An anonymous poster wrote the following comment in my last post:
AnonymousOctober 23, 2014 at 12:36 AM
Six Popes have also condoned and applauded clergy sexual abusers (http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/secrets-of-the-vatican/). That doesn't necessarily make it right. You have your triumph and bragging rights right now w/the blessings of the Pope. Like all things, time will tell and only when more people speak up against evil, will "the way" end. Enjoy your evil way for now my friend. It's days are numbered and when we stand before our Creator on judgement day, I will be the first to tell him that I had forgiven you, not through any effort on my own but solely because Jesus had forgiven me. Love you in Jesus' name, even though I don't agree w/your "way". God bless.
First of all, I have asked the poster to provide the names of the Popes who have condoned and applauded the clergy sexual abusers and the quotes from these popes. The truth is.....no Pope has ever condoned nor applauded the sex abuse of children.
In 2001, Pope John Paul II apologized for the sexual abuse done by Catholic priests. According to the weblink below:
Pope John Paul II offered an apology Thursday for sexual abuse by Roman Catholic clergy, saying it has caused the victims "great suffering and spiritual harm" and has damaged the church.
On September, 2010 Pope Benedict XVI apologized to victims of sexual abuse, saying that pedophile priests had brought shame and humiliation on him and the entire Catholic Church. According to Pope Benedict XVI: “I think of the immense suffering caused by the abuse of children, especially within the Church and by her ministers. Above all, I express my deep sorrow to the innocent victims of these unspeakable crimes …,”
Pope Francis also apologized to the victims of sex abuse by the Catholic clergy. In fact, the website that the anonymous poster provided in his comment even showed that. So, who are the Popes who condoned and applauded these sex abuse scandals? Please provide your evidence.
Secondly, I also asked the anonymous poster to list the "evil" things the NCW has committed. Did the Founder of the NCW commit murder, sex abuse, or adultery? The anonymous poster has provided a website that speaks about the sex abuse scandal. Is he/she implying that the NCW has committed the sex abuse scandal??? Apparently, the anonymous poster failed to provide any evidence showing the "evil" the NCW has committed. The NCW does not promote suicide, murder, or incest. Only a cult does this. The NCW is accused of doing "evil", but he/she failed to list what those "evils' are. This is the kind of false rumors spread about the NCW.....rumors without substance.
Finally, the anonymous poster stated: "Like all things, time will tell and only when more people speak up against evil, will "the way" end"
My response........If you are going to speak up against the Way, then make sure that you provide evidence to support the things you say. You can start by giving the names of the Popes who condoned and applauded the sex abuse scandal.
i guess the hyperlink provided in the post provides the details
ReplyDeleteDear Anonymous at 2:05 pm,
DeleteThe details of what? Could you be more specific? The weblink is about the sex abuse scandal.
Um, you're missing the forest for the trees. In your previous post, a neocatechumenal member posted anonymously "Six popes have condoned and applauded the Way...". The non-neomember posted the link above to show that not everything the Popes condoned were proven to be in the Holy Church's best interest. That was all that was meant. Some things to ponder. Then, you obviously took it all too personally and responded with an over-the-top response. Calm down, take your meds and breathe. Time will tell, so let's just wait and see. If the Way is good for the Holy Church, it will survive. If it isn't, well all righty then.
DeleteDear Anonymous at 4:12 pm,
DeleteAm I correct in assuming that you are the anonymous poster who made this comment?? The poster specifically stated that six popes condoned and applauded the clergy sex abusers and then proceeded to provide a weblink on the clergy sex abuse scandal. All I ask are the names. Is that REALLY so difficult for you to provide???
Is it REALLY so difficult for you to see that the Archbishop Anthony approved J.L. to work @ St. Barbara parish in 1999 then condemned Father Paul years later for doing the same thing?? Why do you not see the double standard being perpetrated here? I can do it and not be condemned but I can condemn you for doing the same thing I did? Makes one wonder what other double standard is applied in the way. Is it REALLY so difficult for you to understand that it is wrong to publicly announce "The NCW is not allowed to own property, etc." but not announce that the RMS board members hold title to various properties worldwide. Oh, it's ok because they are "individuals" who hold title and not the entity NCW who holds it. REALLY?
