptised (LG 10). But, according to Kiko, such a distinction is not made, being all participants in the single priesthood of Christ. Thus it follows that, in the Church there is no Hierarchy distinguishing the clergy from the people: clergy that, representing the Head, talks and acts "IN NOMINE ET PERSONA CHRISTI"; and a people that, represented by the clergy, elevates itself to God in virtue of its mediation which renders sensible that absolute primary mediation of the Incarnate Verb.
    Here are some extracts from this chapter:
    As usual, the charismatic founder of the N.M. pronounces himself with amazing cheekiness: "We do not even have priests in the sense of persons who are separate from all because in our name they get in contact with the divinity. Because our priest, he who intercedes for us, is Christ. Moreover, since we are His Body, we are all priests. ... In the New Testament, the word "priest" is not used except in reference to Christ; instead it speaks of ministers and presbyters..." (p. 56s).
    Perhaps we are at the most deadly "blow below the belt" striked by Kiko to the heart of the Church: Luther would have delighted in it.
    If "every member of the Church is a priest"; if "we are all priests"; if in the Church there are no "priests" as a category of persons that, separated from the other faithful, intercede for them with God; if we only have "ministers" or "servants" of the priesthood (the only one of Christ), such as to make it visible with their own service, the essential distinction between "ministerial priesthood" and "common priesthood" of which the Council speaks disappears insensibly until it becomes baffling... More than that:
    According to Kiko, "there is no eucharist without the assembly (...). It is from this assembly that the Eucharist springs out from.". (p. 317). It would not be held then that a celebrating priest, consecrating, whose Mass is very much valid even wihout any assistence from the people...; only the catechist would have "the charism of discernment of spirits" (p. 188); In other words, for Kiko, ... ,the catechist is more than the Priest. the function of the catholic priest is annulled, once denied - as we will see in its own context - the reality of the "Eucharistic Sacrifice". In the neocatechumenal communities, who presides is not the "priest", but the "catechist". (Talking of what Pope John Paul II said on the subject) The summons is unmistakable. Nevertheless, it results that the neocatechumenal communities have remained deaf to it.

  13. Ch 7. The Catholic Church is Not the Only Sheepfold of Christ - Heresies in the Neocatechumenal Way (Author: Fr Zoffoli)
    The bold quoted text as usual are quotes from Kiko and Carmen's "catechesis documents" with the page numbers in brackets.

    If the Apostolic and Roman Catholic Church is the unique Sheepfold of Christ, the exclusive society He founded and headed by the Pope who is His Vicar and successor of Peter...; if it has been instituted to be, in the world, the privileged area of his redemptive influence for the exercise of His powers...’ all are called to belong to it; for this reason - except for the cases of ignorance and thus in good faith - there is no salvation outside of the Church.
    Here are some extracts from this chapter: Kiko does not agree. And it is logical, because, denying the sacred Ordination and the ministerial priesthood, he must reject the hierarchical structure of the Church as a visible society. As a consequence, no-one is obliged to belong to it; salvation is possible even remaining outside of it. ... According to him, "the Church is not a juridical thing..." (p. 167) "So where is the Church?"...many Christians, who do not live according to the Holy Spirit because they are in mortal sin, do not belong to the Church?... Precisely: we are at the error of the Fraticelli condemned by John XXII (D-S 911); for whom the true Church would be only that of the "righteous" or of the "predestined ones" who live in God’s grace ... (According to Kiko) the Church by its constitution and vocation is not missionary, against the explicit declaration of Vatican II (LG 13, 16; AG 2-3,7; NAE 2,4). On this matter, our theologian has no modesty: "the mission of the Church" is not to "put inside of it whatever is outside..." (p. 78). And again: "there are people who are not called to belong to the Church" (p. 87).
    Thus (following Kiko's argument) Jesus was deluded when he spoke of his sheepfold, in which all the sheep would have entered, to form a single flock under one single Shepherd (Jn 10,16);Unfortunately, it looks like that Neocatechumenals would not profess themselves as Catholics, but simply as Christians, similar to all protestants.

