The Archbishop's Invitation To Pope Francis

Since Archbishop Apuron has invited Pope Francis to Guam before going to the Philippines, I am hoping that the Pope would decide to stop here for a few days.  We were honored to have St. John Paul II visit Guam in 1981, and it would be a great honor to have Pope Francis visit us as well.  I hope he would be able to stay for a few days.  It would even be better if he could celebrate Mass in the Cathedral and then have Eucharist with members of the Way.  I am certain that the Agana communities will get first priorities.

If the Pope were to celebrate the Eucharist in the NCW, that may put an end to all the speculations and ugly rumors from people who have never attended the catechesis or even have first hand knowledge and experience of walking in the Way.  That is my hope.  After all, those persecutors are still our Catholic brothers who have been led astray by Satan.  Jesus loved them too.  After all, Christ also appeared to Saul who persecuted Christians.  Afterwards, he was converted.  On the other hand, if they persist in their persecutions, then they are truly lost and all we can do is give them up to God. 

Thank you, Archbishop for extending an invitation to the Pope for coming to Guam.  We are happy to hear that the Pope was very supportive of you.  In fact, we can see his support of you in this photo as the Pope holds on to your arm, and both of you smile together.  A picture is worth a thousands words. Continue doing good things for our island and God bless.  :)    

Timing Of Allegations

An anonymous poster wrote the following under the thread of my last post.  I was shocked to read this. 

AnonymousNovember 30, 2014 at 6:56 AM

Diana, I read your response about John Toves that he should take the matter to the church, not to the media. Someone wrote about that in the PDN and Tim posted this on his blog:

"You chastise Mr. Toves for “casting stones in a public forum” and accuse him of taking a detour. How do you know that Mr. Toves did not confront Apuron privately? You don’t, do you? You don’t know because he did confront Apuron privately. But as usual, Apuron did not respond."

 

So, according to Tim Rohr: "You don’t know because he did confront Apuron privately. But as usual, Apuron did not respond." 

 

I would like to know how John C. "The Typhoon" Toves managed to confront the Archbishop PRIVATELY when John Toves was in California and the Archbishop was in Rome?  His interview with the media while he was still in California made it here first. 

 

The first time the public heard about the allegation of sexual abuse by John Toves was on KUAM on November 17th.  The interview on KUAM revealed that he was calling from San Francisco, California.  In his interview, John Toves stated that he plans to expose the Archbishop AND Father Adrian.  So, what PRIVATE confrontation did he have with the Archbishop BEFORE this interview with the media while he was in California?  Or perhaps, Mr. Toves was referring to his PUBLIC recording to the Archbishop and to Father Adrian, which was published on YouTube on November 13th.  Was this PUBLIC recording on YouTube supposed to be the PRIVATE confrontation between him and the Archbishop? 

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Cr6-vWAnbI4

 

The above weblink was a public message to BOTH the Archbishop and Father Adrian.  In no way can this be viewed as a "PRIVATE" conversation between him and the Archbishop.  In both this YouTube message and the interview with KUAM, he mentioned exposing BOTH Archbishop Apuron and Father Adrian.  Furthermore, in regards to Father Adrian, the comment below came from Tim Rohr (the bold is my emphasis): 

 

TimNovember 7, 2014 at 10:33 AM

Fr. Adrian's errors are just as documented as AAA's. So we'll probably get an outside administrator. I think Rome is waiting until Apuron is gone in order to clean up the whole mess in this region which is why they haven't assigned a bishop to Saipan after 4 years...and also why they immediately accepted Camacho's resignation (though they'll say it was illness related.) But even if we get Adrian, we have a back up plan. His name is John Toves.

Apparently, John Toves also has some allegation on Father Adrian, which we have not heard yet.  So, when is he planning to reveal that information?  In todays PDN, Reuel Drilon stated: First, on the matter of timing, I have read a number of comments of those pondering why it has taken over 30 years for such accusations to come to light.  John Toves already came out with these allegations against the Archbishop after 30 years.  Now, the question is.....when is he going to come out with allegations against Father Adrian.  Perhaps, he is going to wait until Father Adrian takes charge as Tim Rohr indicated?  Would that be the right timing? 

 

 

Archbishop Plans To File Defamation Lawsuit

The Holy Bible says that there is a time for peace and a time for war, a time to live and a time to die.  And I believe there is also a time to turn the other cheek and a time not to.  The Archbishop is the true representative of the Catholic Church on Guam and the Pope's representative.  According to KUAM news: 

Guam - The archbishop of the Archdiocese of Agana is, by nature of the

position, the highest-ranking Catholic locally - and as such, the person who

takes the cloth in that role is usually the biggest target for scrutiny. But

 while it's taught to turn the other cheek and solve disputes through reason and

prayer, it seems the leader of the Guam's Catholic faithful is intending to file a

defamation lawsuit amid recent controversies involving the church.

It's been long and rough road for the island's Catholic church. This year, for example, the removal of Father John Wadeson stemming from allegation of child molestation prior to coming to Guam. Then there was the sudden removal of Monsignor James Benavente as rector of the Archdiocese of Agana, which was received with outrage and disappointment. Then just recently media reports about a man accusing the archbishop of sexual molestation, and then talks about why Archbishop Anthony Apuron really met with Pope Francis in the Vatican last week.

The head of the island's Catholic Church, is back on island and issued a statement exclusively to KUAM - Apuron requested to meeting with the pope and he was granted an audience on November 21.

"I wanted to speak with the Holy Father about the situation of the church in Guam and the critical role we play in the evangelization of the Pacific, we spoke of the challenges and the joys of our church. Pope Francis showed interest to know about Guam and the Pacific," stated his Excellency.

Apuron says that he also invited the pope to visit our island on his way to the Philippines. As for recent allegations of sexual molestation Apuron says nothing could be further from the truth. "It is a horribly calumny and I am obliged to defend not my person but the church. On the advice of legal counsel I will not answer any questions. However defending the church compels me to a suit - a defamation suit - any damages that I receive I will not keep for myself but will be given to the charitable causes of our church."

