Neocatechumenal Way

[eddyr2]

Thankyou, I do appreciate your response.

Do you think the pope needed to be instructed on these things? Or was it for the purpose of Kiko having a video of himself giving the Pope a lesson on how great he (Kiko) is, so he could build himself up some more?

In any case, in my opinion, the pope looks less than impressed!

Let me start by saying, that i love the fact that you, Caanan, have a fire for the Catholic faith and i am sure you are a true believer in our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ. i am always thankful to God and Holy Spirit that there are Catholics willing to defend the faith. As a long time member of the Neocatechumenal Way, i am always open to respectful dialogue with my fellow Catholics. That being said i don’t speak for Kiko or the Way in general. Just like as a life long Californian i dont speak for Jerry Brown or the State in general.

I don’t think the Pope needed to be informed on the steps and i don’t know the purpose of Kiko presenting the steps to the Pope. I do think it helps the Holy Father to have a quick refresher before the blessings of the families. I am sure the Holy Father meets with hundreds of different orders, groups, charismas and itinerary of Catholic Formation, it must be difficult for him to remember all the different nuances for each one.

I accept your opinion that the Pope looks less then impressed during that part, but i hope that you also accept my opinion that he look very happy blessing the families going on mission. For example at the 1:32 mark he is blessing a mother and child with a huge smile on his face. youtube.com/watch?v=gR_8MXJHfac

Further to my previous. I wonder whether Kiko, during his lecture to the pope “going over all the steps of the Way, to explain why all these families are will to go on this mission (sic)”, mentioned the obligation of tithing? Or the obligation to use only the songs of Kiko? Or to use only the icons of Kiko? Or the Kiko guitar strap? Or Kiko’s sacred vessels? Or Kiko’s superior chairs? Or the famed Kiko carpets?

I wonder whether Kiko gave the Pope one of his “Holy cards” that were given out during lent of 2012? internetica.it/neocatecumenali/english/kiko-symphonic.htm

I am only going to speak about my experience since that is all i know:

-My family does try to tithing, must of that money goes to my parish, with some directly to charities and a good chuck directly to my Diocese capital campaign. i don’t send any money to Kiko.

-Kiko has written many songs but most of the songs i hear at Church are the Psalms (my buddy Dave wrote those).

-In my home i do have icons that Kiko painted but i also have several that where paint hundreds of years before I or Kiko where born. (all copies, can afford the real deals )

-I don’t have a guitar strap but my wife does. It’s a cheap black one that was $5 and not one Kiko made.

-don’t not have any of Kiko’s vessels

-the chars and rugs i have came from IKEA and not Kiko

-the “Holy cards” you linked to was part of a flier for a free concert that Kiko was presenting. I didn’t go since i am form the west coast but i have a friend in Boston that did go. He liked it and mentioned that Cardinal Sean O’Malley was there and spoke at the event. cardinalseansblog.org/2012/05/11/the-suffering-of-the-innocents/

All, that being said, hope you can respect that the Church and the Way saved my life and brought me back to Christ. Without the Church and the Way i wouldn’t be married, i wouldn’t be open to life and i would be living a life of deep sin. The Way isn’t for everyone but it helped my family a lot.

Once again Caanan, i am grateful for your faith and will pray for you and your family tonight. Please pray for me.

Your Brother in Christ,
eddyr2

PS please forgive any typos, wrote this on a break at work.

 

[Caanan]

Once again eddyr2, thankyou for your generous response.

May I take this opportunity to ask you some more questions about your experiences?

Originally Posted by eddyr2
My family does try to tithing, must of that money goes to my parish, with some directly to charities and a good chuck directly to my Diocese capital campaign. i don’t send any money to Kiko.

Do you mean to say here that you tithe to the parish? Or rather, is the tithe (or some portion of that amount) paid directly to the “community”, and they then pass on some funds to the parish? In most cases I am familiar with, the NCW members tithe to their own community and are not directly giving to the parish. Does your community report to its members its overall financial income and expenditure? (not the individual donations of course but just a summary position) Or does your community keep all its financial activity essentially secret?

If your community does actually receive money and/or other goods directly, who is responsible for managing those assets? And are there ever audits of these assets? Are you aware of this article of the NCW statutes (Article 4.1):

1. The Neocatechumenal Way, being an itinerary of Catholic formation that is implemented in the dioceses through services freely given, has no material goods of its own.

Does that article, in your honest opinion, reflect the reality?

Originally Posted by eddyr2
*Kiko has written many songs but most of the songs i hear at Church are the Psalms (my buddy Dave wrote those). *

Are you claiming that the NCW communities use the songs of others, not just Kiko? Do you not use Kiko’s NCW songbook? When you say “songs I hear at Church”, are you saying “Songs I hear at NCW Eucharists?” In my experience, only Kiko’s songs are acceptable to the catechists.