ReplyDeleteDear Anonymous at 12:46 am,
DeleteWhere are the names of the Popes???? If you cannot provide the names of the Popes who condoned and applauded clergy sex abusers, then everything else you say after that is moot. Either provide the names of the Popes or be man enough to say you were wrong.
My Dear Diana,
ReplyDeleteAnonymous from Oct. 23 @ 12:36 AM stated that "Six Popes have also condoned and applauded clergy sexual abusers." Notice that the person used the term abusers; but in your response you challenge the person to "start by giving the names of Popes who condoned and applauded the sex abuse scandal" which is different from what the commenter stated. No Pope ever condoned and/or applauded the sex abuse SCANDAL as you claim.
The Legionaries of Christ was established several decades before the NCW and they enjoyed the approval of Popes until Benedict XVI took action. Even SAINT Pope John Paul II held the Legionaries in such high esteem, much higher than the NCW. It was later revealed that the founder of the Legionaries turned out to be a priest who did not keep his vow of chastity and abused children, even his own son. So I guess it's accurate to say that 5 (not 6 as claimed) Popes, from Pius XII to John Paul II, including 2 Saints and 1 Blessed, approved and condoned sexual abusers in the person of Fr. Marcial Maciel, albeit out of ignorance or an unwillingness to see the truth.
Dear Anonymous at 9:24 am,
DeleteDoes it really matter whether I say "clergy sex abusers" or "sex abuse scandal" especially when we know they are related? Why else did the anonymous poster provided a weblink of the sex abuse scandal by Catholic priests? It is correct to say that no pope has ever condoned or applauded the "clergy sex abusers" or the "sex abuse scandal."
Pope John Paul held the Legionaires of Christ in high esteem for their work.....but certainly NOT for the sexual abuse of their founder. The Pope have approved of Legionaires' work of providing more priestly vocations.....but where did the Pope condone and applaud Father Marciel's sexual abuse towards children????? Could you provide the quote from the Pope saying that he condoned and applauded the sexual abuse done by Father Marciel?
It is very clear that when Pope John Paul II was praising the Legionaires of Christ, he was praising them for the work they did such as providing more priestly vocation. He certainly was NOT praising Father Marcial's abusive behavior towards children.
Dear Diana @ 11:30. So there you go. Finally. Now when the NCW claims that the pope "approves" it, you can see why many of us object. Because, as you say, the pope "approves" the good stuff, but not the bad stuff.
DeleteIn the case of the NCW, though, there is no possibility that you can admit that there is "bad stuff". Hence the problem. You will not reform. You will not change. Because to you and others in the NCW, Kiko is a prophet and can't possibly be wrong about anything, can he? Be honest. And this is precisely how Maciel (and others) get away with the abuse, and precisely how Kiko can establish an protestant movement in the midst of the Catholic Church
Dear Anonymous at 11:51 am.
DeleteThe Pope's approval of the Legion of Christ does NOT mean that the Pope approves of the founder's sexual abuse of children. Those are two different things. In fact, even the Legion of Christ has denounced its founder for the sexual abuse.
Kiko is a man capable of sinning like the rest of us. No one in the Way would ever tell you that he is incapable of sin. However, no one has ever claimed that Kiko has molested any children. Also, Kiko has not established any Protestant movement otherwise you would also have to call the Pope a "Protestant." Our celebrations are all Catholic and approved by the Popes. Whether you believe that to be true or not is not my problem. Why you hate the Way is also not my problem. We are not bothering you, and the people who are walking in the Way are people who chose to be in the Way of their own free will.
Now, who are the Popes who condoned and applauded the clergy sexual abusers???
My Dear Diana,
DeleteIt DOES make a difference about which word(s), "abusers" vs "abuse scandal," is used in this discussion. Anonymous made reference to how Popes "condoned and applauded clergy sexual abusers" such as the founder of the Legionaries of Christ, Fr. Marcial Maciel. You chose to change the focus from the person(s) (sexual abusers) to an event (sex abuse scandal) to justify your outrage.