He adds that he has dedicated his life to spread the Catholic faith through his words and actions and leads through example in his own behavior. "I trust that the members of our Guam Catholic family who have observed my actions and leadership for the last thirty years will know in their hearts and spirits that these allegations are false," he expressed.
The archbishop did not provide any specifics as to who he will file the lawsuit against, but said he will be filing it shortly and will provide that information when its available. The archbishop would not take any further questions.   

http://www.kuam.com/global/story.asp?s=27498590

Happy Thanksgiving!

                    Happy Thanksgiving!!!

And let everyone remember that “Thanksgiving” in Greek is Eucharistia. Thus, the Body and Blood of Christ is the true “Thanksgiving Meal."

Archbishop Apuron Met With Pope Francis

According to Father Adrian, the Archbishop met with Pope Francis and will be returning soon in December.  The Archbishop was never summoned by Pope Francis, according to Father Adrian. 

Therefore, would it be correct then to assume that it was the Archbishop who requested to meet with the Pope?  Perhaps, that is why he unexpectantly flew all the way to South Korea to meet Pope Francis when he learned that he was going to be there.   So, if the Archbishop did request to meet with Pope Francis, I find it interesting that the Disciplinary Arm of the Vatican was there alongside the Cardinal who was on Guam to certify the Redemptoris Mater Seminary.   

According to KUAM news (the bold is my emphasis): 

Guam - Archbishop Anthony Apuron met with Pope Francis at the Vatican. According to the Vatican Information Service, the archbishop had an audience with the Pope on Friday, November 21.

Archdiocese of Agana spokesperson Father Adrian Cristobal told KUAMn News, "I don't know what the details are of the meeting the archbishop is still off island perhaps when he gets back we will get more details overall I cans say is that the archbishop is very happy with the meeting it was a very positive meeting the archbishop was very impressed with the humility of the pope."

According to Father Adrian, Archbishop Apuron was not summoned by the pope. He added that Pope Francis was supportive and encouraging to Apuron. Father Adrian says he expects Archbishop Apuron to return to Guam in early December.

Jungle Watch blogger Tim Rohr finds it peculiar that not only was Archbishop Anthony Apuron given an audience with the but that the pope also met with two others that day and share what he believes to be the reason for the meeting.. "There is a news story in Swiss press published originally in French then German of Archbishop Apuron meeting with Pope Francis over the essentially the hiding or harboring of an accused pedophile priest well we know what that story is because that happened last July with Father John Wadeson," he said.

The two others that met with the pope are Cardinal Muller the disciplinary arm of the Vatican, and Archbishop Convolo who was on Guam last December to certify the Redemptoris Mater Seminary.  

In July the archbishop removed Father John Wadeson from active ministry in the Archdiocese of Agana. His removal followed the Survivors Network of Those Abused by Priests (SNAP) exposing his past and the fact that Father Wadeson was twice accused of child molestation in California. Father Wadeson was banned from the Los Angeles Archdiocese. The day after he was removed, Father Wadeson left Guam.

The allegations against Father Wadeson have not as of yet resulted in any convictions.

http://www.kuam.com/story/27464000/2014/11/24/archbishop-apuron-meets-with-pope-francis

Do It Anyway

Hatred From The Jungle

If someone had made a comment like the one below, I would never have published it.  It is filled with hatred.  An anonymous poster copied and pasted this comment from the jungle, which can be found under the thread of my last post:  

AnonymousNovember 20, 2014 at 6:45 PM

Diana, this shows the kind of hatred that JW has. I can't even think of how anyone can hope for another person to die.

AgnesNovember 20, 2014 at 4:50 PM
Mary 3:40 p.m., Kiko better hurry up. He's 75 years old. I'm hoping he is called to his "heavenly reward" before long. Hopefully, his cult will fizzle out once he's out of the picture. And hopefully Rome will take what's left of the NCW after his demise and reform and de-fang it.

I cannot imagine how someone can publicly proclaim that they hope Kiko would die and that the NCW would be destroyed after that.  Jesus said to love our enemies.  He never said to hope or wish for their death.  What has Kiko done to this person that she would wish such a thing to a person.  Did Kiko kill someone or molest a child?  What crime did he commit?  

Why this death wish on Kiko and the destruction of the NCW?  They claim that they do not hate us and are not persecuting us.  So, what is this death wish? To hope and wish for death upon anyone is hatred, and to hope and work for the destruction of the NCW is persecution. This is where we need to pray for the jungle.  

Their Next Issue Against The NCW

I think that we can pretty much say that the issue regarding the menorah at the altar has been resolved (See the dialogue under the weblink below). 

http://neocatechemunal.blogspot.com/2014/11/more-errors-in-jungle.html

The next issue they have against the Way is that they think that the NCW worships Kiko Arguello.  According to an anonymous poster: 

AnonymousNovember 18, 2014 at 11:48 AM

Hmm, the problem with the Way is that to accept it you must essentially believe Kiko. Everything of the NCW is about Kiko - the catechesis and interpretation of the scripture; the music, the prayers, the liturgy, the images/'icons, the moral position, the need to induce the existential moment; the setting, the language, the culture. Everything is Kiko.

To say you follow the NCW is to say "I believe in Kiko".

It is always risky putting your faith in a human being - unless that human being is also Divine. I'm pretty sure that Kiko is not divine (diabolical perhaps?). You end up worshipping the creature rather than the creator, and I don't think that will save you.

 

Nowhere in any of my posts and comments does it ever say that we worship Kiko Arguello.  I am walking in the Way, and the avatar I chose on this blog is Jesus Christ.  In the Neocatechumenal Way website, you would see an icon of the Blessed Virgin Mary and Baby Jesus.  Also, nowhere in any of Kiko's speech did he ever call the faithful to worship him.  Nowhere in any of our celebrations do we even have a photo of Kiko Arguello.  Our celebrations of the Word and Eucharist always have the crucifix and the icon of Mary and Baby Jesus.

