Saturday, January 9, 2016


I am happy to trot out the "priest with the ph.d" matter again...thanks to Diana.

In response to the Dungbats blog to titled 'A Priest Problem' the dingbat still remains clueless....

Father Neil has a Ph.D in Liturgy. In his letter, he stated that the Way is not violating the liturgy. (See Father Neil's Letter). Those who feel that Father Neil is incorrect are only questioning his credentials. If you think you know better than Father Neil, then FIRST show us your credentials.
Diana at 10:50 PM

Yes, when one lives falsely then numbers and credentials matter. Thus, Diana, and her sorry little tribe are forever touting numbers of this and numbers of that and letters before and after the names of their little trophy priests. (This may explain why they don't believe Jesus is God. He had no credentials.)

The priest in the above comment is Fr. Neil X. O'Donoghue. Amazingly he is still listed as one of the permanent professors at RMS even though he has not been on Guam in many years (save for short and secret visits perhaps) and is vice-rector at the Redemptoris Mater House of Formation in the Archdiocese of Armagh, Ireland. 

Obviously one cannot be a full-time vice rector of a seminary on one side of the planet and a full time professor on the other (unless you are Padre Pio), so guess who's lying? Yes, more evidence that our seminary is fake. No certificate of affiliation with the Lateran (as claimed) and a false list of permanent professors. 

But back to what Fr. Neil says: that the Way "is not violating the Liturgy." Of course he says that. He's a Kiko. But he's not a stupid Kiko like Diana. He's a smart Kiko. Fr. Neil knows on what side of the bread his slice is buttered. Position, prestige, material comforts, cushy trips, and probably a nice flow of cash from the sale of his books to little kiko's all over the neo-cult world. Why should he upset his nice little apple cart with the truth.

But while the likes of Diana are simply stupid followers, Fr. Neil, not being stupid, knows he's lying - as do most of the neo-cult hierarchy (including Apuron). They know they have no authority to alter the liturgy outside the norms permitted in the statute. But they do. And then they lie about it. Or more precisely, they go silent when asked - just as Fr. Neil did when I asked him personally last year after reading the same post to which Diana refers. 

You see, I know Fr. Neil personally. I explained how I know him personally (and many others in the neo-cult hierarchy) in my March 2014 post,  A PRIEST WITH A PH.D.

In the same month, I emailed Fr. Neil (I have his personal email) and asked this "priest with a ph.d" to help set us all right. Truly, if a specific indult from the Vatican (and it must come from the Vatican) exists permitting the NCW to celebrate an alternate communion rite, then let's end the argument over it. If nothing else, a priest of his caliber (a "ph.d") should understand the grave consequences of permitting the scandal of silence on the matter. 

Yet, Fr. Neil's response was the same as Apuron's and the rest of the neo-cult: SILENCE. Copied below is my email to him. There was NO reply.

March 9, 2014

Dear Father, Greetings from Guam, and thank you in advance for taking the time to consider my inquiry.

Since we know each other, I thought I could approach you with a simple question and get a simple answer. I recently read your response to Magister, and am left with the following questions:

In the neocatechumenal liturgies on Guam, the host is distributed in the following manner:
  1. The priest, before communicating himself, distributes the consecrated bread/host to the communicants who stand, remaining in their place.
  2. All communicants continue holding the host until all have received
  3. There is a period of reflection.
  4. The priest then consumes the host, then invites the other communicants to do likewise. 
Is this only happening on Guam or is this the way neocatechumenal communities receive the sacred species universally?

If this is a universal practice and not just a local practice, could you please advise on where this deviation from the GIRM is permitted? The GIRM requires:
  1. the priest to communicate himself before distributing the sacred species to the communicants
  2. the communicants to immediately consume upon reception.
I have studied the Statute thoroughly and not only do I see no allowance for this, I see the original instruction to conform the distribution of holy communion to the liturgical books (the Arinze letter) reinforced in footnote 49, with the only allowance being that the communicants do not process towards the minister but wait in their place. 

Sadly, this is a major point of contention in our local church because the Archbishop publicly ridiculed the "Arinze" letter upon its release and just as publicly, challenged Arinze's credentials, even though Arinze began his letter: "The Holy Father wishes you to know..." 

We are continually told that the issue was resolved with the approval of the Statute, but I see no evidence of it.  And the debate over the NCW has recently exploded here in Guam for a variety of reasons, but this is one of the big ones. Your explanation will help. 

Thank you. I await your reply and hope all is well.

Here is a link to other posts related to Fr. Neil on this blog.


Now as a small addendum to this post, let us investigate a bit into this so-called "house of formation" for which Fr. Neil is the supposed "vice-rector." 

It appears that this Irish presbyter factory has the same problem as ours, and I suspect all the RMS's are the same. For what should be vaunted institutions, and for an organization in love with credentials, one would think that such credentials would be publicly trumpeted. Instead, we get the same smoke and mirrors that we have come to expect from our own RMS. 

Look up any real seminary on the internet and there is a wealth of data about its mission, curriculum, professors, published works, libraries, etc. But the neo-cat places generally have nothing more than a facade for a web site. And if it has any information at all it is usually nothing more than general information about the Neocatechumenal Way and circular links. No real information about the institution itself. 

Fr. Neil's Redemptoris Mater House of Formation is just like ours, a pretty front page, and then nothing. Here is the home page: Now check out the other links. You will see that there is next to NOTHING there and what is there at all is vague. 

Especially funny (and telling) is the link to "Seminarians and Formators." One might think that you will learn a little there about the people who attend and run the seminary, or maybe even a little about the supposed vice-rector. Nothing but a few photos. Typical neo-cult mode: clandestine silence. 

Now here is another website which from what I can tell is not linked to the main website, but discoverable through a separate search: 

Here is where we are supposed to learn of the "academia." You will note that this Redemptoris Mater has only ONE department and only ONE professor (Fr. Neil) who has produced only ONE document, and LOL, it's about bigger "altars" (i.e. a justification of the neocat table.)

Fr. Neil's "RMS" is the same scam ours is. So much for a "ph.d." 

Recommendations by JungleWatch