Thursday, August 21, 2014


Kevin Camacho's letter to the editor "The Way brings intimacy with God" was printed in today's Pacific Daily News. Following is his letter with my comments in red.


The Church has put her imprimatur on the Neocatechumenal Way. As noted by previous submissions, the Church examined the authenticity of its charism, and the efficacy of its contribution to the Church's mission.

The Church did not "put her imprimatur on the Neocatechumenal Way". What the Church DID do was give the Neocatechumenal Way a Statute, a rule to follow. Outside that rule, the Neocatechumenal has no authentic Catholic charism. 

Although it's not for everyone, it has saved many in Guam, and throughout the world. Ask any priest who has been formed in a Redemptoris Mater Seminary, any married couple who has learned what it means to live their marriage as a sacrament of salvation, any youth who has attended a World Youth Day Pilgrimage. The Way brings people into an intimacy with God that is very hard to find in the current model of the parish.

Yes, it is quite common to hear members speak of how they were saved by the neo. The rest of us prefer to speak of how we were saved by the passion, death, and resurrection of Jesus Christ, the fruits of which are made manifest in his Church and its sacraments.

Your comment about the parish is also familiar. We are told regularly by the NCW that the parish model is dead, that the small community is the future of the church. However, this conflicts with your Statute in several places and namely Art. 6, which requires the NCW to be "implemented in the parish". 

Art. 6 then goes on to call the parish: “the usual place in which one is born and grows in the  faith”, and "the privileged location in which the Church, mother and teacher, brings the children of God to birth in the baptismal font and “gestates” them to new life.

As per your comment and the regular teaching of the Neocatechumenal Way, it is the "community", NOT the parish that is the new "privileged location"wherein the "children of God" are birthed and gestated to "new life". 

• Critics have displayed poor form. Personal attacks detract from meaningful discourse. Ad hominem attacks take away credibility. The mode of criticism has been outright shameful and embarrassing, unbecoming of Christian leaders.

It's comments like this that make me wish I had catalogued all the "ad hominum attacks" directed at me on this blog that are indeed "outright shameful and embarrassing" or should be, to the Neocatechumenal Way. The author seems to be unaware that for many months my name was the only one that could be attacked "ad hominum" since all the neo-haters, including, the neo-spokesperson, hid behind the name "anonymous" or a pseudonym. In fact, this very comment is another ad hominum attack because rather than refute our arguments, he characterizes those of us who oppose him as having "poor form" and "unbecoming of Christian leaders". Really?

• Criticizing aspects of the Neocatechumenal Way. Many have charged everything from blatant disobedience to the pope and violation of liturgical mandates. Address concerns responsibly, and maturely. Stop with the nonsensical clamor.

How about stop the nonsensical answers. Simply demonstrate the papal permission which allows you to depart from the liturgical norms as prescribed for you in the Statute of the Neocatechumenal Way. Those departures are:
1. The postponement of the priests communion until after he has distributed the consecrated bread.
2. The delay in consuming the consecrated bread until all have had it placed in their hands.
3. The sitting to consume the consecrated bread.

Just show us and this debate is over. You win. 

• True motive of dissenters. What is the genuine motive of these critics? Do they think that this will encourage people to come back to Church?

As the record shows, most have no issue with your errors. You are welcome to them. What we take issue with is the persecution of priests by their bishop for opposing the expansion of the Neocatechumenal Way and the imposition of its illicit practices on them. The persecution began in 2008 with the Archbishop demanding that three Filipino priests serve as presbyters for the Neocatechumenal Way or get out of his diocese. In his letter to the priests, even the Archbishop noted that the NCW liturgy had not yet been approved, but that he expected it to be, and thus expected the priests to serve the Neo. With the final approval of the statute, the liturgy was NOT approved as the Archbishop expected and the NCW's communion rite remained illicit. Priests forced to accommodate the Way by their bishop are forced to choose between staying true to the Church or participating in illicit liturgies. For staying true to the Church, they are ground down, publicly smeared, and run out of town. 

• Financial transparency. People donate their time, talent and treasure to the church. Since Jesus said you cannot serve both God and money, it is important we live as if our true treasure is in heaven and not in our bank accounts. Knowing where our money goes is important to maintain trust and confidence in the Church as the steward of our temporal goods. Demanding financial accountability of our Archdiocese is not only a good thing, but it is imperative.

This part is funny. And who was it that demanded financial accountability of this Archdiocese? It wasn't the Neo was it? In fact, this archdiocese is one of the very few that still does not make its finances public. And speaking of financial transparency, what about yours? What about all the money that is collected at Neo events? Do you turn that money into the parish office? You don't. Where is it? Who gets it? Where is your financial accountability? There is none, is there?