Our music comes from the Book of Psalms, which is in the Holy Bible.   Our interpretation of scripture comes from the Catholic Church.  After all, one reason we use the Jerusalem Bible or New Jerusalem Bible is because of its many references and commentary footnotes, which comes from the Catholic Church.  The NCW goes by the commentary footnotes to understand scripture better.  In this blog site, readers saw me quote the Catechism of the Catholic Church. 

 

When Fundamentalist Protestants accuse Catholics of being idol-worshippers, it is because they see us bowing to the statues and icons.  But what is the reason for other Catholics to call us idol-worshippers?  Where did this false idea of worshipping Kiko come from?  

 

This anonymous poster stated:  "To say you follow the NCW is to say "I believe in Kiko."   So, if a Catholic says he follows the Knights of Columbus, does this mean he believes in Michael J. McGivney (the founder of the Knights of Columbus) rather than Jesus Christ? 

 

The Dialogue Of The Jungle

An anonymous poster wrote the following under my last post, which could be found here.  According to the anonymous poster: 

AnonymousNovember 16, 2014 at 10:40 AM

Diana, I was the Anonymous person who who wrote the following in the jungle. Chuck White wrote all his opinions on Kiko and the Way. I asked if he got Kiko'sl response, and I was mocked. Look at Rohr's response.

AnonymousNovember 13, 2014 at 7:02 PM
When you don't get Kiko's answers, then your opinions becomes a one-sided propaganda just like your book Target. Didn't you say that investigative reporting involves both sides?

Reply
Replies

TimNovember 14, 2014 at 9:46 AM
This deserves both an LOL and an SMH, 7:02. "Kiko's answers", ummm, where would we find those? In his catechetical directory? Oh, that's right, that's not available to mere mortals like us. Oh, you mean we have to sit through 30 years of catechesis to find out. Thank God Jesus required no such thing. Investigative reporting? We've had to work like hell to find out what the hell you people believe and teach because you hide it. Hidden teaching is gnosticism. You are not Catholic. Catholic means "on the whole", "for all". You idiots consider yourself to be the new "chosen people". Have at it.

 

In the first place, notice the demeaning language that Tim Rohr uses?  Name-calling.  He called the anonymous poster and members of the NCW "idiots."  While it is true that one may not be able to get a personal interview with Kiko Arguello, it is possible one may be able to get an interview with Father Pius, who is very knowledgeable about the Way, considering that he is the Head Catechist in Guam. 
 

A thoughtful Catholic would always hear both sides of the story before he comes to a conclusion.  It does not take any thinking to only hear one side especially if that one side is only your own interpretation.    

According to Chuck White's conclusion, he stated:

Kiko is certainly correct in saying that the Passover celebrated at the time of Christ was celebrated in family groups, but he is patently wrong in asserting that “at the time of Jesus Christ the temple is no longer the center of the liturgy”.  Millions of pilgrims made their way to Jerusalem each year to celebrate the Passover with a lamb sacrificed in the Temple.

Why, then, is Kiko so intent in removing the temple from the celebration of Passover in the time of Jesus?  It is because he wishes to strip any hint of sacrifice from the ritual.  Nowhere does Kiko mention that the Passover celebrated by Jesus was a sacrifice consummated by a ritual meal.  In fact, he not only makes no mention of sacrifice when talking about Passover, he speaks pejoratively about sacrifice and the temple throughout the first volume of his Catechetical directory.   

http://thoughtfulcatholic.com/?page_id=37224

From my previous post, we now know that Kiko never denied the sacrifice of Christ's death on the cross because he mentioned it in his interview with EWTN.  Perhaps, if Mr. White had searched deeper or had asked an NCW catechist (such as Father Pius), he would have learned that Kiko's catechesis at that time was a focus on the family and that the new temple is the person's body.....the dwelling place of the Holy Spirit.  Perhaps, Mr. White did not understand Kiko's catechesis the way the Pharisees did not understand Jesus when He told them "to destroy this temple and within three days, He will raise it up."  At that time, Jesus was no longer speaking of the temple as a building, but the Jewish leaders misinterpreted what He said.  At that time, Jesus was now teaching that the temple is our bodies rather than the temple building where sacrifices were being made. 

John 2:21-22  But the temple he had spoken of was his body.  After he was raised from the dead, his disciples recalled what he had said. Then they believed the scripture and the words that Jesus had spoken.
 

Because there were no other interpretations given for anyone to compare other than Chuck White's own interpretations, then his criticisms of the Way is indeed a one-sided propaganda just as the anonymous poster pointed out.   

Furthermore, Tim Rohr says that we claimed to be the "chosen people."  Yet, on this blog, I and many NCW members having been saying that the chosen people are still the Jewish people.
 

 

More Errors In The Jungle

An anonymous poster copied and pasted Tim Rohr's comments on the jungle under my last post:  

TimNovember 12, 2014 at 5:58 PM

There are two Kiko precepts on display here: 1) the Jewification of Christianity, 2) the obfuscation between the ministerial priesthood and the common priesthood or the "priesthood of all believers." These things are purposely confused because 1) Kiko must get rid of the Sacrifice of Christ and replace it with Jesus as a murdered scapegoat, and 2) he rejects the ministerial priesthood and believes in a return the idea of early church presbyters. Both of these things come together in his rejection of the Mass as Sacrifice, since a Priest is "one who offers sacrifice". There are so many heresies like this in the history of the church this would be another yawn except for the fact that we have a bishop who is subjecting this diocese to it.

1.  Tim Rohr claims that Kiko's intent is to Judaize Christianity.  How?  We are not going around demanding circumcision.  We believe in baptism, not circumcision.  We are not demanding or imposing Jewish mosaic laws on anyone.  Judaizers make demands and impose their rules and laws on others.

