Monday, January 16, 2017


Posted by LaPaz, Jungle Watch Correspondant from Spain.

Dear readers of Jungle Watch:

I have found an interesting old post -2013- which I want to translate for you, for your bishop -just in case he feels the need of information and reflection- and of course for those NCW's members who perceive a squeak in their conscience.

This post was the answer to one neocatechumenal member who wrote a commentary. I do not know exactly what he said, it is does not matter at all, the really interesting thing here was, as I said, the answer from the author of the blog, called Infocaótica (a word game with info-, information, and caótica, which means chaotic, owned by traditionalist catholics). 

There is another different blog, also in Spanish, called Infocatólica, which combines info- and católica, catholic, which serves the NCW among others. The game with chaotic and catholic, in Spanish, gives light about the critical character of the blog Infocaótica about the Catholic Church as a Chaotic one). In that sense, it is obvious that the NCW is a part of that chaos or even more: one of the fruits of that chaotic Church, from the view of traditionalists.

Anyway, they made some right considerations about the NCW wich put the finger on the sore. It is a pity their criteria are not taken into account due to the excommunication of their doctrinal position. 

In front of the Neocatechumenal Way there is a consensual position among many different and opposed ecclesial conceptions...that is such a miraculous communion. 

I have made some cuts at the beginning of the original text in Spanish because there were some sentences referred to some non interesting aspects here. Here is the text, remember the author is talking to a neocatechumenal member:

"1. (...) I will only say that Kiko's statements, made between friends, are self-sufficient. I'll tell you more about that anecdote, I think apocryphal, of Bergoglio's allegedly rude response to Ceremoni Marini regarding the mucette: "Put It On", celebrated by Kiko not only as real but also praiseworthy, clearly shows what Kiko is for any Traditional Catholic, ie for any Catholic. References to ecclesiology prior to the Council also clearly show a culmier of the hermeneutics of rupture. In that Kiko is consistent, he is a typical sesentista (NT: man of the 60's) who has not learned anything from Benedict. Point.

2. You consider insulting the term "subjectivist" in relation to the Way. It was not my intention, I used the term literally. 

The Way is the Catholic movement (yes, I know, it is a simple "itinerary of formation") more subjectivist than I know, in the sense that it is molded on the subject Kiko and his colleagues in the trinitarian life directory (NT: he is referring to the neocatechumenal Directory or Orientations for Catechists).

Notice that in saying that (Kiko and all neos) did not like the liturgical and doctrinal corrections of Benedict because "nobody likes to be corrected",  you yourself show such a subjective character. 

For a traditional Catholic, that phrase would have no meaning whatsoever. If I am told that a certain liturgy that I celebrate must be corrected because it is not traditional, nor would I like nor dislike it, I would correct it. 

For example, when I started going to the traditional Mass, I was displeased that the acolyte kissed the priest's hand when the censer passed. I said it and they told me it was the traditional way. Well, ready, the rule is objective, it is accepted. Same with doctrine

The appearance of "taste" and "disgust" refers to the creative subjectivity of Kiko, who is the immediate source of the liturgy and the doctrine of the Way. Certainly you admit the "corrections" of the Church to such "creativity", I do not dispute it. But the creative initiative is by Kiko. The Way is the Catholicism according to Kiko.

In that sense, the Way is the most subjectivist movement I know. No religious order, no congregation, no movement lies in the founder's liturgical initiative, doctrinal, pastoral, as the Way does. It can have some custom or tradition that drags of its Founder, in that sense the Opus has them and many. But its liturgy is that of the Church, the normal one. His doctrine is that of the Church. His pastoral does not have many internal secret documents. One might say something analogous to the Legion. 

But the whole understanding of Kiko's subjectivity is overwhelming (NT: literally, the author says "la omnicomprensión de Kiko" in Spanish, which comes from omni-, all, global, and comprehension, instead of whole understanding) and I would excuse myself to expose it, ranging from architecture, ornaments, to liturgy and doctrine. This is unpublished, and certainly related to the Subject Kiko. I have referred to this with subjectivism and I think it is an incontrovertible fact.

I insist that the Way is the Catholicism according to Kiko, that is, sieved, filtered, reworked and recreated according to Kiko. And corrected later by the Church. In the form of patches, partial and fragmented. In a way that has never been seen in the history of the Church, your comparison with Franciscanism does not stand. A Cross of San Damiano against the paraphernalia of objects of worship or liturgical created by Kiko really have no point of comparison. Or the mamotretos against the motto "peace and well".