  14. @I am Puzzled. Technically, the NCW does not have public confessions. Members are asked to share their "crosses". Think of it is as an AA meeting. There is nothing wrong with this of course and it can be, as the AA has proved, the first step towards healing.

    The problem is that most people's "crosses" are often their personal sins. There is the additional problem of a cross also being the sins of others, such as an adulterous spouse. So you can see how quickly sharing a "cross" can become a revealing of ones deepest personal sins as well as the telling of the sins of others.

    Such a thing is extremely dangerous. It works in the AA because usually there is a skilled counselor in control and everyone's "sin" (alcohol addiction) is already known, which is why they are there in the first place. But in the NCW, we are taking people who for the most part only signed up to learn more about their faith and suddenly find themselves learning about adulterous spouses.

    The pretext for this is probably James 5:16 where it says "confess your sins to one another". However, the preceding verses put this exhortation in the context of "summoning the presbyters". Thus we are not to confess our sins to just anyone. Logic should tell us that anyway. We are to confess to the presbyter.

    And to emphasize this, the exhortation to confess in James is followed by: "the prayer of the righteous man availeth much." The idea, being of course, even in that primitive context, is that we should confess to one who is righteous, and by design, it is supposed to be the presbyter, which later, would become today's priest.

  15. I'm so confused. While I walked in the way it was always said to me "God does not want smart priests, God wants holy priests." Yet in the very
    same breath it is proclaimed "I will
    follow the one with the initials." What a sad defense you have by further claiming that a person has or has not waked in the Way just because of anonymity. I walked in the way...AGANA 2 right alongside the Archbishop. Go ahead and question my credibility as I can name every responsible that community has gone through even back to the time when Sinajana parish kicked out the NCW and they merged with us in Agana. David G., or should we initial it as VG, you seem very educated and well versed in the way and are very comfortable with its teachings, are you perhaps the "Presbyter" of Agana 1?

  16. To Anonymous April 13 at 7:59 am St. Jude Church in Sinajana did not kick out the NCW. Never was a NCW at that parish. St. Jude never had the NCW in their parish so what are you referring to?

  17. What a bunch of baloney. To Anonymous April 13, 2014 @ 7:21. The NCW was indeed at Sinajana Parish. During the very last term of Fr. Felix. Why not ask Fr. Felix at the Talofofo Parish? Why not ask the Alvarez Terlaje Mendiola San Agustin Atalig Hererro members of the NCW Agana2 community where they came from. I have facts while all you have is what your catechists tells you. Before they came down our responsibles were Mr. & Mrs. Santos. Yeah right, there was never a community in Sinajana! Hey, go ask the Archbishop too, or even Fr. Luis Camacho, or Fr. Michael or even Fr. Franchesco. I'm sure the ordained NCW Presbyters won't lie to you....or will they?

    Joseph of Sinajana Parish.
    So what's your name coward?

  18. Whoa there....I saw my name. San Agustín. Yes the way was in St. Jude and yes it was kicked out. I no longer walk in the way and I am proud to say that. To mr. Anonymous referring to the way not being in Sinajana get your facts straight. I am San Agustín from St. Jude. Formerly with Agana2. I am still at St. Jude and still active in my parish.

  19. They were not kicked out. When Fr. Bob first came to Sinajana, he found them in the social hall celebrating their Eucharist. The windows were covered and the doors locked. He questioned why they were not upstairs where the Blessed Sacrament is.

    The NCW also demanded that things in the social hall be constructed for their use to which Fr. Bob refused because the rest of the parish needed use of the social hall as well.

    So the NCW left because they were being told to use the Church and their requests for rearrangements was not met. But I guess to them this means kicked out. It had to be all their way or none at all.

    Thank goodness we were able to keep Fr. Bob and his fate was not like that of Fr. Paul. Unfortunately those in the NCW that are familiar with this forever branded Fr. Bob negatively but he took it in stride.

