Neocatechumenal Way Given Full Approval by Vatican

[Walking_Home]

Okay right now tell me WHERE did I say you should or would be excommunicated. Right now, no weaseling, no side stepping, no word play.

DIRECTLY and in a straight forward manner tell me where I said you should be excommunicated.

I nearly pointed out your attacking a group as Non-Catholic and calling those that support them enablers. Which would include Rome.

An to me it is interesting how Catholics seem to be all about absolute obedience to Rome…

Until Rome supports something they don’t like. Then the excuses fly.

Quote=cyberwolf00
Which I guess includes the Vatican and the Pontifical Council for the Laity judgeing from the article…

What was** that about submitting to Rome again?**

Or is it only for the stuff you LIKE and AGREE with?

You did question my submission to Rome —and from your last sentence — picking and choosing what I like and agree with --is an implication that I do not follow Rome —which would then mean I have separated myself in some way.

Unless accepting the Neocatechumenal Way has been made part of Church doctrine/teaching to which we are bound to give assent —my rejection of the Neocatechumenal Way —does not in any way or form make me less Catholic or place me against submission to Rome.

Taking into account that the Neocatechumenal’s theology ,and the fact that in Japan ----they have tried to take the diocese right out from under the bishops and that Arguello has dictated to the Pope how he wants his followers to receive communion --opposing the Pope’s directives—yes I can disagree with the Pontifical Council of the Laity --as to whether it was prudent to give them full approval.

 

[arieh0310]

The Neocatechumenal Way is a cult: cathud.com/LINKS/pages_MR/neocatechumenate.htm

 

[benedictgal]

---

Instead of rolling your eyes — it may be better for you to become informed as to what is going on. On Dec. 1 2005, Pope Benedict via the Congregation for Divine Worship and Discipline of the Sacraments to the founders of the Neocatechumenal Way. This letter addressed the abuses in the Neocatechumenal Mass. Note item No. 5. They were directed to stop their form of offering communion and adopted the Church’s form.

Instead Arguello has flipped the directives back at the Pope’s face and basicly told the Pope how he —Arguello is going to submit his followers to offer communion. Communion is still going to be taken to where Arguellos followers are sitted — instead of the congregation go up to receive like the rest of the Latin rite.

chiesa.espresso.repubblica.it/articolo/44140?eng=y
Congregatio de Cultu Divino et Disciplina Sacramentorum

Prot. 2520/03/L

From Vatican City, December 1, 2005

To the esteemed Mr. Kiko Argüello, Ms. Carmen Hernandez, and Rev. Father Mario Pezzi,

Following the conversations with this Congregation for Divine Worship and the Discipline of the Sacraments on the celebration of the Most Holy Eucharist in the communities of the Neocatechumenal Way, in keeping with the guidelines issued in the meeting with you on November 11 of this year, I am to inform you of the Holy Father’s decisions.

1. On the manner of receiving Holy Communion, a period of transition (not exceeding two years) is granted to the Neocatechumenal Way to pass from the widespread manner of receiving Holy Communion in its communities (seated, with a cloth-covered table placed at the center of the church instead of the dedicated altar in the sanctuary) **to the normal way in which the entire Church receives Holy Communion. This means that the Neocatechumenal Way must begin to adopt the manner of distributing the Body and Blood of Christ that is provided in the liturgical books. **

zenit.org/article-22897?l=english

According to Arguello, the only significant change that the definitive statues introduced in regard to the liturgy affects the way of receiving Communion.

In keeping with the communities’ usual practice, Communion will continue to be received under both species and will be distributed by ministers in the assembly, instead of the procession of the faithful typical in the Roman rite.

This practice is kept in the definitive statutes, but for the reception of the Host, the faithful will stand before the minister. This is not the case in receiving the Chalice, which will continue to be received seated, to avoid spilling the precious Blood.

Walking Home, I accidentally went to one such service and I was appallled. This was some 10 years ago and the rector of the Cathedral was bound by episcopal obedience to conduct this. He looked drained and pained. It was a strange, almost new age type service and the music was more like cats wailing in misery than anything else.

It is no wonder that Pope Benedict issued this edict after his election to the See of Peter.