What is clear is that the creative or recreational initiative is by Kiko. If this is lawful I do not know, whether it is good or bad I do not know, what I know is that it is indeed something new in the History of the Church, in the variety and magnitude of recreations

Indeed, the Dominicans have a liturgy (of course not armed by Santo Domingo) with any particularity. But they do not have a mamotreto, they do not have the painted icons, they do not have the songs, the guitars, the glass altars, the Jewish implements, they do not have the bisagrarios (NT: double tabernacles), they do not have ... There can be some isolated element that is characteristic of an Order , Something peculiar, but never the creation of a compact paradigm like the one that has armed Kiko. Compact but not coherent, obviously that man is not a genius.

The comparison with any religious Order is ridiculous, anyone who knows a little will see the difference in magnitude and depth of the "subjectivism" of the Way in relation to the Subject Kiko. If even Kiko was who canonized his artistic creations, arguing that it was the Devil who encouraged those who challenged his icons in the cathedral of Madrid.

The liturgical modus operandi of Kiko is indeed creative. A liturgy is invented, then corrected if the Holy See so requests. The liturgical initiative, far from being reserved for the Apostolic See, as mandated by the Constitution on Vatican II liturgy and the Code of Canon Law, is exercised by Kiko. It is a lie that the Council has authorized the liturgical initiative, expressly forbids the Sacrosanctum Concilium. It was a later abuse, proclaimed to the heat of the "spirit of the Council", to allow liturgical experimentation.

In short, the Camino is a Kiko's experiment. Liturgical, Aesthetic, Doctrinal, Pastoral. As well as the way an artist creates a work of art, in fact Kiko is an artist. The Catholicism according to Kiko, partially corrected by the Church. If this is legitimate, it is convenient, it is, ultimately, Catholic is deferred to a later, always posterior, judgment of the Church.

And the question remains, if this did Kiko, what prevents from any other Kiko appearing and inventing another Catholicism according to John, for example?

3. It talks volumes when somebody talks about a powerful man who is definitely out of power. 

We have had more of a surprise in these last weeks, sudden ingratitudes that would tear the stones apart. Will we have to remember Mahony's twitterable twitter, saying "good bye to the red shoes and ornaments" (NT: Kiko also mocked a lot about Benedict's red shoes and laces, of course just inmediatly after his resignation, as coward Mahony), with the courage of one who hits a man who can no longer answer him and with the rage for eight years of sumission? True gratitude is manifested with the impotent and the dead, said Kierkegaard.

It is characteristic of brave and outspoken men to manifest taste or disgust with the powerful. If it is Benedict, it will be with Benedict. If it's Francisco, with Francisco. I do not like the ostentation of humility, and I have said it.

The thing is to show contempt for "red shoes and stuff" when the man who was wearing them is no longer in power. To see who was encouraged to say this with Benedict still being Pope.

P.S.: in the Neocatechumenal Way, the words of the Consecration are changed, as recorded in the score of the Eucharistic Prayer II of one of his songbooks (177)." Source:

For some conclusion, many observers think Kiko Argüello and his NCW have surprised the Catholic Church in a total improvidence. I agree. That is the question. He has broken all the molds.

Maybe we are looking for a global solution and it is clearly impossible. Maybe we need local solutions more than global. Maybe we can not expect any torero Pope (torero is the Spanish word for bullfighter), but a bishop...

How many times the NCW talks about the bishop full responsability? How many times Kiko appeals to the bishop as the maximum guarantor?

Let's play his rules. Let's make each bishop to take position. A black and white position. 

If Kiko has maquiavelically desactivated the ability of the upper instances, then we have to work at local levels, where he has strenghtened the NCW. It is my hypothesis. And Guam is the ideal scenario.




    1. The concept of communion (koinonRa), which appears with a certain prominence in the texts of the Second Vatican Council(1), is very suitable for expressing the core of the Mystery of the Church, and can certainly be a key for the renewal of Catholic ecclesiology(2). A deeper appreciation of the fact that the Church is a Communion is, indeed, a task of special importance, which provides ample latitude for theological reflection on the mystery of the Church, "whose nature is such that it always admits new and deeper exploring"(3). However, some approaches to ecclesiology suffer from a clearly inadequate awareness of the Church as a mystery of communion, especially insofar as they have not sufficiently integrated the concept of communion with the concepts of People of God and of the Body of Christ, and have not given due importance to the relationship between the Church as communion and the Church as sacrament.

    2. Bearing in mind the doctrinal, pastoral and ecumenical importance of the different aspects regarding the Church understood as Communion, the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith has considered it opportune, by means of this Letter, to recall briefly and to clarify, where necessary, some of the fundamental elements that are to be considered already settled also by those who undertake the hoped-for theological investigation.