So, why do the jungle hate us?  One reason is because we use the menorah during special Eucharistic celebrations.  They tell us that we are wrong in using the menorah and demand that we get rid of it.  They impose their rules on us.  Below is the menorah in the Cathedral of Brunswick, which was built in the 12th century and given to the Cathedral by Henry the Lion:

A similar one can be found in the Cathedral of Milano in Italy.  The Eastern Catholics and Eastern Orthodox Church also use a menorah at their altar.  So, where is the law saying that Catholics cannot place a menorah in their church or altar? And if there is no such law, then why is the jungle demanding and imposing their so-called rules on us the way the Judaizers did on the Gentile converts?  

2) I believe that everyone in the Way knows the difference between the ministering priesthood and the common priesthood.  In the Way, only the priest turns the bread and wine into the Body and Blood of Christ.  The fact that you do not find any layperson turning the bread and wine into the Body and Blood of Christ at the altar is evidence enough that we are not confused and can indeed distinguish between the two priesthoods.

 

1)  Tim Rohr stated: Kiko must get rid of the Sacrifice of Christ and replace it with Jesus as a murdered scapegoat. 

Tim Rohr and Chuck White have always claimed that Kiko does not believe or denied the Christ's sacrifice on the cross.  Below is what Kiko Arguello stated in his interview with EWTN.  According to Kiko Arguello (the bold is my emphasis):

 

 Then I realized that the central point of apostolic preaching was the Resurrection of Christ, Christ’s victory over death. Take into account that I am speaking of when the Council was just beginning, 1964 – 1965, a time in which the Paschal mystery was not quite so bright, Christ’s sacrifice on the Cross was stronger. In other words, the poor, that environment was like a culture broth, like a laboratory where the Lord gestated a kerygmatic-catechetic synthesis that today is being preached all over the world. This kerygmatic-catechetic synthesis was forged by the poor.

 

EWTN interview with Kiko Arguello

 

We see in Kiko's own words saying that Christ's sacrifice on the cross was very strong.  Thus, he never denied Christ's sacrifice on the cross. 

 

2) Tim Rohr states: he rejects the ministerial priesthood and believes in a return the idea of early church presbyters. 

 

An anonymous poster asked if Kiko rejects the ministerial priesthood, then why have hundreds of seminaries around the world?  If the intent of Kiko was to get rid of the ministerial priesthood, having 100 Redemptoris Mater Seminaries around the world with more than 1500 seminarians and ordaining more than 1200 priests defeats his goal and purpose. These seminaries have been in existence for 26 years now.  So, when is Kiko supposed to start decreasing the number of ministerial priests rather than increasing it....if that is his real intention?  According to the Vatican statistics, the number of ministerial priests increased.   

 

And finally, Tim Rohr says that Kiko believes in a return the idea of early Church presbyters.  Is there a difference between the early Church priests and the modern priests today???  Or is he saying that today's priest are BETTER than the early Church's presbyters??? 


 

"Priest, Prophet, King" Sample - Lesson 1

This is only a sample of Lesson one, which mostly got into the office of priesthood.  Father Robert Barron is a friend of Scott Hahn.  He has a six hour serious on the topic "Priest, Prophet, and King."  The video mainly speaks about the office of the priesthood which all baptized Catholics share with Christ when we were anointed at our baptism.  At any rate, it is worth listening.

Priests, Prophets, And Kings

Through our baptism, we are priests, prophets, and kings.  What does that mean?  Perhaps, to those in the jungle, they interpret our priesthood, our positions as prophets, and our kingship as mere "symbols."  However, our status as "priests", "prophets", and "kings" are REAL given to us by Christ.  God is my Father, and my Father is truly a REAL King.  Mary is my mother, and she is a Queen in Heaven.  My Mother and my Father is a King and Queen in Heaven; therefore, that also makes me "royalty" for I am their daughter.  I am not a symbolic daughter.  I am REALLY God's daughter......a child of God and heir to my Father's Kingdom.   Nothing in the Neocatechumenal Way says that God's gifts to us are mere symbols.  When He said that we are the sons and daughters of God and heirs to His kingdom.....those words were not said "symbolically." 

James 2:5  Listen, my beloved brethren: Has God not chosen the poor of this world to be rich in faith and heirs of the kingdom which He promised to those who love Him?

Our Father is a King and our Mother is a Queen, so that certainly also makes us "kings and queens" as we are heirs to the heavenly kingdom.  How much more as priests and prophets?  The Catechism of the Catholic Church says that the laity are the common priesthood while those ordained are the ministering priesthood.  Is the jungle saying that our priesthood is simply a symbol?  Would you say that the Office of Bishop is nothing more than a symbol and NOT real?  If the common priesthood is only a symbol, then it stands to "jungle" reason that the ministering priesthood (which includes the Pope and office of Bishop) is also a symbol.  However, these positions are definitely REAL and no symbol at all. 
 
According to Tim Rohr (bold is my emphasis):  "By our Baptism, we are all called to be priests, prophets, and kings. However, we do not go around titling ourselves or each other as such." 

Where did Tim Rohr learned that we cannot use these titles "priests, prophets, and kings" when these titles were given to us by God in the first place? 

God has always shared His title with His Church to show that He is intimately one with His Church.  Christ is called the "Good Shepherd."  The bishops are also called "Shepherds."  God is called the "Holy Father."  The Pope is also called "Holy father."  Christ is called the "Son of God."  Christians are called "sons (and daughters) of God".  Christ is called the "Rock".  The Apostle Peter is named the "Rock."  Christ is priest, prophet, and king.  We are also priest, prophet, and king.  God shared these titles with His Church to show that He is intimately one with His Church, His bride. 