 

[Indyann]

Walking Home, I accidentally went to one such service and I was appallled. This was some 10 years ago and the rector of the Cathedral was bound by episcopal obedience to conduct this. He looked drained and pained. It was a strange, almost new age type service and the music was more like cats wailing in misery than anything else.

It is no wonder that Pope Benedict issued this edict after his election to the See of Peter.

So are we now to believe that the Pope and the Magisterium has been “hoodwinked” into giving approval to this “cult”?

 

[benedictgal]

So are we now to believe that the Pope and the Magisterium has been “hoodwinked” into giving approval to this “cult”?

There are two differences that most people may not be able to realize. Just because the Holy See has approved the movement, that doesn’t mean that the Church also gives the green light to the way their liturgies are handled. Those are two different issues altogether.

While Pope Benedict lauded some of the good efforts that the movement has made, he is also very quick to point out that they, like the rest of the Church, are bound by her liturgical laws.

One thing is to approve the movement. The other is to make sure tht the movement is following the liturgical norms and not making things up that they have no authority to do.

 

[arieh0310]

So are we now to believe that the Pope and the Magisterium has been “hoodwinked” into giving approval to this “cult”?

It takes, most times, decades for the Church to condemn movements or ideologies. It took many generations for the Church to condemn Gallicanism and Jansenism (two heresies that raged in the Church). The Church has also made condemnations that were later reversed (like the suppression of the Jesuit order). The Church can move at glacial speeds, or even make mistakes, when it comes to disciplinary matters.

And realize that the Vatican has given approval to their constitution, not to their heretical (and secretive) catechism.

 

[OriginalJS]

I don’t know anything about this “movement” and I am glad I don’t. Wake me when it’s over.

 

[Walking_Home]

Kiko Arguello’s “theology” of denial of the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass.

forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?p=1460106#post1460106

Quote=pieuse
I agree with that because they say 1 thing to him and people and then say a different thing to us. I lost my peace of mind since I’ve joined and especially realised that. They kind of twist words, say they don’t really like the Adoration and they say it but cleverly.
So people don’t realise that. But the way they started in our group was by telling us something like that: after the recognisation of Christian as a state religion, there were adding like the sacrifice. 1 of our catechist who is also a priest said that and was saying that we weren’t supposed to be adoring but receiving… I was a bit shocked becasue by what he said it was like annihilating what the Church said about the apparition of the L.ord to St. Margaret Mary Alacoque (the Sacred Heart). When I spotted that error to our responsible, he denied it bluntly. But I can prove it as I have recorded the convivence on audio tapes.

I’m anyway interested by people who have experienced the scrutinies.
Thanx a lot for your help.
Pieuse

rorate-caeli.blogspot.com/2008/04/vatican-approval-coming-slowly-for.html

nonymous said…

i was in the "way" for almost 2 years. i didn't like it from the start. it did seem cultish to me. you never knew what was going on. everything was secret.

** the priest taught us that the tridentine mass was defective because it turned the mass from a banquet to a sacrifice**. this happened after christianity was adopted by rome and incorperated pagan elements.

i could go on and on about the problems. our group disbanded shortly after we left.
13 April, 2008 06:39

forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?t=23443&page=5&highlight=Neocatechumenal

popebenedict16.blogspot.com/2…vi-brings.html

heathcliff huxtable said…
i belong to the “way” and have experience with the liturgy. first off, i was told during the catechesis that the sacraficial aspect of the mass was a result of pagan inculturization shortly after constantine’s reign when the eucharist went from the catecombs and homes into basilicas. they said that the original primitive understanding of the eucharist was a celebration of the passover of Christ and was strictly a sacred banquet and not a sacrifice to appease God who didn’t need it.

at the end of the way’s mass, we would hold hands and dance around the table and sing some jewish song. i also remember people becoming very upset when we were told we had to recive the bread on our hands sitting down. one lady started to cry and the priest told her it was the devil doing it.