  2. Thank You Lapaz for this article on Kiko and his NCW cult. I have always asked of members of the NCW, from where does this person get his authority to say "Thus says the Lord?", on top of that he takes Catholic Doctrine that the Church has practiced for centuries and he adulterates or bastardizes it relative to what he interprets the doctrine to mean to fit his cult, and many Bishops, Priests, do not oppose those errors that he is propagating in the church. We are talking about heretical teaching that can cause the loss of one's eternal salvation. "Jesus is a sinner" is one such teaching that has greater implication on Christian teaching than we can ever quantify. It cuts the legs out from teaching that we hold foundational and fundamental to Christian teaching. But as we have discovered and mentioned many times in this blog. For Many of these bishops and priests who are tasked with guarding and teaching the truth handed down from Christ, Money talks and BS walks, and we are seeing so much BS going around even in the Vatican.

  3. Querida LAPAZ,
    non tengo mas tua email. Puedes inviarmela, se siempre eres intencionada a traducir mis dos libros "Kiko Arguello santo o impostore?" y
    Kiko, ti voglio parlare..." del Italiano en Espagnol, ora che sonos en stampa e van ser publicados en Enero?
    En Maria y Jesùs,

    Daniel Lifschitz

  4. Hey!! Check out these links: Neo-shirts... then Neo-gadgets... and even Neo-cakes

    1. NCW cult articles for cult followers to use to pray to Kiko.

    2. Check out what look like Jewish menorahs on a couple of those Neocat altars, dining tables, or whatever they are. If they're altars, those are definitely not liturgically correct candelabra.

  5. Being a Charismatic, can Byrnes even relate to proper liturgy? He might not be as outraged by the Neocats' liturgical abuses as others are.

  6. Rose de los Reyes (Seattle, WA)January 18, 2017 at 12:16 AM

    Thank you, Lapaz, for another excellent piece. I have always envisioned that a manageable goal to keeping away from the reaches of the NCW is to keep the NCW out from the local level. The NCW exists in a diocese only if its bishop allows the NCW to exist. Even on a smaller scale, the NCW grows a community in a parish only if that parish’s pastor allows the NCW to develop a community in that parish. The NCW came into existence in the Archdiocese of Agana because Abp. Apuron (and Presbyter No-Balls-Ardian) allowed --- perhaps even invited --- the NCW into the archdiocese. NCW communities on Guam were allowed to develop in parishes where the pastors allowed such a program/movement (according to one of Lapaz’s prior writings, in exchange for “donations” to the parish, which ended up donations to the pastor personally because the parishes didn’t see visible signs of those donations in the form of parish facilities improvements, improvement in parish programs and improvements in parish’s financial health). That is seen in the Barrigada parish where Presbyter No-Balls-Ardian had a stronghold as pastor (and beneficiary of the NCW donations). It was seen in Chalan Pago where Abp. Apuron had a strong influence in its pastoral placement. Conversely, then-pastor Fr. Paul Gofigan didn’t freely allow the NCW to establish a program/movement in Santa Barbara because he knew of their heretical liturgical practices and would not allow it in his parish. He didn’t prevent the NCW from establishing a community in Santa Barbara, he merely set fair conditions under which they had to conduct their program if they were to practice in his parish --- (1) follow the Eucharistic celebration as prescribed by the norms and (2) that their celebrations had to be open to all. Fr. Pius-the-Putrid and Pat-the-Tall-Woman were miffed by those demands imposed by Fr. Paul and they went running to Abp. Apuron. Hence began Abp. Apuron’s vendetta against Fr. Paul. The point here is that the existence of the NCW can be guarded against in two manageable levels --- diocesan level and parish level. If Abp. Byrnes is a NCW sympathizer who allows the NCW to continue the practice of heresies in his archdiocese, the parish pastors can still protect their parish under the same grounds that Fr. Paul protected Santa Barbara. Any move, even the tiniest ones, that Abp. Byrnes takes that is pro-NCW is going to be immediately very, very, very evident to the local Faithful because of their decades of experience who was under the influence of the NCW. And they will cry FOUL!

  7. Any member of the NCW who advocates the merits of the movement without completing the Way is not a credible witness. In fact that person is not only precocious but amazingly ignorant of his own blindness. Let that person read Matthew 24.24 "even the elect if that were possible" discernment lies with the Church and the Church including AB Byrnes will discern the NCW by its obedience. It appears that the track record is not good. Given enough rope the NCW will hang itself as it is incapable of being obedient even in the smallest of matters. The World is watching. The World is praying that the NCW will come into communion and obedience to the Church.