Then Tim Rohr goes on to say:  With the advent of the Christ, there was no more need for prophets. The OT prophets were given to us by God to point to the Son. The Son is the fulfillment of all the prophecies. He is the fulness of revelation. That's why there are no prophets in the NT and that is also why any religion who claims a prophet is a different religion than ours.

While it is true that there are no more revelations, where is it taught that there are no more prophets?  Tim Rohr claims that there are no prophets in the New Testament???  Then he needs to explain why Agabus was called a prophet in the New Testament.  And who were these other prophets who went to Antioch according to the Acts of the Apostles?  Obviously, Agabus and the other prophets who came from Jerusalem to Antioch were New Testament prophets. 

Acts 11:27-28 And in these days came prophets from Jerusalem unto Antioch. And there stood up one of them named Agabus, and signified by the Spirit that there should be great dearth throughout all the world: which came to pass in the days of Claudius Caesar.

St. Paul also said that some will be called "prophets" (See 1 Corinthians 12:28-29 and Ephesians 4:10-12).  Furthermore, how can there be no more prophets when every Catholic was anointed a "prophet" in their baptism?  Apparently, Tim Rohr does not comprehend the term "prophet" as it is understood by the Church.  As prophets, we are called to teach and spread the Gospel. 

However, if those in the jungle do not want to be called "priests, prophets, and kings", I have no problems with that.      


 

Announcement

Dear readers:

To those wanting to make a comment on my blog, it must be written in English. Comments made other than the English language will not be published.  My posts can be translated into different languages; however, any comments made under my post must be in English.  All comments must be approved by me, and I cannot publish comments written in Spanish, Portuguese, or Italian because I do not understand those languages.

Also, please keep your comments civil.  Do not tell a commenter that he/she needs some psychological help or anything similar along that line simply because you disagree with what the person said.  Just say that you disagree and explain your reasons why.  

Everyday Prophets In Our Midst

 

One commenter who was walking in the Way called Kiko Arguello a "prophet." I disagreed with this anonymous person.  However, after much discussion with the anonymous poster, I conceded.  This is one of the reasons why I favor honest dialogue and free expression.  One can actually learn from another but only by listening to what the other person was saying.  

At any rate, I listened to what the anonymous poster who was walking in the Way said and actually found nothing wrong with his/her statements.  He/she was able to point out in the Bible where it says that we are called to be prophets, so I conceded.  My love for scripture had taught me that Church doctrine never contradicts sacred scripture, so I conceded by telling the anonymous poster that he/she is correct.  Today, I found this article from the National Catholic Reporter dated July 12, 2012.  It is a homiliy given by a Catholic priest in Michigan.  The homily is worth reading:
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Most of us probably do not remember our Baptism because, of course, we were almost all of us infants when we were baptized, but there is a very important part of that ceremony of Baptism that we should reflect on regularly. After the priest has poured the water on the person to be baptized, and through that beautiful symbol has taken that person through being buried in the death of Jesus, and rising to new life in Jesus, after that the priest, deacon or minister anoints the person with holy chrism, and says, “As Jesus was anointed Priest, Prophet and King, so may you live always as a member of His body.”

In other words, may you be priest, prophet and king like Jesus. If we listen to today’s readings, we’ll learn something about especially that role of prophet. Not many of us would think of ourselves as being called to be prophets, but in fact, we are. It’s part of our carrying on the work of Jesus who was a prophet. We think of Jesus as a wonderworker, the healer, the compassionate, the healing person who has drawn all people through Himself through love, but we don’t think very often of Jesus the Prophet.
 
Today, we will explore that and see what it means for Him and other prophets, and for us who are called through our Baptism, to be prophets. First of all, we ask ourselves what is a prophet? Sometimes, I suppose, we’re caught up with the idea that a prophet is someone who predicts the future, who can foresee what is going to come in the future. That really isn’t what we mean by a prophet, by those God calls to be prophets. It has nothing to do with predicting the future. A prophet is one who speaks on behalf of God.

That is what a prophet does. A prophet is called to be one who speaks as God speaks, bringing the message of God into our world, into the human family, into our lives. Clearly, that is what Jesus did. In our first lesson today, however, we also look at other prophets like Ezekiel. This lesson that we heard from the Book of the Prophet Ezekiel tells about the time when the chosen people had refused to listen to another prophet, Jeremiah, who had warned them against entering into military alignment with other nations and carrying on war.

They refused to listen. They got caught up in a war and they were totally defeated. It was a disaster. Jerusalem was overwhelmed and destroyed. The people were carried off into exile, and Ezekiel was carried off with them. He was inspired, filled with God’s spirit, to be a prophet in their midst, trying to help them to understand how they had gone wrong, to repent of their evil, to come back to God. Ezekiel was sent to preach to them. This incident shows us something that is so important, that God will always send a prophet.

As we hear at the end of that lesson, God is faithful to God’s love for God’s people, and will always send a prophet to speak for God to draw the people back to God. Sometimes, the people will not listen, and so, we hear God saying through Ezekiel, “I will always send the prophet, and they will know that a prophet has spoken in their midst, even if they refuse.” If the people are unfaithful, God always remains faithful, and always preaches to us through His prophets.

Of course, there have been other prophets. John the Baptist -- Jesus said about him, “What did you go out into the desert to see? A prophet? Yes, I tell you, more than a prophet.” John the Baptist was the one who spoke on behalf of God, and Jesus said about John the Baptist, “No greater person among all of humankind. There is no greater person than John the Baptist who was a great prophet speaking on behalf of God.

Jesus comes into the midst of God’s people, into the midst of the human family to be the Prophet who not only speaks on behalf of God, but whose very presence, whose very life, whose very being is a message about God, a message enabling us to know God deeply by knowing Jesus. He is the Prophet that is God. Now all of us are also called to be prophets, and we must understand as Ezekiel did, that people may not listen. They may reject the prophet. Surely, that’s what we see happening in Nazareth.

