V
verdigirl
Guest
Let me explain this as objectively as possible, given that I am not in support of their methods.
The movement was started in the 60s by a catechist named Kiko Arguello and a former nun named Carmen (I forget her last name) in Spain. The motive was a great one: to bring street people, prostitutes and drug addicts back to the Catholic fold.
In a nutshell, the movement tries to equate people’s falling away from the Church to a sort of pagan state, and has a conversion process that is similar to the steps the early Christian converts would take to be converted and baptized. It consists of around 8 years of different steps that you have to take to be considered fully converted (or re-converted). They use their own catechism to teach their adherents in “The Way,” as they call it. The early Christians used to call the Faith “The Way” as a sort of underground code.
In practical terms, what this means is that a group of “catechists” will approach a pastor and ask to present their method of conversion to a parish community. They present a series of talks, around two months long, and whoever is left after that period is up goes on a retreat with the catechists where they get you to decide whether you want to follow this “Way” or not.
Their liturgical practices are outside the norm. Their version of the Mass is more of a throwback to the Jewish ways during the days after Christ’s Ascension. They are definitely not for everyone, and traditional Catholics take real issue with their manipulation of the rites. Seems like moving to the “novus ordo” Mass was probably change enough!
But there are some legitimate questions about whether true consecration happens within those celebrations or whether the fact that they sit for Communion is sacreligious or not.The problems stem from the fact that the indoctrination is in the theological take of the NCW, not necessarily the Church. They do not ever use the Catechism of the Catholic Church (the primary source of Church teaching) in any of the course of the steps. I personally have not ever heard of any mechanism within their movement to teach their adherents anything about the way the rest of the Church believes, practices or celebrates. I pray that there are exceptions to this rule.
Another issue is the bond that is created between adherent and “catechist.” Because of the methods used to break down one’s “resistance to conversion,” in some cases there is this Svengali-like attachment to the catechist. So then instead of inspiring wisdom and personal discernment, there is the potential for the adherent to do everything the catechist says. The danger is that since their theology is questionable in the first place, they are breeding heretics.
I would much rather recommend to you, as someone who is discerning the Church, to follow the more traditional ways to learn about Her. The US Council of Bishops released a new, American-focused Catechism that I actually think is a wonderful book. I used it last year for my RCIA class. You can get it here.
This is, of course, my take. I’ve tried to be as objective as possible.
My prayer is that the Holy Spirit guide you in this time of discernment!
Ha ha! I guess art is too subjective…it’s all in the eye of the beholder. I just don’t like how the NCW communities are compelled to use only his icon images and processional cross. It’s very James Jones-ish.