You know that when a community is formed, there are potentially many costs associated with acquiring the necessary materials and objects for liturgies. Often these are paid for by members of the nascent community or from collections from other community members. Have you ever been curious as to where the funds used to purchase these goods eventually end up? Are you aware of Kiko’s personal interest in the ‘shops’ that sell these items world-wide? Have you any factual information on Kiko’s personal financial position, living arrangements etc? Would it bother you if you discovered that Kiko (and G. Gennarini for that matter) were living very affluent lives?

In my home i do have icons that Kiko painted but i also have several that where paint hundreds of years before I or Kiko where born

Have you ever noticed any icons other than Kiko’s versions that are used in NCW seminaries, liturgical spaces (occasionally Churches where NCW ‘run’ the parish) or in any official activities of the NCW?

don’t not have any of Kiko’s vessels

Do you admit that, where possible, virtually all NCW Eucharists are conducted exclusively with the vessels and items from Kiko’s shops? What vessels and other liturgical items do your community use?

Why not visit Kiko Industries Inc. neosigne.com/
Chairs: neosigne.com/signos/mobiliario/i/1013/283/silla-catecumenal (seriously?)
Crucifix: neosigne.com/signos/cruces/cruces-celebracion
Offertory items: neosigne.com/signos/orfebreria/calices-y-patenas

Someone is doing very well out of all of this. But let me guess, there is a private trust/foundation that never releases its financial records behind it all. I wonder who might operate that foundation?

the “Holy cards” you linked to was part of a flier for a free concert that Kiko was presenting. I didn’t go since i am form the west coast but i have a friend in Boston that did go. He liked it and mentioned that Cardinal Sean O’Malley was there and spoke at the event. cardinalseansblog.org/201…the-innocents/

Yes, I am aware of this. However, this is hardly a flyer - more a self aggrandizing, I’m-so-important-and-wonderful card. Cardinal O’Malley needs our prayers too.

All, that being said, hope you can respect that the Church and the Way saved my life and brought me back to Christ. Without the Church and the Way i wouldn’t be married, i wouldn’t be open to life and i would be living a life of deep sin. The Way isn’t for everyone but it helped my family a lot.

Thank goodness you at least had the sense to mention Church in the above comment - usually it is “the Way” that saved my parent’s marriage, that stopped me from suicide. Despite Kiko’s catechesis that “there is no salvation outside of the community” (honestly this is what he claims!) it is Jesus Christ Himself through the Unity of His Church that saves anyone who is saved. I do not believe that our Loving God would spare any means to bring you to salvation. I reject your assertion that the “Way” is the means by which He does that.

You seem like a very decent fellow. I wish you well in uncovering the uncomfortable truth of the NCW. I will shortly be visiting the Blessed Sacrament in adoration - I will remember you before the Lord and pray for your family and friends.

 

[Roguish]

No. You said that there IS a way to a profound understanding of Catholicism. So I was curious to see what, according to you, that way WAS. But that was just because I was trying to figure out where you’re coming from.

Yes, you invited me to take a stance on the matter, so that there would be something to dispute.

I am shocked to notice that in your description of the way to true Catholicism the Church does not figure at all.

And there we have it: I’ve offered some comments and you’re “shocked” at them.

But what I wrote was not meant as general advice for anyone who wishes to understand Catholicism. I was meant for you personally. As I said: someone of your temperament will have to find his own way – only someone of your temperament, that is.

The NCW appeals to a deep-seated rebellion in you, and the lack of reference to the Church in my previous post is because your perceptions of its rituals are currently twisted. The NCW preys on your desire to cling to these symbols while continuing to misinterpret and thus abuse them. Indeed that is why someone like you, if he sincerely desires to understand aright, will have to get away from the Church. This is necessary so that he can return to it in earnest.

Are you a Buddhist? You sure sound like one…

What is your understanding of Buddhism?

And thanks for your advice. Hope you don’t get offended if I won’t heed it.

What I have recommended is a long road, if not in time then at least in the soul. So it is to be expected that you will resist embarking on it. But sooner or later you’ll have to. Either that, or continue your “successes” on the NCW – the latter will do much for you, but effect your Salvation it will not.

–
R.

 

[eddyr2]

Hello Caanan,

Again i only speak for myself and not for Kiko or the Neocatechumenal Way. I can only speak of my experience since it’s the only one i know. I will try to dialogue respectfully (i am not here to argue with my fellow brothers in Christ)

Do you mean to say here that you tithe to the parish? Or rather, is the tithe (or some portion of that amount) paid directly to the “community”, and they then pass on some funds to the parish? In most cases I am familiar with, the NCW members tithe to their own community and are not directly giving to the parish. Does your community report to its members its overall financial income and expenditure? (not the individual donations of course but just a summary position) Or does your community keep all its financial activity essentially secret?

