Tuesday, September 2, 2014


David Rak drak@brick.net via gmail.com 

to Jungle

You are wrong and continue to be. We heeded the Holy Father's directive. We receive it standing at our place as put forward in the Statutes.

As I said, go to a full Catechesis or go to a Eucharist because they are a valid Mass of the parish.

I will pray for you.  It's unfortunate you have this hatred for something you don't know.

All the communities I know always work for communion with the pastor and within the parish.




Dear David,

You are wrong and continue to be. The church does not distinguish between receiving and consuming because before the Neocatechumenal Way and its conniving leadership it never expected to have to. When the Church, in your Statute, ordered you to receive the Eucharistic Lord, STANDING, it presumed upon the intelligence and sincerity of heart of your leadership. The Church did not assume that you would separate the act of receiving and consuming. She expected you to actually know that the word "receive" meant to "receive into your body", NOT simply onto the hand for later consumption.

If receiving and consuming are separate acts, then all of us, not just the Neo's, should be permitted to take the consecrated bread back to our pews and consume whenever we want to. In fact, since the Archbishop permits the Neos to separate receiving and consuming, and there is NO specific permission in your Statute to do so, we "regular" Catholics should just start taking the host back to our pews or maybe even stash it away for later. 

Of course, our priests, those who are responsible, would not allow this. But then we could protest, as you do: "show us where it says not to do this." And of course, it (the liturgical books) does not say NOT to do this, because the Church presumes on our intelligence and sincerity of heart. 

This practice makes your "Mass" illicit. I did not say "invalid". Perhaps you know the difference? However, we must also question validity given what we know about Kiko's objection to the Mass as a "Sacrifice". But we'll leave that for another time. 

Also, I have no "hatred" for the Neocatechumenal Way or its members. I FULLY SUPPORT the Neocatechumenal Way as constituted by the FINAL Statute given it by the Church. What I "hate" is the kind of subterfuge and lies you employ to concoct for yourselves exceptions like the one which allows you to separate the reception of the Body of Christ and its ultimate consumption. 

Lastly, this constant defense that no one knows anything unless they go through your program is in direct opposition to how the Catholic Church handles genunine inquiries. The Church, at least the one I belong to, has taken great pains throughout the centuries, to hammer into words and examinable documents every facet of what we believe. 

The Church, in its wisdom, knew from early on that the "oral tradition" lay exposed to charlatans and false teachers. This was the original impetus for what we now call the New Testament and the many writings of the Fathers, which were followed by the many writings of the popes, saints, and doctors of the Church. To sequester documentation and information from the faithful and make it available only orally and only through the mouths of self-appointed leaders is gnosticism.

Thanks for the prayers. 


  1. Greetings, David. I'll let others who are more learned with your Statutes (and how you violate your very own Statutes) respond to you. I think Tim Rohr has already done a good job at objectively responding to your letter, though I doubt his explanation will make a dent in your deeply rooted belief(s). No amount of objective retort will convince you folks otherwise, because it is either "your WAY" or "no way". Ironically, "lex orandi, lex credendi" applies to you folks as well. Since you folks do not BELIEVE that the Mass is a TRUE SACRIFICE wherein Jesus offers an expiatory offering to His Father for your sins and mine, there is no need to be respectful in how you receive/consume (same thing) Him in Communion. So, let others more capable than I deal with you.

    The thing that I find both startling (as well as amusing) in your comment is "All the communities I know always work for communion with the pastor and within the parish." Wow! How lucky you are! Where do we find these communities? The ones we are familiar with actually do not work in communion with their pastors and within the parish - unless the Pastor is a Neo himself! One such pastor lost his job because the community didn't want to work within the framework of the pastor's requirements. Know him?

  2. "The thing that I find both startling (as well as amusing) in your comment is "All the communities I know always work for communion with the pastor and within the parish." Wow! How lucky you are! Where do we find these communities?"

    That might be Illinois, but I still doubt the assertion- http://parish.peoriaholyfamily.com/uploads/6/9/5/4/6954608/02-05-12bulletin.pdf

  3. Well, then come to Guam, David. Not all the Neos here are model Neos like you guys there. Maybe you can do your "schooling" with your fellow GuamNeos.