 

[benedictgal]

Kiko Arguello’s “theology” of denial of the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass.

forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?p=1460106#post1460106

Quote=pieuse
I agree with that because they say 1 thing to him and people and then say a different thing to us. I lost my peace of mind since I’ve joined and especially realised that. They kind of twist words, say they don’t really like the Adoration and they say it but cleverly.
So people don’t realise that. But the way they started in our group was by telling us something like that: after the recognisation of Christian as a state religion, there were adding like the sacrifice. 1 of our catechist who is also a priest said that and was saying that we weren’t supposed to be adoring but receiving… I was a bit shocked becasue by what he said it was like annihilating what the Church said about the apparition of the L.ord to St. Margaret Mary Alacoque (the Sacred Heart). When I spotted that error to our responsible, he denied it bluntly. But I can prove it as I have recorded the convivence on audio tapes.

I’m anyway interested by people who have experienced the scrutinies.
Thanx a lot for your help.
Pieuse

rorate-caeli.blogspot.com/2008/04/vatican-approval-coming-slowly-for.html

nonymous said…

i was in the "way" for almost 2 years. i didn't like it from the start. it did seem cultish to me. you never knew what was going on. everything was secret.

** the priest taught us that the tridentine mass was defective because it turned the mass from a banquet to a sacrifice**. this happened after christianity was adopted by rome and incorperated pagan elements.

i could go on and on about the problems. our group disbanded shortly after we left.
13 April, 2008 06:39

forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?t=23443&page=5&highlight=Neocatechumenal

popebenedict16.blogspot.com/2…vi-brings.html

heathcliff huxtable said…
i belong to the “way” and have experience with the liturgy. first off, i was told during the catechesis that the sacraficial aspect of the mass was a result of pagan inculturization shortly after constantine’s reign when the eucharist went from the catecombs and homes into basilicas. they said that the original primitive understanding of the eucharist was a celebration of the passover of Christ and was strictly a sacred banquet and not a sacrifice to appease God who didn’t need it.

at the end of the way’s mass, we would hold hands and dance around the table and sing some jewish song. i also remember people becoming very upset when we were told we had to recive the bread on our hands sitting down. one lady started to cry and the priest told her it was the devil doing it.

This is most troubling and one of the reasons why the Neocat form of liturgy was supposed to be suppressed.

That part that I bolded is very problematic and almost heresy. It pretty much sets aside what the Church has taught for 2,000+ years about the Sacrifice of Christ.

But, as I said before, just because they are now a recognized movement, that doesn’t necessarily mean that the Neocat liturgy is now approved. Nobody gave them the right to cobble up their own form of the Mass.

 

[Walking_Home]

This is most troubling and one of the reasons why the Neocat form of liturgy was supposed to be suppressed.

That part that I bolded is very problematic and almost heresy. It pretty much sets aside what the Church has taught for 2,000+ years about the Sacrifice of Christ.

But, as I said before, just because they are now a recognized movement, that doesn’t necessarily mean that the Neocat liturgy is now approved. Nobody gave them the right to cobble up their own form of the Mass.

---

That is not all benedictgal:

fatherjoe.wordpress.com/2006/09/11/abuses-of-the-eucharist/

I had one experience with a neocatechumenal group that quite upset me. They make their own patties for Mass. Conventional ovens are not hot enough to properly prepare the unleavened bread used at Mass, so it ends up more like powdered dough. (Ovens used by the sisters for hosts get up to about 800 degrees!) Anyhow, after Mass I noticed that there was an excessive amount of crumbs and powder on the altar. **When I came back to clean up, I discovered that they had brushed everything onto the flour and were vacuuming it up. When I challenged this practice, I was told it was routine and that they had been taught that Jesus is bread but not crumbs. ** Obviously they never sang St. Thomas Aquinas’ great chant with any understanding. They sit for Holy Communion and have huge punch-bowel sized chalices for Mass. The Easter Vigil at one church, with ninety participants, went through three gallons of the precious blood! Rome has given them two years to correct their liturgical abuses.

freerepublic.com/focus/religion/726775/posts

An Experience Of
The Neo-Catechumenal Way
by D.J. Redfern
Neocatechumenal Way adherent for five years,
inc. one year in a Redemptoris Mater Seminary in Australia
From “Christian Order” Magazine, November, 1997

COMMUNION RITE

Fractio Panis. The large piece of bread is broken into two pieces and again elevated. The assembly bows, sits down and the Communion song begins as the priest continues to break the bread into smaller pieces to be distributed to Communicants. The cruciform shape made on the upper and lower surfaces of the bread is meant to assist the priest in the breaking of bread. However, on many occasions the bread has not been cooked properly and the priest has to either use brute force to break the bread or, conversely, the bread shatters into a number of pieces. On more than one occasion have I had to clean up crumbs left on the altar cloths and the floor at the end of a celebration.