My tithing goes to many locations, most to the Parish, to my Diocese Capital Campaign, catholic radio, and charities. My community does take collections for the needs of the parish and members of the community. I can give a few examples for both

Parish
-Last year my community volunteered to be in charge of the “Soft Drink Booth” at our Parishes Festival, so we took a collection. We used every penny of that money to buy cans of soda and bottles of water. We also worked the booth and sold nearly $2000 worth of soft drinks, all of which was profit for the Church since we did not charge for the cost of the drink.

-Over the summer our Parish had an anniversary Mass/resection . it was for whole parish, (about 2000 people), so the Pastor had to do it out door so everyone could come. We took a collection and helped the parish pay for rental of chars/tables and other things need for the event. We also cooked and handed out over 1000 churros free of change for the parishioners. there are other things we do we do but those are the fist 2 that come to mind.

Members of the community

-there are some couples in our community have several young children, so we help them pay for sitters so they can go to mass

-if someone is sick or just had a child, we using the collection to help them with meal till to feel better. there are many more but i am trying to keep this broad.

I don’t send out a report to member of the community but do have a to the penny accounting of the money. Anyone in the community is free to ask to see it and i do share the info with other members when they ask.

If your community does actually receive money and/or other goods directly, who is responsible for managing those assets? And are there ever audits of these assets?

I and 2 other members of the community manage the assets, (be it not a whole lot to manage). Like i said before, i do keep records of every dollar in and every dollar out. nothing is in secret and any member of the community can ask to look at the numbers.

Are you aware of this article of the NCW statutes (Article 4.1):

“1. The Neocatechumenal Way, being an itinerary of Catholic formation that is implemented in the dioceses through services freely given, has no material goods of its own.”

Does that article, in your honest opinion, reflect the reality?

Yes, i can honestly say this is true. the materials we bought/use for our meetings are kept in the Parish. The Pastor can and has used these materials when he need them. they are the Church’s we just bough and use them.

Are you claiming that the NCW communities use the songs of others, not just Kiko? Do you not use Kiko’s NCW songbook? When you say “songs I hear at Church”, are you saying “Songs I hear at NCW Eucharists?” In my experience, only Kiko’s songs are acceptable to the catechists.

At the Neocatechumenal Masses (Eucharists) i go to, most of the songs are Psalms. Yes there is a, as you put is, "NCW songbook. Most of those songs are Psalm with guitar cords. So, yes not just songs Kiko wrote but also a lot that King David wrote.

You know that when a community is formed, there are potentially many costs associated with acquiring the necessary materials and objects for liturgies. Often these are paid for by members of the nascent community or from collections from other community members. Have you ever been curious as to where the funds used to purchase these goods eventually end up? Are you aware of Kiko’s personal interest in the ‘shops’ that sell these items world-wide? Have you any factual information on Kiko’s personal financial position, living arrangements etc? Would it bother you if you discovered that Kiko (and G. Gennarini for that matter) were living very affluent lives?

Yes, i agree, if you buy things they can cost money. I am not really curious about how Kiko lives his life or am i here to judge him. I do know Kiko and do not know how he lives his life. Again i am not here to judge him or Mr. Gennarini.

Have you ever noticed any icons other than Kiko’s versions that are used in NCW seminaries, liturgical spaces (occasionally Churches where NCW ‘run’ the parish) or in any official activities of the NCW?

Yes, yes i have. in particular Our Lady of Guadalupe.

Do you admit that, where possible, virtually all NCW Eucharists are conducted exclusively with the vessels and items from Kiko’s shops? What vessels and other liturgical items do your community use?

No, i have seen both Kiko and non-Kiko vessels used. My community made a lot of the liturgical items we use. We also bought stuff from “the Way’s shop” and other Catholic shops. (we don’t have a whole of money, so try to get the best deal we can. Also, like i said before, the pastor is/has more then welcome to use any of the items we make/buy.)

to be continued…

 

[eddyr2]

Part 2…

Why not visit Kiko Industries Inc. neosigne.com/
Chairs: neosigne.com/signos/mobiliario/i/1013/283/silla-catecumenal (seriously?)
Crucifix: neosigne.com/signos/cruces/cruces-celebracion
Offertory items: neosigne.com/signos/orfebreria/calices-y-patenas

Someone is doing very well out of all of this. But let me guess, there is a private trust/foundation that never releases its financial records behind it all. I wonder who might operate that foundation?

i have not clue. I have nothing to do with that website. I can not answer any of those questions.