    Please do not involve yourself in the issues of Guam, if you are not going to help build bridges. Supporting the Neos and defending it to us will not do so well for your cause, because the Neos here do not follow statutes and are continuing the great divide, with the help of the Archbishop.

  4. David,
    Please read your "statute" again then read the Popes recommendations to correct the aberrations NCW has blatantly ignored. Contact Kiko Aguello, your leader, and ask him if there's any need to adhere to the Holy Fathers recommendations.

    As for your "All the communities I know always work for communion with the pastor and within the parish." ....you are correct, now ask the archbishop to correct these problems and to stop favoring one child from the other.

  5. Though Tim had said many but no meaning.

    1. I too am laughing out loud!! Yes 2:43, no meaning for you because you don't understand English!!

  6. Hi David, where is your testimony? Just wondering who you are.

  7. Pretty sneaky these guys. "We receive it standing at our place as put forward in the Statutes."

    It was so simple then when your mom asks you, "Did you receive Holy Communion, my son?"
    It was never, "Did you receive Holy Communion, my son? Or, while we are at it, did you comsume the Holy Communion, my son?"
    Come on, David, please don't just leave us hanging. Answer Tim. We won't get anywhere when you don't engage him after he corrects you. Correct him and tell him he is truly wrong. Don't let him have the last word on this if you want us to stop reading his blog. Come on, David. Please, I know someone asks about your testimony. Please do that later. Answer Tim first. Please. I really want to hear your answer. Prove this guy Tim wrong and we will go to your side immediately.

    1. GOD will correct Tim in due time. The truth can be slanted but in the end will be revealed. We celebrate and understand the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass. As usual everything out of context and slurred. Kind of like your radio interview with Ric Nauta. I can't belive no one has caught on to your ways. Ric reads something...he asks, "is this true?" Maybe all you hear is "yes" but Tim's anwers is, "yes, I believe it's true" and goes on talking, talking, talking. It is what he believes, it is his truth not the truth. Let us all wait in God's due time. His promises can be relied upon. Courage Archbishop!

    2. Well then have the courage to publicly rebut me.

    3. To AnonymousSeptember 2, 2014 at 11:02 PM the only ones slanting the truth are the hierarchy of this diocese and the NCW. you do not celebrate the sacrifice of the Mass, in fact according to canon law many of these people celebrating your "eucharist" should be anathema for how you treat the sacred host, dusting the crumbs on the floor, shaking off the corporal like a table cloth, adding things like sugar and cinnamon to the unleavened bread " to make it taste better". Check with your head catechist kiko. he doesn't believe in the Sacrifice of the Mass, which is why you use a table instead of an altar.

  8. @ 11:02pm Holy Sacrifice of the Mass, you say? Kiko doesn't believe that Jesus "sacrificed" himself...so how can it be a Holy SACRIFICE of the Mass? Hence, the reason why NEO holy sacrifice of the the mass isn't done on an altar, just a table with a menorrah. And oh yes, guitar cases in an airport. Remember that picture before boarding the plane to Australia for world youth day? Instead of prayer, it looked like a show for everyone around them to see and admire. Jesus deserves more than a TABLE. Mass you say? NEO calls it a celebration. I just love how "GOD" is thrown in as a defense. GOD will do this, GOD will do that. I am sure that Kiko RANTS using "GOD" a lot, mostly to instill fear like a former leader of the 20th century. Regarding courage for the archbishop. Yeah, courage to start swallowing his pride, apologizing to the church and fixing his mess. Yes, I said HIS mess. He is the cause and now we are feeling the effects.

  9. David, read Tim's reponse carefully. The NCW's rationalization of how it has conformed to the pope's orders by unilaterally defining receiving as separate from consuming is tantamount to exploiting a loophole. Do you honestly want to argue the semantics and gamble the disposition of your soul on a technicality?

    Jesus Himself gave us an example when he healed the blind man on the sabbath to the displeasure of the sanhedrin. The letter of the law does not supercede the spirit of its intent.

    If you look carefully, the NCW is protestant in the real historical sense. Yet it desperately tries to dress itself as Catholic. Even its members talk about the Way as if it were an entity separate and distinct from the Church, yet claim to be Catholic. Calling yourself Catholic doesn't make you Catholic. It's what you believe that matters.


Recommendations by JungleWatch