 

[E.E.N.S]

…
But, as I said before, just because they are now a recognized movement, that doesn’t necessarily mean that the Neocat liturgy is now approved. Nobody gave them the right to cobble up their own form of the Mass.

What exactly does their approval mean? Honestly, I am curious to know, because not only is their liturgy a mess, but it would appear that their theology and catechesis is as well.

 

[benedictgal]

What exactly does their approval mean? Honestly, I am curious to know, because not only is their liturgy a mess, but it would appear that their theology and catechesis is as well.

Evidently, the Holy See made approval of the Neocat movement conditional, and the condition had to do with the way they were celebrating the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass. This is what the online magazine Cheisa notes:

The Neocatechumenals typically celebrate the Mass in the form of a banquet, around a large square table, taking communion seated and passing the chalice from hand to hand. Moreover, together with the homily, the give a great deal of latitude for the spontaneous comments of those present.

At least, this is what they did until a short time ago. And as, in part, they continue to do.

On December 1, 2005, Cardinal Francis Arinze, prefect of the congregation for divine worship, sent them a letter, in the name of the pope, to call them back to faithful observance of the liturgical regulations. And the following January 12, Benedict XVI in person urged them to obey. But in practice, this twofold reminder fell on deaf ears almost everywhere.

On February 22, 2007, in an audience with the clergy of Rome, Benedict XVI made it clear that the new statutes would not be approved if they did not follow these instructions.

And in the end, the pressure worked. The new statutes approved last May 11 require the Neocatechumenals to celebrate the Mass following the general liturgical regulations of the Roman rite. They must receive communion standing. The homily can no longer be replaced with a variety of comments. Their Masses on Saturday evening will be “part of the Sunday liturgical service of the parish,” and will be “open to other members of the faithful as well.”

The only concessions: they can receive communion “while remaining in their places,” and they can exchange the sign of peace before the offertory instead of before communion. But it must be noted that the latter arrangement is already used in the Ambrosian rite in the archdiocese of Milan. And in the near future, it could also be introduced into the Roman rite, according to what Benedict XVI himself foreshadowed in the post-synodal exhortation on the Eucharist, “Sacramentum Caritatis.”

According to the new statutes, ***all of the Neocatechumenal communities in the world must immediately adhere to the new rules in celebrating the Mass. ***

I received this notification in my inbox, as I am a subscriber to chiesa.

 

[mattm09]

It takes, most times, decades for the Church to condemn movements or ideologies. It took many generations for the Church to condemn Gallicanism and Jansenism (two heresies that raged in the Church). The Church has also made condemnations that were later reversed (like the suppression of the Jesuit order). The Church can move at glacial speeds, or even make mistakes, when it comes to disciplinary matters.

And realize that the Vatican has given approval to their constitution, not to their heretical (and secretive) catechism.

“Argüello revealed that at present, the Holy See is studying the texts of the Way’s catecheses, so that they can be made public and distributed to parishes worldwide.” zenit.org/article-22897?l=english

If the catechism is so secretive, how come the Holy See is in the process of reviewing it so that it can be “made public and distributed to parishes worldwide”? The Neocatechumenate submitted their entire agenda to Rome for it to be scrutinized, so of course Rome will do so. I am in the Way, and something that is heard so very often goes like this. “If the Pope and Holy See completely denounced the Way, then Kiko would be in complete obedience and stop it.” Also, in response to people feeling that they don’t want to accept the Way, they have every right not to. A priest once said in his homily, “This walk is only one of the countless ways to Christ.”

EDIT: When I mean Kiko stopping “it” I mean the Neocatechumenal Way.