Of course John Paul II praised the work of the Legionaries but he also praised supported Fr. Marciel:
From National Catholic Reporter, "Maciel built a power base in Rome as the greatest fundraiser of the modern church. He won the undying support of Pope John Paul II, who called him an 'efficacious guide to youth' and praised Maciel in lavish ceremonies even after a 1998 canon law case at the Vatican in which the cleric was accused of sexually abusing Legion seminarians."
From Latin Times, "Father Maciel founded the Legionaries of Christ in 1941 and …accompanied Pope John Paul II during the late pontiff's visits to Mexico in 1979, 1990, and 1993. In 1990, Father Maciel was appointed by Pope John Paul II to the Ordinary Assembly of the Synod of Bishops on the Formation of Priests in Circumstances of the Present Day. …
There have been many documented allegations and accusations against Father Maciel — from pedophilia to drugs and plagiarism — but the Vatican, and Pope John Paul II, backed Father Maciel. The church is said to have admired the order's ability to grow and fundraise."
From CTVNews, "Documents from the archives of the Vatican's then-Sacred Congregation for Religious show how a succession of papacies — including that of John XXIII, also to be canonized Sunday — simply turned a blind eye to credible reports that Maciel was a con artist, drug addict, pedophile and religious fraud.
By 1948, seven years after Maciel founded the order, the Holy See had documents … questioning the legitimacy of Maciel's ordination (by his uncle, after Maciel was expelled by a series of seminaries), noting the questionable legal foundation of his order and flagging his 'totalitarian' behaviour and spiritual violations of his young seminarians.
The documents show the Holy See was well aware of Maciel's drug abuse, sexual abuse and financial improprieties as early as 1956, when it ordered an initial investigation and suspended him for two years to kick a morphine habit.
Yet for decades, Rome looked the other way, thanks to Maciel's ability to keep his own priests quiet, his foresight to place trusted Legion priests in key Vatican offices and his careful cultivation of Vatican cardinals, Mexican bishops and wealthy, powerful lay Catholics. Vatican officials were impressed instead by the orthodoxy of his priests and Maciel's ability to attract new vocations and donations.
John Paul, who in 1994 praised Maciel as an 'efficacious guide to youth,' wasn't alone in being duped. His top advisers were some of Maciel's fiercest supporters, convinced that the accusations against him were the typical 'calumnies' hurled at the greatest of saints."
As you can see at least ONE sexual abuser was applauded by SAINT Pope John Paul II.
Dear Anonymous at 5:37 pm,
DeleteEven when I asked Anonymous Poster to provide the names of the Popes who condoned and applauded "sexual abusers", he/she has not done so. So, it does not matter whether "sexual abusers" or "sex scandal" was used. He/she has still not provided the names of the Popes and their quotes.
As for John Paul praising Marciel to be an "efficacious guide to youth".......it is obvious that the Pope was not condoning nor applauding Marciel AS a child sexual abuser. Was the Pope REALLY praising Marciel as a child sexual abuser when he said those words??? How did "efficacious guide to youth" become "child sexual abuser"???? The Pope was praising Marciel's work in guiding children.....but definitely NOT his role as a child sexual abuser. It appears that you only came up with that invention to make your philosophy fit.
According to investigations and before declaring him a saint, Pope John Paul II was exonerated of any personal blame to Father Marciel.. The blame belongs to Father Marciel who led a double life and fooled many people.
I am still waiting.........
ReplyDeleteAn anonymous poster stated: Six Popes have also condoned and applauded clergy sexual abusers. I am waiting for the anonymous poster to give evidence to support what he/she says. Either support what you say or be man enough to admit your mistake.
It was no mistake. The evidence is there for all to see in the history of our church. Please look it up, as I can tell by your blog that you always do your homework.It's there in plain sight! I would admit if I had made a mistake, alas, the only mistake I may have made is that there may have been even MORE THAN SIX POPES who had condoned and applauded clergy sexual abusers. The real question is: Why are you so bent out of shape about me stating that our church has history, both good and bad?
ReplyDeleteDear Anonymous at 3:15 pm,
DeleteAGAIN, could you provide the names of those Popes and their quotes showing that they condoned and applauded the clergy child abusers? If you are 100% certain that there were more than six popes who condoned and applauded the clergy child abusers, then you should have no problems providing their names and quotes from them.