Yes, I am aware of this. However, this is hardly a flyer - more a self aggrandizing, I’m-so-important-and-wonderful card. Cardinal O’Malley needs our prayers too.

well, it’s part of a flyer. You are entitled to your opinion and i will respect that. You are right Cardinal Sean does need our prayers as do all of the Clergy. (i will pray for you and him tonight)

Thank goodness you at least had the sense to mention Church in the above comment - usually it is “the Way” that saved my parent’s marriage, that stopped me from suicide. Despite Kiko’s catechesis that “there is no salvation outside of the community” (honestly this is what he claims!) it is Jesus Christ Himself through the Unity of His Church that saves anyone who is saved. I do not believe that our Loving God would spare any means to bring you to salvation. I reject your assertion that the “Way” is the means by which He does that.

the Church, through the Way, did saved my life. For me there was no hope outside the Church and community. the community was the tool Christ used to save me. For some he may use a good priest, a parent, a Scott Hahn book, Catholic Radio, seeing Pope Francis on TV, an Order, the life of a Saint or just the prayers of good Catholic. The Spirit takes many form in the Church Christ started. For me it was the Way and like i said it’s not for everyone. But it is the tool in the Church God used to save many people, including me.

I am glad you found Christ and his Church. I am GLAD to call you a brother in Christ. i respect you and hope you can respect me.

You seem like a very decent fellow. I wish you well in uncovering the uncomfortable truth of the NCW. I will shortly be visiting the Blessed Sacrament in adoration - I will remember you before the Lord and pray for your family and friends.

Thank you for your prayers, i am sinner and can always us them. I accept how you feel about the Way, i respectfully hope you accept the way i feel about it. I am very proud to call you and myself Catholic and i hope you are proud to call us both members of Christ’s Church.

Your Brother in Christ,
eddyr2

Again, for give any typos

 

[nagyszakall]

Yes, you invited me to take a stance on the matter, so that there would be something to dispute.

Well, you are right, I did not think that you have the answer, so I guess, you could say that I asked you in order to dispute it… but not ONLY to dispute it.
I don’t think you can argue reasonably by saying “there IS a way but the NCW is not it” and leave it at that. I was trying to see what your reasoning was. Sincerely, I am not interested in your paternalistic advices. You make it sound like you know something about me, my understanding of what is to be a Catholic Christian and my relationship to the NCW. Let me tell you: you don’t know a thing about me. If I want to get to know people and chat with them about myself, believe me, I won’t do it on the Internet.
The reason I am posting on this thread is to counter some false statements about the NCW. Many times people write totally ignorant things, stuff they read in an article of some dude, and then wonder how on earth can the Holy See support such a thing.
I have a different view and so I present it here, that’s all.

 

[Caanan]

eddyr2, and nagyszakall, and others. I would very much appreciate your thoughts and comments on the following blog article:

neocatechemunal.blogspot.com/2014/02/eucharisticum-mysterium-on.html

Is this truly what the NCW communities are taught to understand? What do you personally make of these statements?

“The neocatechumens receive it standing, remaining in their place.” From this, it is already an indication that we do not line up in a procession, but remain in our place. There is only one Mass in the GIRM that speaks about remaining in their place to receive Holy Communion, and that is the concelebrate Mass (See GIRM 242-244)

Nevertheless, showing the GIRM did not satisfy the opponents against the Way. The purpose of the Way was to celebrate in small communities as the Early Christians did. At that time, the word “concelebrant” means “All Christians”, not just bishops and priests. The fact that the approved statutes allowed us to celebrate in “small communities” should already be an indication that it is not celebrated as in a large Parish Mass, but in small communities similar to the Early Church.

Those against the Way insist that we are not concelebrants and that we should follow the “modern” definition, which consist of Bishops and priest. So, I found a document showing even the lay Catholic can be a concelebrant in the Eucharist.

According to the Eucharisticum Mysterium 47-48: Concelebration:

1. Concelebration of the eucharist aptly expresses the unity of the sacrifice and the priesthood; whenever the faithful take an active part, the unity of the people of God stands out in a special way, [See Sacrosanctum Concillium art. 57. Sacred Congregation of Rites, Decr. generale Eccelesia semper 7 March 1965.] particularly if the bishop presides. [See Sacrosanctum Concilium art. 41; Lumen gentium no. 28: Presbyterorum ordinis no. 7].

As I explained in my post, one of the purpose of the Neocatechumenal Mass in celebrating in small communities is to imitate the Mass of Early Christianity. In Early Christianity, the word “concelebration” is not the same as it is used today. In ancient Christianity, all Christians concelebrated according to their role or liturgical order of the Church whereas in modern times, it refers only to the bishops and priests

According to the Catholic Encycopedia, the word “concelebrate” refers to all Christians according to their role or liturgical order of the Church, and this is the definition that the Neocatechumenal goes by because as I said, the purpose of the Way is to celebrate in small communities just as the Early Christians did.