 

[benedictgal]

“Argüello revealed that at present, the Holy See is studying the texts of the Way’s catecheses, so that they can be made public and distributed to parishes worldwide.” zenit.org/article-22897?l=english

If the catechism is so secretive, how come the Holy See is in the process of reviewing it so that it can be “made public and distributed to parishes worldwide”? The Neocatechumenate submitted their entire agenda to Rome for it to be scrutinized, so of course Rome will do so. I am in the Way, and something that is heard so very often goes like this. “If the Pope and Holy See completely denounced the Way, then Kiko would be in complete obedience and stop it.” Also, in response to people feeling that they don’t want to accept the Way, they have every right not to. A priest once said in his homily, “This walk is only one of the countless ways to Christ.”

EDIT: When I mean Kiko stopping “it” I mean the Neocatechumenal Way.

But, this begs an even bigger question: Why do the members of the Way insist that their celebration of the Eucharist was appropriate to the point that Kiko and company believed that the Holy Father’s directives concerning the Mass were suggestions and nothing else?

Part and parcel of being in the Church is to have obedience to the Holy Father and his representatives (in this case, Francis Cardinal Arinze). The Neocats had no right to tinker with the Mass. No movement does. The Mass is not sonething that we cobble up for ourselves and change at our own whim and idiosyncracies. The Holy Sacrifice is something that we receive.

Our Cathedral has a Neocat community. They had a separate celebration of Holy Thursday and their own rituals. For the Paschal Triduum, the entir Church celebrates together. We don’t do our own thing. We celebrate the sacred mysteries as a Church.

 

[benedictgal]

I would also ask the proponents of the Neocatechumanal Way this question. Why would this group openly resist the directives the Holy Father gave them regarding the Mass?

Read this section of an article from Chiesa magazine. Sandro Magistero is pretty accurate and is the one who has covered this issue:

There is one thing about the Neocatechumenals that the pope does not accept, and which touches the heart of Christian life: the unusual way in which they celebrate the Mass (1).

…Benedict XVI has ordered that all of this come to an end. He did this through a letter delivered in mid-December to the three main leaders of the Way: Kiko, Carmen, and the Italian priest Mario Pezzi. The letter was signed by cardinal Francis Arinze, prefect of the Vatican congregation for the liturgy, but from its very first lines it clearly states that these are “the decisions of the Holy Father.” Six unambiguous commands follow.

…But instead of simply obeying, the Neocatechumenals disobeyed while asserting that they were perfectly obedient.
When Vatican analyst Andrea Tornielli first gave the news of the pope’s directions, the official spokesman and director of the Way in the United States, Giuseppe Gennarini, protested that in reality these orders amounted to an approval (3).

When on December 27 www.chiesa published Arinze’s letter in its entirety, Gennarini called the very authenticity of this letter into question. He added that “this does not change its nature of a confidential and internal instrumentum laboris (working instrument),” devoid of any normative force. He restated that the only valid norm is “the confirmation by the Holy Father of the liturgical praxis of the Way.” And by way of proof he cited the blessing that the pope would bestow a few days later upon the Neocatechumenal families leaving on mission, during the audience of January 12 (4).

The audience did, in fact, take place. And so did the blessing. But there was also a second, ringing summons to obedience from Benedict XVI: “Recently the congregation for divine worship and the discipline of the sacraments imparted to you, in my name, some norms concerning the Eucharistic celebration, after the trial period that had been granted by the servant of God John Paul II. I am certain that these norms, which draw upon the provisions of the liturgical books approved by the Church, will meet with attentive compliance from you.” (5)

Having stumbled on to this particular “Mass” by accident, I can certainly see the problems that Rome has with it. What I don’t understand is by whose authority did Kiko do this? It violates the Sacred Constitution on the Liturgy, the GIRM and all of the other liturgical documents. Furthermore, as the Holy See pointed out, no such indult existed for what they were doing.

 

[Walking_Home]

What catechism is it that Rome is currently reviewing. The Neocatechumenal “catechism” that says — The Holy Sacrifice of the Mass is a pagan introduction —therefore false. The “catechism” that says our Lord is not present in the crumbs — therefore the crumbs can be discarded. The “catechism” that says the Church is being disobedient and spiting the gospel because of communion via one species.