Diana,
DeleteI don't believe Anonymous at 3:15 pm or Anonymous October 24, 2014 at 11:51 AM are Catholic. Jesus did three things that established the framework of His Church. First, He chose humans to carry out His work. He appointed Peter to be the visible head of the Church. Jesus said to Peter, "You are Rock and on this rock I will build my Church." (Matthew 16: 18) Jesus said "build," as in to create a structure. Jesus built His structure on specifically chosen human beings Peter and the apostles.
Second, Jesus gave Peter and the apostles the power and authority to carry out His work. "Whatever you bind on earth will be bound in heaven."(Matthew 16:19; 18:18) "Receive the Holy Spirit, whose sins you forgive, they are forgiven, whose sins you retain, they are retained."(John 20:23)
Third, Jesus gave Peter and the apostles commands as to what that work should be. At the last supper, He commanded, "Do this in memory of Me." (Luke 22:19) He commanded them to "Make disciples of all nations" (Matthew 28:19), and to "Go into the whole world and proclaim the Gospel to every creature." (Mark 16:15)
Any Catholic claiming any Pope who represents Peter allows, condones or applauds child abusers is only Catholic by religion and not be faith.
Anonymous October 24, 2014 at 11:51 AM uses the term reform.......The Reformation, traditionally described has having been begun by Martin Luther in 1517, was the movement which gave rise to Protestant churches and the decline of the power of Roman Catholicism. The Reformation sought to "reform" Christianity by returning it to original beliefs based solely on reference to the Bible, eliminating later additions which accumulated in tradition.
this forum is open freely to everyone Diana but not everyone is freely open to his love
Anon 3:15PM swinging in the wind. This is not a riddle blog, frankly it does not make you smartef either.
ReplyDeleteI got a DVD from a friend of an extremely long NeoCat "Easter Vigil" gathering. I hear on this DVD a lot of nonsense spoken by lay NeoCat members who grab time before the homily to express their peculiar religious views during the mass. I asked my friend if this DVD can be published. He told me it can't be published under any circumstances. Why? Tell me, Diana, why is this secrecy? If the gathering is open to the parish then how come you cannot publish the content of the meeting? Don't you think it is an evidence of secrecy and exclusion of fellow parishioners?
ReplyDeleteDear voice of faith,
DeleteIf it was REALLY a secret (as you claimed), you would not even have that DVD in the first place. Why it cannot be published, you ask? Because it has the brothers' personal sharings in it.
Voice, you have no clue what you are talking about. I assume your friend lent you the DVD because you showed interest in joining. Now that DVD was made for internal use only, perhaps your friend told you. So why do you want to publish it in the first place? If you fooled your friend and you are not truly interested in joining, then you are not a true and faithful friend in my opinion. Publishing under these circumstances would be a betrayal, selling the spiritual for material gain. Perhaps ask your other friend, the businessman Tim Rohr if material gain would it worth it to go that low...
DeleteWhat you call secrecy is simple precaution. As Diana told you, we have personal sharing that is not public. Would you like your own personal reflections to be published without you knowledge? Especially if you share things about your family? I don't think so! Are you a honest person? So why do you ask? Our Eucharist is open to the parish, it is true. But when we invite someone, we ask this person to keep private things private after their visits. I hope this makes sense to you. We don't invite people who come to collect material on us for unclear purposes.
Hi Ernie,
DeleteFrom what I see, the Saturday night 7:30 NCW Service is now included on the CB schedule. At 9:18 AM you write that "We don't invite people who want come to collect material on us for unclear purposes." Are you saying that someone who is not walking cannot just attend that service if only out of curiosity? Are you saying that one of the NCW members will be screening newcomers to find out why they want to attend? All these months Diana and others have claimed that anyone is welcome to attend the NCW services. So now outsiders/Non-members must be invited to attend? As a Protestant, Scott Hahn started attending Mass out of curiosity and ended up converting to Catholicism. But now you're saying that unless invited, Regular Catholics are NOT WELCOME.