See the Catholic Encyclopaedia entry:
newadvent.org/cathen/04190a.htm

Concelebration is the rite by which several priests say Mass together, all consecrating the same bread and wine

 

[Roguish]

I don’t think you can argue reasonably by saying “there IS a way but the NCW is not it” and leave it at that.

So I didn’t leave it at that. I told you to stand on your own feet, without the psychological supports that the NCW is giving you.

Sincerely, I am not interested in your paternalistic advices.

I know. You detest paternalism, because it invites filiality at the receiving end, i.e. obedience to a loving but unassailable authority. Of course I am not that authority, but my comments remind you of the general principle, and your rebellious streak abhors it. It much prefers codependency and collusion, which it insists on mistaking for “brotherhood”.

And there’s a clue to your general predicament in this… because Christianity is filiality.

You make it sound like you know something about me, my understanding of what is to be a Catholic Christian and my relationship to the NCW. Let me tell you: you don’t know a thing about me.

You’ve been posting here for a year now. It’s a little late to claim that your views on these matters remain a mystery.

The reason I am posting on this thread is to counter some false statements about the NCW. Many times people write totally ignorant things, stuff they read in an article of some dude, and then wonder how on earth can the Holy See support such a thing. I have a different view and so I present it here, that’s all.

“Countering false statements” isn’t quite what you’ve been doing here, but even if it was it doesn’t matter much. You see, people that speak out against the NCW are acting on their conscience. They’re heeding a gut-level alarm-bell that won’t be silenced by refutations, explanations, or even papal approvals. The NCW can’t be fixed by mending or defending its ways because although it’s a poster child with all its passionate members, their copious offspring and steady stream of vocations, it’s wrong at the core. It’s quite the opposite of the authentic Church, which sometimes disappoints in its more visible aspects but is fundamentally right at its core.

But back to you. The NCW is taking you down a triumphant path, but true Christianity isn’t a triumphant path. It is a humble path. And you are free to disdain the humble path and stick to the high road. That’s exactly what makes choosing the humble path so tough.

–
R.

 

[nagyszakall]

So I didn’t leave it at that. I told you to stand on your own feet, without the psychological supports that the NCW is giving you.

So, again, you left it at that… and I don’t mean that you didn’t tell me what to do. That you did and I told you and still maintain that I am not interested. What you didn’t do: you didn’t provide your arguments in support of your conviction (even against papal and Vatican dicasterial approvals – the authority against which not I am rebelling but apparently someone else) that, according to you, the NCW is “wrong at the core”. Now that’s what I meant when I said that you “left it at that.”
And I will state it again, that you know nothing about the “psychological supports” that the NCW is or is not giving me. I can tell you (as I did in some previous posts and so it really isn’t a secret, as you pointed it out) that without the formation I received in the NCW, most probably I would not be an active member of the Church today. I would not have received the sacrament of confirmation and would not be attending Mass, and probably I would be in an irregular relationship… I am pretty sure of this, as it happened to some of my peers, even though, logically, I need to acknowledge that I will never know what “would have been if.” I don’t suppose I wrote about any triumphant path, successes, back patting and psychological support in my previous posts, but since you mentioned it, I will look 'em up to see, perhaps I forgot something.

 

[Caanan]

Recommended reading:

thoughtfulcatholic.com/?page_id=775

 

[Roguish]

you didn’t provide your arguments in support of your conviction …] that, according to you, the NCW is “wrong at the core”. Now that’s what I meant when I said that you “left it at that.”

I didn’t use the expression “wrong at the core” until Feb 14, a day AFTER you wrote in an EARLIER message (Feb 13) that I “left it at that”. It seems a tad unreasonable to claim now that that was what you meant.

But I’m nitpicking I’ll tell you why NCW is wrong at the core. It is wrong because it is both heretical and schismatic, while pretending to be neither. It is heretical because it teaches the protestant doctrine of total depravity, if not explicitly then at least by using techniques to have its members focus on an intense awareness of their sinfulness to the exclusion of redeeming qualities. And NCW is being schismatic by organizing its activities in ways that underline the distinction between NCW members and non-members.

(even against papal and Vatican dicasterial approvals – the authority against which not I am rebelling but apparently someone else)

These approvals do not put me or anyone under obligation to adjust our views of NCW. They are neither doctrinal statements nor instructions to the faithul outside NCW. So the question of my obedience or rebellion vis-a-vis those documents does not arise. Nor is there any rebellion or disobedience involved in stating that I think those approvals are mistakes, not so much because of their content (which is fairly limited), but because of the signal they send. Reasons for that I already gave in my first post.