The people couldn’t take Jesus as a Prophet. They were happy to see Him do some healing, and they thought of Him as a wonder worker, but for Him to speak on behalf of God, who is He? He’s a carpenter. They spoke in a very derogatory way about Jesus. “We know His family. They’re nobody. Why is He putting Himself up?” So they reject Him. Jesus, as Mark says, is astounded at the hardness of their hearts, and because they are not able to be open to Him, open to God, God’s love can’t touch them. So Jesus decides to leave there, but a Prophet has been in their midst as God promised.

As we look at the world around us and not only in the past, but in the present, too, we know that there have been many prophets whom God has sent. I suggest a couple that we’re probably very familiar with. I think everyone knows Mother Teresa. She was a prophet, not so much by what she said. She didn’t go around preaching, but her very life exemplified God’s love that includes everybody, especially the poor, the rejected, those that are thrust aside almost as worthless. She went among them. She brought healing -- not so much physical healing.

She did that by bringing the sisters into their midst and bringing that healing love of God, but her very life spoke God’s love for God’s people, that our God is a God of love who reaches out to all of us, but especially to the poor, the most rejected. That’s a powerful message about God that Mother Teresa preached by her very life. I also bring to your attention another woman prophet: Dorothy Day. She is not as well known as Mother Teresa, but one who has had a significant impact on the Church, especially in our country.

Some people would claim that Dorothy Day has been, in the history of the Church in the United States, the most outstanding of prophets. She started an organization or community, the Catholic Worker Community, people who live the radical teachings of the Gospel, who go among the poor and live among them, welcoming the poor into their homes through houses of hospitality, and who try to transform our world into the Reign of God by bringing the message of Jesus into our world.

One of the things that Dorothy Day did that was not well known, during the Second Vatican Council, when the Bishops at the Council were discussing the part of the document on the Church in the modern world about war and peace, she together with some others, met with a number of bishops and helped to influence their thinking about the need to issue a declaration condemning weapons of mass destruction. It’s the only place in all of the Vatican Council, in the document of the Church in the modern world, where there is a condemnation of weapons of mass destruction as being something totally evil that never could be justified.

That was prophecy, a God message proclaimed through the help of Dorothy Day and the others who were with her, but now through the Bishops of the world teaching, prophesying, speaking on behalf of God, giving us this message that we must turn away from war, and especially wars that bring about the destruction of innocent human lives. We must turn away from that. It’s a powerful message. I think that here, too, we discover for the most part we haven’t really been listening: not enough to Mother Teresa and not enough to Dorothy Day and the bishops of Vatican II.

We still find ourselves in a world where there are a vast majority of poor people who are neglected and pushed aside and ignored. In our own country, it’s getting to be a larger and larger number, while a few are getting richer and richer. We find ourselves embroiled in acts of violence and war, and the use of weapons that kill so many innocent people. So prophecy is still something that God is using. God is speaking to us through prophets, but like the people in Nazareth, like the people in exile in Babylonia, we do not listen well enough.

That is one of the things that we must reflect on today as we are instructed on prophets and prophecy, and our role as baptized members of the Body of Christ, to be a prophet as He. We must listen and reflect on do we listen? Are we really trying to hear God’s Word proclaimed by the prophets who are in our midst today, those who in some special way are proclaiming God’s word and the radical teachings of Jesus? Are we listening? Then, also, are we being the prophets we’re called to be?

Most of us would not think of ourselves as going out and preaching, proclaiming God’s Word from the housetops, so to speak, but we can do it in the way Mother Teresa did it: through our lives. We can be what we might call everyday prophets. As you heard at the beginning of the Liturgy today, my brother is dying. He probably will be dead within a matter of hours, at the most a couple of days, and as I reflect on his life, the life of his wife and their life together, I think of them and I’m hesitant to speak about my own family, but I feel close to all of you in this parish, so I feel like I can share in this way.

It’s sort of like St. Paul in the second lesson today. He didn’t really want to speak about himself, but he felt to his closest friends at Corinth he could open up his heart and speak about what was really in him. So in that way, I speak about my brother and his wife. This summer, they have completed 60 years of married life, really proclaiming God’s Word of love, which is what married people are called to do, to show that covenant love of God for God’s people, a love that is without limit, a love that is unconditional, a love that embraces all.

For 60 years, my brother and his wife have exemplified that love. Their children, seven of them and their spouses, and their children, they are a beautiful family, with the children and grandchildren experiencing the love of my brother and his wife, and being influenced by that love. They themselves are able to carry on this message of God’s love. So I think of my brother and his wife as everyday prophets. They heard the Word of God. They understood that the one commandment, “Love one another as I have loved you,” that they must live that commandment, and they have.

They are what I would call everyday prophets, and they are listened to by their children and grandchildren. It’s something beautiful when it happens like that. All of us are called to be prophets. We hear the Word of God. We hear Jesus proclaiming, “Love one another as I have loved you. There is no greater love than this: to lay down your life for your friend,” and even to love your enemies -- we’ve all heard that message. We see it lived out by others around us who have been prophets in our midst.

So today, we must ask ourselves, are we going to leave this Church and understand more clearly that we are called to be a prophet, to follow Jesus the Prophet? We must pray that God will give us the ability to proclaim God’s Word wherever we are, not necessarily and most often not in words, but just to proclaim God’s way of love by the way we live out the Word of God.

[Homily given at St. Hilary, Redford, Mich.]

Everyday Prophets In Our Midst

Furthermore, this is what the Catechism of the Catholic Church says: 

CCC 783   Jesus Christ is the one whom the Father anointed with the Holy Spirit and established as priest, prophet, and king. The whole People of God participates in these three offices of Christ and bears the responsibilities for mission and service that flow from them.²⁰⁸ 

CCC 785  "The holy People of God shares also in Christ's prophetic office," above all in the supernatural sense of faith that belongs to the whole People, lay and clergy, when it "unfailingly adheres to this faith . . . once for all delivered to the saints,"²¹⁰ and when it deepens its understanding and becomes Christ's witness in the midst of this world. 