• Zero-tolerancy policy is a good policy. Protecting our children is our first priority. Our archbishop has the responsibility to ensure children safety. A zero-tolerance policy within our archdiocese is a great thing; but I don't think the problem people have concerns this policy.

Apparently this is a reference to the LIE the Archbishop cooked up to get rid of Fr. Paul. But speaking of Zero tolerance, why is it that the archbishop incardinated a priest with a record of accusations of child molestation without attempting to either clear that record or at least acknowledge it? The Zero-tolerance policy means just that. There is no need for an indictment. Zero-tolerance means that even the accusation requires action. But no action for 14 years from this Archbishop because why? Because the priest was Neo. So tell us some more about "zero-tolerance". The only "zero-tolerance" is what this archbishop shows to priests who do not serve the Neocatechumenal Way.

If you're unsure about something, look it up! If we really want to know what the Neocatechumenal Way is all about, read what the Church fathers are saying, what the congregations responsible for safeguarding the Church against erroneous teaching are saying. Let us stop the gossip and the vitriol. Let us not give occasion for the evil one to sow discord among us!

Actually, I did look it up. I looked it up in the only document that matters: the Statute of the Neocatechumenal Way. As previously mentioned, it is your rule. Outside it you lack an authentic Catholic charism. So yes, let us "stop the gossip and the vitriol." Simply show the rest of us where you are authorized to celebrate the liturgy in a manner not consistent with Art. 13 of your Statute. Simple. 

In the year 2000, my pastor invited me to attend a series of catecheses (sic). It was during a time when my family was going through a difficult time. We sought the Church in the midst of a crisis, we needed an answer in the face of our suffering.

It is a shame that your pastor, as evidenced by what you say here and following, did not provide the proper catechesis for you in the first place. That is HIS responsibility, NOT the responsibility of some itinerant. In fact, he is gravely culpable for permitting and promoting a catechesis based on a theology that negates the central act our faith: that participation in the Holy Eucharist is a participation in the ONE SACRIFICE of Jesus Christ. This is why you do not celebrate on an altar, the place of sacrifice, but on a table. You do not celebrate on an altar because Kiko does not believe that the celebration of the Eucharist is THE HOLY SACRIFICE as the Catechism of the Catholic Church says it is in par. 1330. Instead Kiko teaches:

 "in Christianity there is no altar", which is " why we can celebrate the Eucharist on a suitable table and we can celebrate in a square, in the countryside or wherever it is suitable. We don't have a particular place where exclusively we should celebrate our worship." (Volume 1, 3rd Day, Catechetical Directory for Teams of Catechists)

As a young man, with a poor foundation in faith, I was lost in cloud of sin, despair and fear, questioning my life and the tragedies before me. I needed more than a Sunday Mass, a lecture or pep talk. Little by little, like a patient mother, the Way brought me into the bosom of the Church. Introducing me to the Word of God, as more than historical commentary or inspirational stories but as a living testament to the presence of the God among his people. I heard of the covenant He makes with Abraham and his descendants. I, too, am a descendant of Abraham, a Chamorro from Guam.

Secondly, I heard the announcement of his saving power. Every Christian must announce the Kerygma. It is the duty of the Church to announce this victory of God valiantly, with joy and with unrelenting courage.

I learned that the sacraments are not just mere ritual practices, but deeply reverent gifts where Christ is present and among us.

I thank God for having come to me through people who traveled far to announce a news: God exists, he has not abandoned you, he loves you as you are, judgmental, arrogant, self-centered, afraid, a sinner. He comes to offer you an alternative. Be free from evil, let go of hate, learn to detest all that is impure. Be clean, be forgiven.

The author does not realize it but all of the above is an indictment of the Archbishop he is trying to defend. The current Archbishop has been in office for three decades. Why did you not learn your faith under or from him? Why, under his reign, did you grow up "lost in a cloud of sin, despair, and fear?" Why were you not introduced to the Word of God under this bishop? Why did you not know that you were a descendant of Abraham? Why did you not know that every Christian is to announce "the Kerygma?" Where was Archbishop Apuron? He's had thirty years!

Our archbishop welcomed strangers to our island, just like Kepuha did, and it is in this invitation that a seed was planted. As Guahan received the missionaries three and a half centuries ago, the archbishop's "yes" bore fruit. His yes has saved countless marriages, enabled many to be born who wouldn't have otherwise, has fostered many vocations to the priesthood and religious life.