And I will state it again, that you know nothing about the “psychological supports” that the NCW is or is not giving me.

But I do. It offers you a sense of belonging, of having found the way, of being spiritually safe for life now, of having achieved something and of being capable of achieving more, of having yourself and your accomplishments acknowledged, of being part of a grand long-standing tradition, of being a “soldier” in the army for a great cause, of having understood things that others haven’t, etc. All of that is psychological support.

I can tell you …] that without the formation I received in the NCW, most probably I would not be an active member of the Church today. I would not have received the sacrament of confirmation and would not be attending Mass,

I believe you. And I also believe that “God causes all things to work together for good to those who love God, to those who are called according to His purpose.” (Romans 8:28) So if that includes you, then so be it that the NCW had to be your stepping stone into the Church. But that’s the past. The question before you now is whether you should continue with the NCW. You are “certain” that you should. It’s done so much for you, how could you leave? And should you ever forget that, fellow NCW members will be eager to remind you. But I repeat: trust your doubts for a change, if only as an experiment.

and probably I would be in an irregular relationship…

If NCW has contributed to the stability of your relationship, good, although I think it matters more whether the relationship is good than whether it’s “regular”. And anyway, I never said that no good whatsoever could ever come from NCW. I said that it is a subversive movement that threatens authentic Catholicism by usurping it from the inside.

I don’t suppose I wrote about any triumphant path, successes, back patting and psychological support in my previous posts, but since you mentioned it, I will look 'em up to see, perhaps I forgot something.

You didn’t write about them, and there’s no need to. As I already pointed out before, your tone in this thread was belligerent and proud from the moment that someone expressed criticism. That’s telling. Furthermore, you haven’t really addressed any dissenting voices, you’ve only tried to demonstrate their irrelevance by repeated appeal to arguments such as “I wouldn’t know about that particular case”, “You can’t generalize”, and “NCW has papal approval”.

But I understand. I know plain Catholicism isn’t very attractive. I mean, take the NCW out of the equation and what’s left? It seems it’s a blander, duller Christianity, which in many (not all) countries is practiced mostly by blander, duller people with little or no passion for the faith, little knowledge of or regard for its decrees, little desire to dedicate their time or resources to it, and almost no sense of community. And I’m not being sarcastic. I know that at first sight the NCW is more attractive than plain Catholicism. But it isn’t right.

Thanks for your message.

–
R.

 

[nagyszakall]

R.

I think you are very much mistaken.

What I find interesting is that you have a psychological picture of me (an evidently brainwashed, but perhaps not hopeless victim) in your head and you apply it to whatever I write, thus completing the missing pieces. You are actually hearing a “tone” in my posts. You think you know my “temperament.” In this way, you “do know” so much about me, and it does not occur to you that your pretended knowledge could be totally false.
As I stated before, my reason for posting here is not so that social network “friends” can come to know me, so I am not interested in letting you know your mistaken views of me one by one. But I must say, I do have a good laugh at some of your attempts to interpret my posts according to your NCW stereotype and apply your psychological profile on me.

But returning to what I am really interested in:
You call the NCW heretical and schismatic not because explicit error but because you have a vague sense of some techniques that according to you make people feel themselves sinner too much and less redeemed and different from anyone who is not one of their number.

C’mon now, are you serious? You should really look up the words heresy and schism.
And then look in the mirror and say out loud that you are smarter than at least two dicasteries of the Holy See.
I am sure you are much smarter than me, so you must at least allow me to rely on the Holy See’s judgements.

 

[Igypop83]

I was in a NCW community for several months and my experiences are:
I was NOT able to receive the Holy Communion on the tongue. I even asked the priest if I could and his answer was not a clear “yes”. Instead he tried to convince me that communion in the hand is just as well as on the tongue and what an intimate moment it is when you hold Jesus in your hands and wait to receive him etc. Of course, it wasn’t possible because then I would technically receive before everyone else, even before the priest, because in the NCW everyone waits with the communion in the hand until everybody else recieved it and then everyone consumes it simultanously. So of course no exception could be made for me. However in “Redemptionis Sacramentum” the Church says that “each of the faithful **always **has the right to receive Holy Communion on the tongue”! So the practice in the NCW is a clear violation of the prescriptions of the Church.
Concerning theology, I noticed that there was no awareness that the Eucharist is a representation of the sacrifice of the Calvalry. No one says of course “we don’t believe in it” but “we won’t mention it” any more.That’s why the Mass is not celebrated on an altar, why the priest is not a priest, but a presbyter and why in a NCW liturgy the sacrificial character of the mass is not being mentioned. Of the four Anaphoras only the second one is being used. The only one that doesn’t contain the word “sacrifice”. Also the words “Pray, brothers and sisters, that my **sacrifice **and yours may be acceptable to God, the almighty Father.” is alwyas being left out in a NCW mass. This is, what I noticed during my few months in the NCW. I’m sure, there are more things, that are flawed…

 

[Roguish]

I am sure you are much smarter than me, so you must at least allow me to rely on the Holy See’s judgements.