To John C. "Typhoon" Toves

Here is my side of the story and the REAL reason I did not publish your comment on my blog.

First of all, if you REALLY are sincere in offering your congratulations to those deacons who are now ordained priests, you would take the time to READ their names, which is in the post.  One would not start out their "so-called" congratulations by saying " To, Harold, Howard, Hoover, or whatever......"  So, Johnny, Joey, Jerry, or WHATEVER Toves, that is one reason why I did not publish your comment.

And finally, if you REALLY are offering your congratulations as you claimed, it is unnecessary to mention anything about recording homilies or stuttering.  A person who is sincere in offering their congratulations would not act like a hypocrite.

Your comment was no different from Isaias who congratulated the RMS deacons and then offered his condolences to the Catholics of Guam.  So, now you can go back to the jungle and tell how you attempted to congratulate the new priests, and how I did not publish your comment because I was fearful.  The truth is..... I did not publish your comment because it was degrading, insincere, and  hypocritical.

Archdiocese Will Have Three New Priests

On Saturday, November 8, 2014 Guam will have three more new priests.  The ordination will be held at the Agana Cathedral.  These new priests who will be ordained are Deacon Harold, 32, from Columbia; Deacon Julius, 33, from Nigeria; and Deacon Vincenzo, 47, from Italy.  All three are from the Redemptoris Mater Seminary. 

Deacon Harold currently serves at San Vicente-San Roke Catholic Church in Barrigada, Deacon Julius serves at San Dimas Catholic Church in Malesso and San Dionisio Catholic Church in Umatac, and Deacon Vincenzo serves at Our Lady of Guadalupe Catholic Church in Santa Rita. 

Love Your Neighbor

The two greatest commandments are to love God and to love your neighbor as yourself (Mark 12:33, Luke 10:27, Romans 13:9, Galatians 5:14, and James 2:8).  This also includes your enemies.  He who loves belongs to God for God is love.  As Christians, we love all people of different cultures and religions.  No where are we taught to love only the Christians.  All of mankind was created in the image and likeness of God; therefore we are linked to the entire human race regardless of that person's religion.  Even the Apostle Paul called the pagans in Athens "God's children" (See Acts 17:29).  This is what the Catechism of the Catholic Church says regarding non-Christians:

The Church and non-Christians 
 
839 "Those who have not yet received the Gospel are related to the People of God in various ways."³²⁵

The relationship of the Church with the Jewish People. When she delves into her own mystery, the Church, the People of God in the New Covenant, discovers her link with the Jewish People,³²⁶ "the first to hear the Word of God."³²⁷ The Jewish faith, unlike other non-Christian religions, is already a response to God's revelation in the Old Covenant. To the Jews "belong the sonship, the glory, the covenants, the giving of the law, the worship, and the promises; to them belong the patriarchs, and of their race, according to the flesh, is the Christ",³²⁸ "for the gifts and the call of God are irrevocable."³²⁹

840 And when one considers the future, God's People of the Old Covenant and the new People of God tend towards similar goals: expectation of the coming (or the return) of the Messiah. But one awaits the return of the Messiah who died and rose from the dead and is recognized as Lord and Son of God; the other awaits the coming of a Messiah, whose features remain hidden till the end of time; and the latter waiting is accompanied by the drama of not knowing or of misunderstanding Christ Jesus.

841 The Church's relationship with the Muslims. "The plan of salvation also includes those who acknowledge the Creator, in the first place amongst whom are the Muslims; these profess to hold the faith of Abraham, and together with us they adore the one, merciful God, mankind's judge on the last day."³³⁰

842 The Church's bond with non-Christian religions is in the first place the common origin and end of the human race:

All nations form but one community. This is so because all stem from the one stock which God created to people the entire earth, and also because all share a common destiny, namely God. His providence, evident goodness, and saving designs extend to all against the day when the elect are gathered together in the holy city. . .³³¹

843 The Catholic Church recognizes in other religions that search, among shadows and images, for the God who is unknown yet near since he gives life and breath and all things and wants all men to be saved. Thus, the Church considers all goodness and truth found in these religions as "a preparation for the Gospel and given by him who enlightens all men that they may at length have life."³³²

 844 In their religious behavior, however, men also display the limits and errors that disfigure the image of God in them:

Very often, deceived by the Evil One, men have become vain in their reasonings, and have exchanged the truth of God for a lie, and served the creature rather than the Creator. Or else, living and dying in this world without God, they are exposed to ultimate despair.³³³

845 To reunite all his children, scattered and led astray by sin, the Father willed to call the whole of humanity together into his Son's Church. The Church is the place where humanity must rediscover its unity and salvation. The Church is "the world reconciled." She is that bark which "in the full sail of the Lord's cross, by the breath of the Holy Spirit, navigates safely in this world." According to another image dear to the Church Fathers, she is prefigured by Noah's ark, which alone saves from the flood.³³⁴

Christ commanded His Church to spread the Gospel to all people so that they can be baptized into God's family and come to know Him.  However, it was never our place to judge the hearts and souls of men of other religions.  Can a Buddhist or an atheist be saved?  Who am I to judge their souls? 

The Nostra Aetate,  also does NOT contradict the Catechism of the Catholic Church.  In the Nostra Aetate, the Catholic Church examines her relationship with non-Christians.  Below is what the Nostra Aetate says of these non-Christian religions.  You can read the rest of the document in the Vatican website that I provided below: 

2. From ancient times down to the present, there is found among various peoples a certain perception of that hidden power which hovers over the course of things and over the events of human history; at times some indeed have come to the recognition of a Supreme Being, or even of a Father. This perception and recognition penetrates their lives with a profound religious sense.
 