The archbishop has not "welcomed strangers", he has imported them. But aside from that, comparing the Archbishop's importation of these so-called "missionaries" to the arrival of missionaries on "Guahan...three and a half centuries ago" is an admission that the archbishop is an utter failure. Three and a half centuries ago Catholicism had not yet been established on our island. It has since been here for three and a half centuries and you now compare our present situation to that of three and half centuries ago? Your point is to impugn the faith of the regular Catholics and elevate the new "missionaries" to the status of Blessed Diego, who have come to evangelize us poor heathen. But in doing so, you reduce Archbishop Apuron to a pagan and the church he presides over to "the heathen". 

Let us pray that the holy spirit enlighten our minds and hearts, and bring us to reconciliation with our brothers.

Quite the norm. After bashing and impugning his opponents throughout, he ends with a call for peace. SMH. Thanks, Kevin. Thanks for another demonstration of why we must keep up our fight. 


  1. Kevin reveals that as a young man he had poor foundation in faith. He wanted to experience more than Mass and a pep talk. Hmmm...he was a fruit waiting to be picked by the Neos. What is tragic in Kevin's case is he was a lost soul then and STILL continues to be a lost soul by turning a blind eye to the TRUTH and continuing to trust the NCW leaders. Come on Kevin, trusting Kiko, a layman, and a former nun over the Pope? Get out while you can Kevin! Meanwhile, I will pray for your lost soul.

  2. Kevin, your testimony in the paper was very sincere, but I know that you have relatives that have quit the Way because of some mistrust of the way some of the leaders in their Neocatechumenal community have handled money and donations. Will you honestly tell us about that?

    I don't dare put my name on this because I am afraid they will not let my daughter be confirmed, or at least give us a very hard time.

  3. While it should be commended for their convictions, these personal testimony essays that have permeated the PDN pages lately are irrelevant to the issues at hand.

    I will even go as far as saying that the Archbishop and the leaders in the NCW are using them, if I may, as "human shields" or pawns in responding to our direct concerns. However, it is apparent that they are ill equipped, offering only their experiences rather than elucidation. As of yet, no personal testimony have offered rebuttal to the serious concerns, objections or request for clarification.

  4. “address concerns responsibly, and maturely.”

    if this is addressed to us non-neocats, then he’s telling the wrong people, because we, not the members of the ncw, are the ones who have the concerns. the neocats, especially archbishop apuron, are the ones who need to be addressing our concerns responsibly and maturely.

    this whole fight would have been over long ago if the archbishop and the neocats just responded to all of our questions and concerns. but instead, their responses have generally been redirections, perhaps deflections, along the lines of: “but look at all the good it’s done for us!” okay, that’s fine, but it doesn’t answer the questions.

    also, an ad hominem attack is a fallacy only if it was irrelevant, was not based on fact, or was meant to insult or abuse the person. for example, calling someone a liar is not an ad hominem attack if there is relevant proof that the person said something false with the intention to deceive. true, it’s blunt language. but it’s not wrong to say it.

  5. Wonderful story Mr. miss the whole point, but it is a nice story.

  6. More misinformation from he/she/it (Diana).

    Diana August 21, 2014 at 3:28 PM
    Dear Anonymous at 3:24 p.m.,

    The Way was not excommunicated in Japan. The Bishop there wanted to expel the Way, but the Pope intervened, so the Way stayed in Japan. The Way in Japan remained obedient to their Bishop even if he was against the Way.

  7. Hafa Adai Tim,

    I would first like to thank you for providing this forum. It has shed a bright light on a very secretive and elitist group within our Church. People with even an ounce of common sense can see through the lies that seems to be pouring out of the NCW. Keep up the great work and know that you have people who understand why you started this blog and support your work.
    I want to comment on something Kevin wrote:

    "True motive of dissenters. What is the genuine motive of these critics? Do they think that this will encourage people to come back to Church?"

    Hmmmm....I thought that the whole mission of the NCW was to bring those who have fallen away, back to "Mother Church". Sounds like he's saying, "Now that we have them, you Judases cannot have them back!" I thought the NCW was supposed to be like other groups within the Church, like the Knights of Columbus, Legion of Mary, etc. Apparently I was mistaken. Shame on me. I like to give people the benefit of the doubt, but all the responses so far from NCW members in the various threads have proved to me that its all smoke and mirrors. Don't try to dazzle me with your words that never really answer the questions, I can smell that BS a mile away.
    If your Leader, Kiko, chooses not obey instructions from the Pope, then he must be removed from the Catholic Church and start his own religion. Oh wait, that kind of sounds like the tone of the Archbishop's letter to the priests ASKING them to participate in the Way here on Guam. What's good for the goose, should be good for the gander.

  8. It is becoming more and more obvious to me that many of the Neocats' tales of woe seem to be issues more appropriately addressed at Mental Health, AA, or with a marriage/financial counselor to seek temporal (material) answers, which once fixed, would eventually lead them back to the real Faith and church. Anybody remember the 60's EST or Gestalt therapy? Eerily similar to the NCW.