I allow you.

EDIT: I overlooked something in your response. When I said that NCW has its members focus on an awareness of sinfulness to the exclusion of redeeming qualities, I did not mean that this makes NCW members feel less redeemed – which apparently is what you took it to mean. On the contrary: NCW members feel very redeemed through their acceptance of sinfulness. And that’s exactly what the doctrine of total depravity is: redemption through the acceptance of being irredeemable now, in exchange for hands-free redemption later (i.e. redemption without the need or possibility of the involvement of the individual being redeemed). This is pretty much the essence of Luther’s protestantism, and was formally condemned as a heresy at the council of Trent (if I remember correctly).

Best​

R.

 

[Roguish]

Concerning theology, I noticed that there was no awareness that the Eucharist is a representation of the sacrifice of the Calvalry. No one says of course “we don’t believe in it” but “we won’t mention it” any more.

Thanks for confirming once again that NCW does not acknowledge the Sacrificial nature of the Eucharist. And good point about NCW members not actually saying “we don’t believe it”. For some reason NCW members seem very aware of the need to stay just short of expressing heretical views openly.

Anyway, the NCW apologists in this thread will probably respond as always by saying that:

(1) What they do and how they do it can’t possibly be wrong because they have papal approval – they don’t mention that the approvals were for their catechetical documents, not for alterations to or omissions from the liturgy, nor do they mention that their liberties were already curtailed by Pope Bededict XVI in 2005, for example w.r.t. the use of one anaphora to the exclusion of others, as you mentioned.

(2) Whatever happened in the community you speak of cannot be generalized. In spite of decades of consistent complaints from all over the world, NCW apologists insist that nothing general can be inferred from that. (It appears that the very concept of “generalization” eludes them.)

(3) None of the liturgical abuses and doctrinal errors or misunderstandings ever happened in the communities that they are members of, thus apparently inviting us to reverse-generalize their scanty anecdotal evidence even though as per (2) we are told that we should not generalize from tons of evidence that is unfavorable to NCW.

Sadly this thread isn’t much more than an endless regurgitation of these apologies.

–
R.

 

[nagyszakall]

Thanks for confirming once again that NCW does not acknowledge the Sacrificial nature of the Eucharist. And good point about NCW members not actually saying “we don’t believe it”. For some reason NCW members seem very aware of the need to stay just short of expressing heretical views openly.

Anyway, the NCW apologists in this thread will probably respond as always by saying that:

(1) What they do and how they do it can’t possibly be wrong because they have papal approval – they don’t mention that the approvals were for their catechetical documents, not for alterations to or omissions from the liturgy, nor do they mention that their liberties were already curtailed by Pope Bededict XVI in 2005, for example w.r.t. the use of one anaphora to the exclusion of others, as you mentioned.

(2) Whatever happened in the community you speak of cannot be generalized. In spite of decades of consistent complaints from all over the world, NCW apologists insist that nothing general can be inferred from that. (It appears that the very concept of “generalization” eludes them.)

(3) None of the liturgical abuses and doctrinal errors or misunderstandings ever happened in the communities that they are members of, thus apparently inviting us to reverse-generalize their scanty anecdotal evidence even though as per (2) we are told that we should not generalize from tons of evidence that is unfavorable to NCW.

Sadly this thread isn’t much more than an endless regurgitation of these apologies.

–
R.

I don’t think that is a fair assessment. First of all, regarding sacrifice, my understanding has always been that the problem is with “my sacrifice” as opposed to that of Christ. I have only lately been aware of Internet criticism of the Way (meaning the past 5 or 6 years, whereas I have been involved for the past 23 years) but have never in the past (before reading up on Internet) occurred to me that the catechists are trying to deny Calvary or Christ’s sacrifice in the mass, rather they were criticizing a mentality of the faithful bringing their sacrifice… Even if it were mistaken, my apology regarding that is sincere. I do acknowledge the sacrificial nature of the Eucharist and had not been aware of explicit or tacit denial of it in my personal experience with the Way.
Secondly, regarding apology against generalizing: Iggypop83 has expressed these concerns of his in the past virtually verbatim. I have answered then, if I remember correctly, with what I have seen (which was communion on the tongue in front of my eyes at Mass celebrated in Neocatechumenal communities) and that I was surprised that a priest wouldn’t allow communion on the tongue because I have never seen such happen. I don’t think I implied more than that, adding that I have participated in liturgies of a great many communities in various countries and continents (an advantage I have as a personal witness above many others, but still not trying to imply senseless generalization of the kind you are accusing me of).
In Poland alone the Way is active in 39 dioceses (I have never visited a community there, but I was just recently informed). I don’t know for sure about the many other countries but I believe that in Spain, Italy, Portugal there are many many more. I think that complaints (and their number) should be viewed in that context (not to mention that quite a few bishops are able to complain that the Church does not allow the communion of the remarried, which makes me think that complaints about the NCW should be handled with just as much critical thinking as those about everything else). Few times I followed links to various pictures and videos of abusive liturgies: perhaps you are right in thinking that that is the norm and what I have always seen is the exception, but I would be very surprised because my experience is so different. If my reactions to critical posts were mistaken, I would be surprised, but they do not lack honesty.