    Ria Camacho

    1. Yes, the catechist tell the parish priest what to do! Thank you Ria for clarifying this!

    2. Im confused here....first mr ken san agustin says the NCW was kicked out, then ria camacho comes and says otherwise, I think the sinajana peeps need to get their story straight.
      While we are on this subject of sinajana......
      I find it interesting that Fr. Bob did not agree with the NCW but he was very moved to fully support the Lifeteen youth ministry and all its abuses.....if you think the NCW is crazy for dancing around the altar after Mass, you should have seen the Teens Masses where Fr. Bob would invite the youth up to the Altar right before communion to form a circle with arms wrapped around eachother.....not to mention the Praise Worship Music. Whats my point? My point is that this is really not about abuses or conformity but rather a dilemma over what we have preference for and these preferences are influenced by what we have seen, heard or felt. We draw broad conclusions even before experiencing it for ourselves. Joy!

    3. All of you stop speaking of Fr. Bob! When Fr. Bob supported Life Teen their practices were accepted but when instructions were sent out to cease coming around the altar, right away were these rules complied with. There was no ambiguity or trying to find loop holes to continue illicit practices. The rules of the magisterium were faithfully followed.

    4. And so what about Fr. Bob's preference? So because he liked Life Teen he was supposed to be be pro-Neo? The Neo is not for everyone, as the Arch himself says, and the same for LifeTeen. Stop crucifying those who don't have a preference for the Neo.

  20. To Anonymous April 14, 2014 at 9:00 AM. Where did you get that story from? Our Parish received a letter even before the arrival of Fr. Robert. The letter was addressed to the NCW at St. Jude. We were told that there was no room for the NCW in the St. Jude Ministry, sounds like we were kicked out...simply put. Why do the NEO defenders continue to hide from the truths? Please tell me who requested that a Social Hall be built just for the NCW. What a whopper of a tale you NCW's keep coming up with. I am in Sinajana and I was a member of the Sinajana 1-2 NCW Community. I am no longer walking with the merged Sinajana/ Agana 2 community but I am still at St. Jude Parish as active as ever. Get your stories straight, or is that the story your Catechists want you all to believe?

    Kenneth San Agustin

    1. I am not in the Neo Ken! And wherever that letter came from I don't know. Fr. Bob himself told me was that he questioned why the Neo were using the social hall instead of the Church for their Mass.

      Also where did I state that the neo asked for a social hall to be built? A demand was made by the group for storage modifications in the social hall just for the neo's use, which the parish could not accomodate.

      I have Fr. Bob's contact info if you would like to ask him yourself!

      Ria Camacho

    2. What Ria says is true. I too have been in constant contact with Fr. Bob since his transfer to St. Elizabeth's parish in Honolulu and now during his semi retirement in New York.

  21. If Sinajana has a good filing system, the letter should be retrievable. Lets see it. If Mr. San Agustin could clarify...

    "The letter was addressed to the NCW at St. Jude. We were told that there was no room for the NCW in the St. Jude Ministry, sounds like we were kicked out...simply put."

    Is this what really happened? Sounds sad on the side of Pastoral Ministry. Joy!

  22. TO ALL THE NEO DEFENDERS IN THIS BLOG, YOU are more concerned whether or not Sinajana was once a neo parish or not, and yet, you can't defend your false beliefs on the issues of "Man cannot offend God", Jesus is not present in the Holy Eucharist and the DENIAL of the Eucharist as a sacrifice. .. Stick to the issues before us. What do you have say! You simply just can't defend yourselves. So typical of you neos...

    1. wishy washy! Even when we do tell you that Jesus is truly Present, He is Real in the Eucharist, you dont hear it. Even when we tell you that we do believe that the Eucharist is a sacrifice you close your ears again. Even when we acclaim that Mary is the Mother of Jesus and our Mother too you shut your ears the more. So typical of you to continue to persecute and reject the neos...Joy!

    2. Your misconception is guiding you into the wrong path. You believe only what you see on this blog instead of understanding for yourself. It is actually really sad. And I know Tim will call me a "coward" and "one who disobeys" but, in all truth, like I will always say, You never know until the end.

    3. Actually David, we CAN know. This is why Christ came. This is the whole point of our Catholic Faith. We CAN know. Jesus Christ came that we might KNOW. Know the Father, Know Heaven, Know the path to heaven, Know his love, Know his grace.

      As for your being "one who disobeys", you can only be that if you know that the manner of distributing Holy Communion in the NCW is not in conformity with the liturgical books as is required and that there is no exception for the practice and you participate in it anyway.