  9. Right, this just pisses me off. first off, this guy hasn't even lived here for more than five years. His pastor at the time he speaks of was Fr. Adrian. Does that explain some things? Secondly, while the parish priest does have some culpability, when an infant is baptised, the parents are asked do they accept responsibility of raising the child in the faith. and now its someone else's fault? Ad hominem only works if the allegations are baseless,which if you lived here, you would know they are not.

  10. Can someone please tell Guam Veterans why Catholic Mass is not allowed for the deceased in the chapel at the Veterans cemetery? Why were 6 veterans allowed to be buried last month without a Catholic Mass when they could not afford to pay for Mass in a church? Why were Catholic Masses stopped being held in the veteran's chapel in the late 80's early 90's? What kind of authority does Guam's Catholic Archbishop have to stop other religions from holding church services for their deceased members in the Veterans chapel? Why does the Archbishop not allow priests to say mass in the chapel at other Guam cemeteries? Is it because of his interpretation of cannon law? Is it because it will take money away from the Catholic church, even if some veterans or others don't have money to pay the church? Even the Governor has asked why? I find this action of the Archbishop deeply disturbing. How heartbreaking for families to suffer this experience when loosing a loved one. How can this be allowed at a time when one's greatest spiritual comfort and blessings are in highest need during an entire lifetime. I ask because Tim stated this quote in his reply, "in Christianity there is no altar", which is " why we can celebrate the Eucharist on a suitable table and we can celebrate in a square, in the countryside or wherever it is suitable. We don't have a particular place where exclusively we should celebrate our worship." (Volume 1, 3rd Day, Catechetical Directory for Teams of Catechists). I am utterly unable to comprehend the Archbishop's actions regarding what I consider unbelievable disrespect to veterans let alone to others who maybe poor at their time of transition and families need for spiritual consolation during grief. Dare I say it is even more confusing to me if the Archbishop claims to be a Neo and Christian and this is their Neo rule. How is the love that Jesus taught demonstrated by such actions? Can Someone PLEASE TELL ME? Does anyone know if Masses on Guam were being allowed in hotels? If so were they held in consecrated rooms, with consecrated tables, alters? Did they have relics? Why have Mass at one place and not another greatly confuses me.

    1. You gotta be in da club nai. Gotta be neo
      My suggestion, since it is run with federal funds, ask the navy to take jurisdiction over the chapel. That way, you don't have to waste your time with this archdiocese and their funky decisions

  11. I, too, have had hardships in my life and can speak tales of woe. I, too, have felt alone and lost. I'm willing to bet most of us have. But I've learned to dig in and trust in God and seek counsel of the priests who hear my confession and care for my well-being.

    It's no coincidence that a priest is often referred to as a shepherd. In the fields, a sheep hears and recognizes its shepherd's voice, and a true shepherd finds its lost sheep to bring it back in the fold. Theirs is a relationship of trust, guidance, and care.

    This is the crux of the problems on Guam -- the Archbishop has split his flock into two groups, and he ignores the bleating of the majority who are hurting. As Msgr. David I.A. Quitugua (the elder) pointed out in the clergy meeting with the Nuncio, Archbishop Krebs, the Archbishop is a "father who shows partiality, that he needs to change his allegiance to the NCW, that even though the Archbishop chooses the NCW for his personal spirituality, that as a bishop, he is not a private person and must be a father to all, not just the Neos" (if it's been a while since you've read this, or haven't checked it out yet, I highly recommend you (re)visit "Spaghetti for everyone and Guam is the problem - July 18th).

    That being said, I do enjoy the testimonies from our NCW brethren, though. They're quite compelling, and I think it's nice of Kiko Arguello and Carmen Hernandez to have formed such a large, organized support group.

  12. 900,400 OK, Chancery, are you awake?? Watch the page views. Your Foolishness, come clean.

  13. Anonymous 11.45 Thank you for directing me to "Spaghetti for everyone and Guam is the problem - July 18th). What a horrifying nightmare the Catholic Church of Guam has become. What an ordeal it must be for the non neo priests. I can't help but think that if the basic needs, rights and laws of non neo priests are denied by the Archbishop what chance do Guam's deceased veterans and their families have of a Mass to for pray for their souls in a chapel they can afford.

    Anonymous 8:58 Thank You for responding. If the navy approved the Chaplin saying Mass. How could they? The CATHOLIC Archbishop seems to have ULTIMATE AUTHORITY OVER the VETERANS cemetery to stop OTHER RELIGIONS from using the VETERAN'S chapel.