What would Rome do with such a “catechism”. The truth of the Neocatechumenal Way is not found in the “catechism” currently under review.

 

[mattm09]

But, this begs an even bigger question: Why do the members of the Way insist that their celebration of the Eucharist was appropriate to the point that Kiko and company believed that the Holy Father’s directives concerning the Mass were suggestions and nothing else?

Part and parcel of being in the Church is to have obedience to the Holy Father and his representatives (in this case, Francis Cardinal Arinze). The Neocats had no right to tinker with the Mass. No movement does. The Mass is not sonething that we cobble up for ourselves and change at our own whim and idiosyncracies. The Holy Sacrifice is something that we receive.

Our Cathedral has a Neocat community. They had a separate celebration of Holy Thursday and their own rituals. For the Paschal Triduum, the entir Church celebrates together. We don’t do our own thing. We celebrate the sacred mysteries as a Church.

Kiko did not believe that they were merely “directives.” Changes demanded by the Holy Father are already evident.

The Neocatechumenal Way was a fruit of Vatican II, which completely changed the rubrics of the Mass. Are you saying the College of Cardinals and the Holy Father himself with their infalliability have no right to change the Mass, since in reality it is the Holy Spirit acting through them?

Your last point is completely false. On Holy Thursday, our community took part in the Last Supper Mass, and then we went on to have a “Word” afterwards. The same thing with Stations of the Cross on Good Friday. We did not do only our “own thing” but did something in addition. It is very odd how people criticize things they know little about.

 

[mattm09]

What catechism is it that Rome is currently reviewing. The Neocatechumenal “catechism” that says — The Holy Sacrifice of the Mass is a pagan introduction —therefore false. The “catechism” that says our Lord is not present in the crumbs — therefore the crumbs can be discarded. The “catechism” that says the Church is being disobedient and spiting the gospel because of communion via one species.

What would Rome do with such a “catechism”. The truth of the Neocatechumenal Way is not found in the “catechism” currently under review.

Forgive me, but those arguments are grossly uninformed. In the 7 years of which I have been exposed to the way, never have I heard that the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass is or was a pagan introduction. It is a sacrifice and a celebration, hence the phrase “Our celebrant today is Father Soandso.” Also, for children receiving the body the first time, the priest always says that they must eat every crumb, because the Lord Jesus Christ is present in every crumb. I do not know where you are finding this “catechism” but it is utterly false. I pose this question, if the Mass of the Neocatechumenal Way and the contents of it’s catechesis is so heretical, why has it not been extinguished by the popes, the Pontifical Councils, the College of Cardinals, and the bishops? I’m under the impression that that is quite a large number of men, who are divinely inspired and even so intelligent in their own respect. It’s highly unlikely that they’ve been “hoodwinked”

 

[Walking_Home]

Forgive me, but those arguments are grossly uninformed. In the 7 years of which I have been exposed to the way, never have I heard that the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass is or was a pagan introduction. It is a sacrifice and a celebration, hence the phrase “Our celebrant today is Father Soandso.” Also, for children receiving the body the first time, the priest always says that they must eat every crumb, because the Lord Jesus Christ is present in every crumb. I do not know where you are finding this “catechism” but it is utterly false. I pose this question, if the Mass of the Neocatechumenal Way and the contents of it’s catechesis is so heretical, why has it not been extinguished by the popes, the Pontifical Councils, the College of Cardinals, and the bishops? I’m under the impression that that is quite a large number of men, who are divinely inspired and even so intelligent in their own respect. It’s highly unlikely that they’ve been “hoodwinked”

---

Oh please —enough. Protection of Arguello and the “Way” is first priority for Arguello adherents. But the truth is surfacing.

forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?p=2475240#post2475240

Quote=nightengale
We are eagerly awaiting the Holy Father’s decision on the Statutes - which ironically does not state all the abuses that go on at the Eucharist. I have found out that the only change re Communion is that they will now stand to receive!** Nothing about the bread which is baked and crumbs can be dropped especially by children**, also no one is allowed to receive on the tongue. I have been told by a Cannon lawyer that the Consecration is not complete until the Priest consumes the Eucharist. This is very frightening. As the Priest has Communion with the rest of the people and then has the Blood of Christ after this, it makes it very difficult or impossible for anyone to receive on the tongue.** It would mean you would be consuming the Eucharist before the Priest**. Everyone stands for the Consecration as kneeling is for ‘slaves’. Also it is considered a Celebration** and the Sacrifice of the Mass is never mentioned. **There is so much wrong with it and the followers are blind to all this. Anything that Kiko says is gospel and no one ever contradicts. I should know as I was in it for 30 years! I began to rebel about 10 years ago and many attempts were made to bring me in line but with no success. Our Blessed Mother had other plans for me and now I enjoy daily Mass and Exposition and follow the Marian way of life. It also means that I am free on Saturday nights to be with my husband - something we never enjoyed when I was in the ‘way’. The only problem, as I mentioned before, is that some of my family members are heavily involved and this creates a lot of problems. I am praying that Kiko and Carmen will be brought in line and that true and healthy fruit can issue from this way. They are good at Evangelising and Vocations but into Christianity but not into the true Catholic Church.God bless

 

[mattm09]

---

Oh please —enough. Protection of Arguello and the “Way” is first priority for Arguello adherents. But the truth is surfacing.

forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?p=2475240#post2475240

Quote=nightengale
We are eagerly awaiting the Holy Father’s decision on the Statutes - which ironically does not state all the abuses that go on at the Eucharist. I have found out that the only change re Communion is that they will now stand to receive!** Nothing about the bread which is baked and crumbs can be dropped especially by children**, also no one is allowed to receive on the tongue. I have been told by a Cannon lawyer that the Consecration is not complete until the Priest consumes the Eucharist. This is very frightening. As the Priest has Communion with the rest of the people and then has the Blood of Christ after this, it makes it very difficult or impossible for anyone to receive on the tongue.** It would mean you would be consuming the Eucharist before the Priest**. Everyone stands for the Consecration as kneeling is for ‘slaves’. Also it is considered a Celebration** and the Sacrifice of the Mass is never mentioned. **There is so much wrong with it and the followers are blind to all this. Anything that Kiko says is gospel and no one ever contradicts. I should know as I was in it for 30 years! I began to rebel about 10 years ago and many attempts were made to bring me in line but with no success. Our Blessed Mother had other plans for me and now I enjoy daily Mass and Exposition and follow the Marian way of life. It also means that I am free on Saturday nights to be with my husband - something we never enjoyed when I was in the ‘way’. The only problem, as I mentioned before, is that some of my family members are heavily involved and this creates a lot of problems. I am praying that Kiko and Carmen will be brought in line and that true and healthy fruit can issue from this way. **They are good at Evangelising and Vocations but into Christianity but not into the true Catholic **Church.God bless

Once again, all of those things would have been extinguished if they were so illegitimate. I am sorry that this lady had an experience that may not be thrilling. I am happy to hear that she found a new Marian devotion, and if that’s what makes her closer to God, then we know that He is acting in her history. (I want to add that the way has a huge Marian devotion, as an icon of the Madonna and Child is displayed during all functions). However she makes it seem like a cult. The liturgy on Saturday night lasts about an hour and a half, not the widely presumed 3 or 4 hours. Priests and catechists do not stress the idea that the Way is the only Way (I actually personally think that it should be reffered to as “a” Way ) The argument of the way of receiving the Eucharist should have ended last week with the official approval of the statutes. Rome’s decision is final, and we must accept what the Roman Curia says whether we like it or not. This woman still says that good things still can come from this Way, and it does! Look at the massive number of people it has brought back from the Church, the number of vocations it has fostered, and a revival of spirit it has brought unto it’s parishes. If the Mass used is so skewed, why was the only major change in the reception of the Body and Blood standing? The Neocatechumal Way is a reality that all Catholics must know exists within the Church and has been approved, but definitely do not have to abide by. In my household there is a copy of the statues that were approved for a period of ad experimentium in 2002 and included is the catechesis used. I do not think that Rome has had an oversight in respect to the catechesis and any heresies would have been corrected, if they even existed in the first place.