      There is no question that this practice is outside the liturgical norms and that there is no permission for it. Kiko himself rejected Pope Benedict's plea for him to conform. The fact that Kiko has not been publicly condemned is the only defense offered for the continued disobedience.

      As I've said elsewhere, this is a child's response: "I'm getting away with it so it must be okay." Added to disobedience we can add the sin of presumption.

      To put an end to the scandal I have asked the Archbishop - since it is is his job - to clarify as to whether there is some exception we are unaware of or whether he personally has the authority to make that exception for Guam and has so made it.

      There has been no reply. I am not expecting a personal reply. This is something that should be addressed in the U Matuna in an official way. Maybe you can request that he put an end to the scandal and speak.

    4. At Anonymous April 23, 2014 at 1:13 AM

      Actually, you can claim whatever you want. The Catholic Church puts things in writing for a reason. The NCW does NOT put things in writing for a reason. Kiko's teachings are in the 13 volume catechetical directory. The teachings of the Catholic Church are in the one volume Catechism of the Catholic Church. We've shown you ours. Now please show us yours.

    5. actually theres no need for the NCW to print their directory, we use the same catechism. You again speak as if these are two different things. You are creating division. I don't see the directory as something that needs to be printed. Actually, I prefer the Directory and the Statutes of the NCW because there are footnotes and citations unlike other written papers used by other movements.
      On a side note you remind me of what the Pope spoke of in Evangelii Gaudium...
      "The other is the self-absorbed promethean neopelagianism of those who ultimately trust only in their own powers and feel superior to others because they observe certain rules or remain intransigently faithful to a particular Catholic style from the past. A supposed soundness of doctrine or discipline leads instead to a narcissistic and authoritarian elitism, whereby instead of evangelizing, one analyzes and classifies others, and instead of opening the door to grace, one exhausts his or her energies in inspecting and verifying."
      "In some people we see an ostentatious preoccupation for the liturgy, for doctrine and for the Church’s prestige, but without any concern that the Gospel have a real impact on God’s faithful people and the concrete needs of the present time."

    6. Actually we remain faithful only to the Magisterium and not some Catholic style from the past. And we wouldn't have even paid attention to your transgressions had not the Archbishop publicly mocked an instruction from the pope, and which he and you still mock. And even then it would not have come up except for the lies and the brutal abuse of power that we are now experiencing at the hands of the chancery as the Archbishop pits you against us.

    7. Your zeal for the Pope whom you thought was going to take us all back to the Rite and Era which you prefer and have passion for, Pre Vatican II. Your hopes were cut short when he became Pope Emeritus. Now that we have Francis as our Pope and you see his Jesuit Style in Pastoral Care, in shepherding our flock, you feel it necessary to go ahead and incardinate yourself as church hierarchy. Youve done a good job at it because you now have faithful followers who consider every notion that you have as truth. You fail to correct them, then causing more conflict because it raises an argument that could have been avoided. You want truth but yet you yourself have failed at this and continue to push forward nonsense. Its time that you understand that the way in which you want to receive the information, documents etc. is not going to happen. You are creating a paper trail that only serves as evidence of your lack to confront the problem upfront. You want something from the Archbishop then go and see him. You know where he lives, eats and celebrates. Joy!

    8. You presume to know about me. You don't . You do what all my opponents do: try to cast me in a mold of your own making because you cannot engage my arguments. I don't want to receive any documents. There aren't any. Are there? And it's "my problem"? Sorry this was a problem a decade before I ever said anything about it, wasn't it? But thank you for the opportunity. I will use your comment as a reason to release the rest of the Archbishop's KOLG interview so people can hear the whole thing for themselves and what the Archbishop thinks of the people of Guam. I will also reveal who was at the meeting after that interview where a lie was concocted to cover for what the Archbishop did as well as what that lie was. I was waiting for this. You haven't learned. It is comments like yours that have driven this blog. By the way. You want me to shut up? Come and see me. Be a man. You know where I live, eat and celebrate. Joy!

    9. BTW, didn't Francis say something about "Airport bishops"? Oh yeah, you forgot that part.