Thanks for clarifying that despite all the previous claims the NCW Services are not the kind where according to Marty Haugen "All Are Welcome."
Dear Anonymous at 3:13 pm,
DeleteYes, anyone is welcome in our Eucharist. But those whose intentions are only there to make a mockery of us are not welcome. I am sure that you would feel the same way of those who enter the regular mass. After all, Scott Hahn attended mass out of curiosity. He never had any ill intention in mind.
My Dear Diana,
DeleteBy his own admission, Scott Hahn was very much ANTI-Catholic and was able to convince hundreds of poorly catechized Catholics to leave the Faith. His primary motivation for attending his first Mass was to gather more ammunition AGAINST Catholicism. He was surprised to discover how Scriptural the Mass was. He became more curious and continued to attend Mass with a more open mind and eventually converted to the Faith.
So you see, even if someone first attends your NCW Service with less than honorable intentions like Scott Hahn with his first Mass there is always the possibility that the person just might have a change of heart.
BTW: Even if the 7:30 NCW Service is now included in the CB schedule, there is no indication where it is held so it's hard to believe that it's really "open" as you and Ernie claim.
Dear Anonymous at 9:18 pm,
DeleteI have A lot of Scott Hahn's books and tapes including his conversion tape. The first time Scott Hahn went to a Catholic Mass, he was NOT gathering ammunition against Catholicism. Hahn was on the road to conversion when he went to his first Mass. Therefore, Hahn's presence at his first Catholic Mass had nothing to do with any ill intentions. I do not appreciate your dishonesty, Anonymous.
voice-of-faith October 24, 2014 at 11:00 PM
ReplyDeleteAffirmation of God's presence in their lives. It not easy for a person to share during our Word, Eucharist or other celebrations...it is a grace to acknowledge...to accept. Prepares the brother or sister for the day of judgment. As for releasing the DVD....? God's will or your will? Which one do you follow today?
voice-of-faith October 24, 2014 at 11:00 PM
Delete1991 news clip from the Vatican.......do you really think that releasing a DVD will somehow embarrass or put the Neocatechumenal Way in a bad light? The Spirit is growing. That DVD may save you.
VATICAN CITY, JAN 3, 1991 (VIS) - Pope John Paul addressed 7,000 Neo-Catechumens this morning and told them to "be messengers of reconciliation and apostles of fraternity and service" in their apostolate of evangelization.
The Neo-Catechumenal Way, a community started by Kiko Arguello and Carmen Hernandez 26 years ago in Spain has a membership of over 200,000 in 10,000 communities throughout 87 countries in the world and was formally recognized last September by Pope John Paul as a valid "itinerary of Catholic formation for society and modern times." The group also has nine seminaries worldwide.
Dear anonymous, I surely hope voice understands what you are talking about here. I find it disturbing what he write down in a comment as a suggestion over at the Jungle. He asked for volunteers to secretly tape our celebrations and post it on the Jungle. I am sure Tim Rohr would not have any moral objection to that. But I definitely would! Being open to the parish is not the same as allowing anyone to come in from the street and to record what we share during the celebration.
DeleteBeing open to the parish means that whoever is coming as a guest must behave like a guest. We mean it! A guest must respect our way of celebration and must follow our rules. I would not be surprised if voice has a different plan in his mind, along the lines of Tim Rohr and the Jungle... We should be very clear about one thing: it is a major betrayal of trust if someone allows private information out in the air. It would be an unworthy behavior for a Catholic and a major offense by any measure! Of course, an offense like this would necessarily have certain consequences.
Interesting that you, Diana, who argue that these "personal witnessing" should be kept discreet forget that these admissions happen during what is supposed to be a public, open for everyone, type service. Otherwise, if the recording was done in a setting outside these public services, I would agree with you.
DeleteThe Easter Vigil is not, nor shall be a secretive, for certain Catholic ears only. If the person wants discretion, a public mass is not the proper setting to divulge such things. Besides, the Mass has one focus and one only; to the worship of Jesus Christ. Anything else is self-serving and self-centered.