 

[Igypop83]

but have never in the past (before reading up on Internet) occurred to me that the catechists are trying to deny Calvary or Christ’s sacrifice in the mass

That’s what I was telling in my previous posting. Nothing is being explicitly denied, because of course that would lead to immidiate excommunication. But it is not being mentioned. Doesn’t Kiko say in the Directory that we should no longer speak of the sacrifice on the calvary but instead of passach mistery (I don’t know it by heart). So why are the prayers that mention the sacrificial character of the mass ommited? No “Pray brothers and sisters…”, only the second anaphora, no priest, no altar.
And can you show us, where does the Holy See allow all the changes in the liturgy? As far as I know, the only thing that is approved, are the statutes and the moving the sign of peace before the consecration. Everything else is not approved and is liturgical abuse.
You say, you whitnessed, communion on the tongue yourself. How is this supposed to work. Did all the others recieve in the hand and consume together with the priest while the one person recieved on the tongue and consumed immidiately?

I think that complaints (and their number) should be viewed in that context

That’s because probably not everyone is complaining. My wife used to go to a community years ago. And she told me the same things, but not as a complaint. At that time it was ok for her. One detail: she was attending a greek catholic community where they celebrate in the byzantine rite. However she said, there was no difference in the litury than the NCW communities in the roman rite. Do you think, it’s a good thing to change the liturgy so far, that one can’t say which rite is being celebrated any more?

 

[Caanan]

Originally Posted by **nagyszakall **
Few times I followed links to various pictures and videos of abusive liturgies: perhaps you are right in thinking that that is the norm and what I have always seen is the exception, but I would be very surprised because my experience is so different. If my reactions to critical posts were mistaken, I would be surprised, but they do not lack honesty.

Please explain more of your experience.

Perhaps you could start by answering the questions I have previously asked, namely:

Does that mean that you remain standing until having consumed the sacred species at NCW Masses? Do you insist that the priest receive (and consume) prior to yourself? Do you then consume the Blessed Sacrament immediately after receiving it to hand? Do you caution the community about overuse of the admonitions, and especially resonances? DO you remind them in particular what is set out in the “Institutio Generalis Missalis Romani” (nn. 105 and 128) and to the Praenotanda of the “Ordo Lectionum Missae” (nn. 15, 19, 38, 42)? Do you insist that the communities attend “Holy Mass of the parish community” at least once a month?

 

[nagyszakall]

Does that mean that you remain standing until having consumed the sacred species at NCW Masses? Do you insist that the priest receive (and consume) prior to yourself? Do you then consume the Blessed Sacrament immediately after receiving it to hand? Do you caution the community about overuse of the admonitions, and especially resonances? DO you remind them in particular what is set out in the “Institutio Generalis Missalis Romani” (nn. 105 and 128) and to the Praenotanda of the “Ordo Lectionum Missae” (nn. 15, 19, 38, 42)? Do you insist that the communities attend “Holy Mass of the parish community” at least once a month?

No, I most of the time sit down after having received the precious Body and consume seated, although there have been exceptions to this, especially when the priest gave us communion with intinction.
No, I don’t insist at any Mass about anything to the priest.
Yes, depending on the circumstances it could take half of a second to half a minute.
Overuse? Nope.
Oh, about that I do remind the community.
No, I don’t insist that “the communities attend” anything. If I speak about this with individuals, I do tell them about the Sunday precept. The problem is usually not with attending once a month the Holy Mass of the parish community. If they go to Mass regularly, they usually attend the Holy Mass of the parish community every week or almost every week. The big problem is with people who don’t go to Mass every week. Many times a serious initiation to adult faith, such as the NCW might help in that. I think you should keep that in mind the next time you talk to a lapsed Catholic.

 

[PeterCampbell]

This debate will never end; just as feuds within the church will never end