Religions, however, that are bound up with an advanced culture have struggled to answer the same questions by means of more refined concepts and a more developed language. Thus in Hinduism, men contemplate the divine mystery and express it through an inexhaustible abundance of myths and through searching philosophical inquiry. They seek freedom from the anguish of our human condition either through ascetical practices or profound meditation or a flight to God with love and trust. Again, Buddhism, in its various forms, realizes the radical insufficiency of this changeable world; it teaches a way by which men, in a devout and confident spirit, may be able either to acquire the state of perfect liberation, or attain, by their own efforts or through higher help, supreme illumination. Likewise, other religions found everywhere try to counter the restlessness of the human heart, each in its own manner, by proposing "ways," comprising teachings, rules of life, and sacred rites. The Catholic Church rejects nothing that is true and holy in these religions. She regards with sincere reverence those ways of conduct and of life, those precepts and teachings which, though differing in many aspects from the ones she holds and sets forth, nonetheless often reflect a ray of that Truth which enlightens all men. Indeed, she proclaims, and ever must proclaim Christ "the way, the truth, and the life" (John 14:6), in whom men may find the fullness of religious life, in whom God has reconciled all things to Himself.(4)
  
The Church, therefore, exhorts her sons, that through dialogue and collaboration with the followers of other religions, carried out with prudence and love and in witness to the Christian faith and life, they recognize, preserve and promote the good things, spiritual and moral, as well as the socio-cultural values found among these men.
   
3. The Church regards with esteem also the Moslems. They adore the one God, living and subsisting in Himself; merciful and all- powerful, the Creator of heaven and earth,(5) who has spoken to men; they take pains to submit wholeheartedly to even His inscrutable decrees, just as Abraham, with whom the faith of Islam takes pleasure in linking itself, submitted to God. Though they do not acknowledge Jesus as God, they revere Him as a prophet. They also honor Mary, His virgin Mother; at times they even call on her with devotion. In addition, they await the day of judgment when God will render their deserts to all those who have been raised up from the dead. Finally, they value the moral life and worship God especially through prayer, almsgiving and fasting.
   
Since in the course of centuries not a few quarrels and hostilities have arisen between Christians and Moslems, this sacred synod urges all to forget the past and to work sincerely for mutual understanding and to preserve as well as to promote together for the benefit of all mankind social justice and moral welfare, as well as peace and freedom. 

Nostra Aetate   

The Catholic Church And Her Jewish Roots

There has been some anti-Semitic sentiments in one of my posts regarding the Jewish people.  For some unknown reason, those who oppose the Way think that we are Jewish.  Nothing can be further from the truth.  The Way worships Jesus Christ.  We have icons of Jesus in the Way, so how one comes to this conclusion is beyond me.  At any rate, the Catholic Church do recognize her Jewish roots and heritage.  The Church is not ashamed of her heritage.  She still holds the Old Testament books as the "word of God."  And the Old Testament books speaks of the Jewish people.  Even the Popes recognize our heritage and link with the Jewish people.  Below is a photo of St. John Paul II praying before the Jewish Wailing Wall in Israel. 

 

 

There has also been much criticism of the Jewish menorah on the altar of the Neocatechumenal Way.  Actually, the menorah is only there during special occasions such as Easter Vigil.  Below are photos of our last two Popes lighting the Jewish menorah.  Pope Benedict lits the menorah in 2001 and recently Pope Francis did the same: 

 

 

 

 

 

Does this mean that these Popes are Jewish?????  Of course not.  They do not have any problems lighting the Jewish menorah because they recognize our Jewish heritage with the Jewish people.  After all, the seven lamp stands mentioned in the Book of Revelation is the Jewish menorah (See Revelations 4:5).  So, all the angels and hosts in Heaven recognize the menorah, which the Apostle John saw in God's kingdom. 

 

Below is a photo of Cardinal O'Malley lighting the last candle on the Yom HaShaoah Menorah, which was moved from Boston to the new headquarters of the Boston Archdiocese in Braintree.   

 

 

 

In fact, one can even find the Jewish menorah is many Eastern Orthodox and Catholic Churches.  Does this mean that these Churches are REALLY Jewish?  No, but they recognize their Jewish roots and heritage.  By doing so, they recognize that Jesus Christ Himself was raised Jewish.  Also, according to CNN, dated December, 1997:

 

A Hanukkah candle was lit at the Vatican Tuesday for the first time in history, an event Israeli ambassador Aharon Lopez called "unique." The candle, which was lit by Cardinal Edward Idris Cassidy of Australia on behalf of Pope John Paul II, was next to an olive tree that commemorates diplomatic ties between Israel and the Holy See. Lopez said the ceremony marked "an important chapter in the historic process of reconciliation between Jews and the Catholic Church."

 

http://edition.cnn.com/SPECIALS/1997/hanukkah/hanukkah.vatican/

 

Does this mean that the Vatican has become Jewish??  No.  Absolutely not.  But again, the Vatican has no problem lighting the menorah or a candle for Hankkah because the Catholic Church recognize her Jewish roots.  And where in the Bible does it say that practicing Jewish celebrations was wrong????  St. Paul never said that the Jewish custom of circumcision was wrong.  He simply said that the Gentile converts did not need to practice it.  There was something better than circumcision, and that was baptism. 

He should be made clear that Pope John Paul II is not Jewish despite that he prayed at the Jewish wailing wall and lit a Jewish menorah.  Pope Benedict XVI and Cardinal O'Malley are also not Jewish despite that they also lit a Jewish menorah.  The NCW is also not Jewish despite that we sometimes have a menorah on our altar.  The Eastern Orthodox Church and the Eastern Catholics are also not Jewish despite that they also have a menorah in their Churches.  So, how does Chuck White and Tim Rohr conclude that the NCW is Jewish is beyond me.  As I said, all they do is come up with their own conclusions without asking us any questions.  Everything they have to say about the NCW is all one-sided because they purposely left out our input.