Dear Anonymous at 1:55 pm,
DeleteDid I say that the Easter Vigil was secretive???? The personal sharings in our Mass was already approved by the Holy See. It is also in the approved Statutes. There will be a time for "personal witnessing" to be made public. That is usually done during a catechesis and rediticio (spelling).
Dear Diana, you did not read carefully Anonymous at 1:55 PM. Anonymous is saying that a public service/ celebration, in fact a pubic mass as we Catholics say it, should not have anything in it that cannot be published. Do you see that? The holy mass of Jesus Christ is about Him. So what could be those things you NeoCats say in the mass and during the mass that cannot be published?
DeleteAnother way to ask the same question: isn't the personal witnessing/ reflection that you allow before the homily, isn't this part of the publicly open liturgy? Isn't this practice open to all parishioners who attend your "celebration"? So how come you claim the mass is open but the content what is said is not?!
I tell you what is this "personal reflection" thing in the NeoCat mass. It is a distraction from the holiness of the mass. Pure and simple, this is the truth. What I heard on the DVD was a bunch of nonsensical monologues about one's current family situation, job, hobby, etc. It is not something that should be protected from sharing with the whole parish. It is declared non public because it does not fit the mass.
Why? Because all this personal reflections that are completely unrelated to the readings and to the holiness of the mass are squeezed right after the Scripture readings before the homily of the priest. Don't you think it is distraction? You say the Holy See approved it. I doubt it. The Holy See did not approve distraction. Maybe if your reflections would be about the mass, about the Scripture, respecting the holiness of the mass... maybe then the Holy See would not raise his eyebrows that high. But your reflections are not like this. Or do you think they are? Hmmm...
The truth would come out if the DVD, not only this one but many other similar DVDs, tapes, etc. about the NeoCat mass would be made public. So why don't you allow free sharing and publication of this material?
Dear voice of faith,
DeleteDid you not read what other anonymous posters say as to why that DVD cannot be published? All echoes in the Eucharist cannot be published or taken outside the Eucharist despite that you may find it a boring monologue.
Diana, this was exactly the question of Anonymous 1:55 PM that I repeated and explained for you. Don't you see the point yet? How can you say "echoes in the Eucharist cannot be published or taken outside the Eucharist" if this is a public ministry? What would prevent someone from the parish to sit in to your "celebration" and tape it? What if I visit some of your gatherings and then I publish the transcript in the parish bulletin? Ernie says it would be a violation of trust. But how could it be, if your mass is declared to be open to all parishioners? Don't you see the contradiction here? Don't you think this is something in your statutes that you must allow to happen?
DeleteI am truly inclined to share some detailed samples of what I heard on this DVD. There would not be a privacy issue involved because I would not say the names of those who talk. I actually don't even know these people who are speaking on this DVD. But the nonsensical monologues that I heard are worthwhile to read for everyone in order to better understand on what level you NeoCats function during holy mass.
Dear voice of faith,
Delete"Echoes" are NOT public ministry. They are private sharings. Do you even know the difference?? If you go to an Alcoholics Anonymous meeting, would you publish what they share in their meetings?
When the Pope says that our Mass is open to everyone, it means that we can invite others who are not walking in the Way. And after inviting them, we tell them that whatever is shared in the Eucharist should be not be brought outside the Eucharist.
Diana, you cannot twist what the Pope said and what is in your Statutes. Open means you can broadcast it to the public. It is a Holy Mass!
DeleteDear voice of faith,
DeleteThere are several ways to interpret the word "open." Your interpretation means to broadcast. We, on the other hand, are following the Pope's interpretation of "open." After all, the Neocatechumenal Way is not for everyone.
Would you invite me Diana to the Eucharist? Para mag ka-alaman na. Give me the address and i will show up and i will seat beside you. No more hiding...that is my challenge. I will go there to celebrate with you all. How's that? Maybe better me and VoF together?
ReplyDelete
ReplyDeleteIsaias Ginson October 28, 2014 at 5:02 PM
the Mass....the Eucharist is open to all Isaias. It is God that calls............why do you need a invitation?
Back then in the 80's we would invite people who are not familiar with the NCW to come to the Eucharist.
ReplyDeleteMaybe i am old school NCW. Just do not want to disrespect anyone.