The junglefolks such as Chuck White has been misrepresenting Kiko Arguello and the Neocatechumenal Way. In his entry posts he implies that Kiko does not believe in the Holy Trinity, and what is his evidence for this? Let us look for example at Chuck White's exhibit II. According to Chuck White:
Exhibit II
Consider Kiko’s icon, “The Annunciation”, below, on the left. You can see that he copies most of the features of his icon from older icons from the Eastern Church, like the one on the right. [To see enlarged versions of any image in this post, click on the image.]
Kiko Arguello’s “The Annunciation”The State Hermitage Museum: Collection Highlights The Annunciation. Double sided tablet icon Novgorod School. Late 15th – 16th century. Egg tempura on gesso, linen, wood, gilding.
Kiko Arguello’s “The Annunciation”
Can you see any differences? How about this: in the ancient Christian icons from the East, the Holy Trinity was often symbolized by three rays. You can see an example of this from the older icon above. But Kiko deliberately removed this powerful symbol of the Trinity in his icon, replacing it with a single ray, as shown below in the zoomed-in images.
Well, Mr. White, I have some news for you. Not all Eastern Catholic Church use the three rays as a symbol for the Holy Trinity. In fact, an artist named Chady Elias (who is not affiliated with the Neocatechumenal Way) also paints pictures of Eastern Catholic icons. And his icons show the Holy Trinity with only ONE ray. Yes, that is correct, Mr. White. In fact, the Melkite Greek Catholic Church (an Eastern Catholic Church in communion with the Pope) has this icon below, which can be found here :
This photo of the same Annunciation was painted by Chady Elias and is found in the Melkite Greek Catholic Church. Do you notice the one ray in that icon?????? Like Kiko Arguello, Chady Elias re-paints ancient Byzantine art in his own personal style. Tim Rohr and Chuck White are only there to discredit Kiko Arguello and the Neocatechumenal Way in anyway they can. I'm sure that Mr. White got his information from an anti-Neo website. He simply swallows the information on every anti-Neo website that was frozen in time without bothering to check for its validity.
Furthermore, the icon below was painted in the Early fourteenth century in Serbia. You can see that there is only ONE ray in this icon that was painted long BEFORE Kiko Arguello was even born. This icon can be found here. The things that Tim Rohr and Chuck White make up in order to discredit the Way!!!
There are many icons showing the Holy Spirit with many rays. What does Chuck White have to say about those icons??? How low they stoop just to discredit the Way and all because of a single ray.
In this case, it depends on who interprets those pictures. There are icons showing the Holy Spirit with many rays. One wonders how Chuck White would interpret those icons. Perhaps, he will interpret them as meaning that the Early Christians believed in many gods due to the many rays????
Chuck white is grasping at straws. If he knew anything about art, he would know that all the ancient and medieval religious painters formed what is known as a school of artists who learned copied and imitated the artists work. All the medieval greats, fra Angelico, Giotto, the Renaissance greats da Vinci raffaello all the Byzantine artists Russians like rubles had schools of painters that followed them. Same goes with kiko. this is not because of cult of personality but because great religious art helps one to pray and so everyone wants the best for their churches. Name one religious artist that is producing art of that quality today. The only one I can think of is Chagall and he has been dead these 50 years. The sisters of Bethlehem have beautiful statuary. They adopt the same formula as kiko. While he has made a fusion of Byzantine and modern art, as el Greco did with Byzantine and mannerist art, the sisters of Bethlehem have made a fusion of modern and Romanesque art. Please name other religious contemporary artists whose art is not a quasi grotesque mix of exaggerated forms and purple brown colors.
Having said this, why are people listening to chuck white? He is a tridintine catholic barely in communion with Rome. His criticizing the ncw is only his covert way of denouncing the whole church. He does not agree with Vatican 2 and so he hates the way because it is the embodiment of Varican 2. By criticizing the way he has found a cowardly way of saying that he rejects the Catholic Church and her teachings.
If in this world there be any knowledge of this sacrament stronger than that of faith, I wish now to use it in affirming that I firmly believe and know as certain that Jesus Christ, True God and True Man, Son of God and Son of the Virgin Mary, is in this Sacrament . . . I receive Thee, the price of my redemption, for Whose love I have watched, studied, and laboured. Thee have I preached; Thee have I taught. Never have I said anything against Thee: if anything was not well said, that is to be attributed to my ignorance. Neither do I wish to be obstinate in my opinions, but if I have written anything erroneous concerning this sacrament or other matters, I submit all to the judgment and correction of the Holy Roman Church, in whose obedience I now pass from this life.
Desperation....maybe....ignorance....who is to say? What is clearly evident is they will never submit to the correction of and judgment of the Church who is represented by Arch Bishop Apuron.
I believe that foremost, they are not in communion with the Spirit and faith of Jesus Christ but of their own intellect and pride.
JSB, I understand a little bit of icons, What I don’t understand is why only Kiko’s work is allowed to be used by communities of the Neocatechumenal Way. My question extends to his music too. Why were the songs of other itenerant catechists remove from the Songbook? Why the cult of personality?
How can the works of man compare to the works of our Father, his Son and the Holy Spirit?
Kiko's works are for nothing if he himself works for the glory of Kiko.
It is not the Arch Bishop Apuron working for the glory of himself but to bring the Glory of God to those who DO NOT TRULY KNOW God.
How can man fathom the dimensions of our Fathers eternal love; or measure the perimeter of his Sons forgiving heart or the Spirits endless patience with the disobedient children of God.
Impossible to those who think they already know something
It is not what we as men have done for GOD; it is what God has done for us Anonymous May 7th 10:08.
You know the most popular song in the songbook? Psalm 150. That was not arranged by kiko. Shema was not arranged by kiko. Give thanks to the lord was not arranged by kiko. I could go on. All the accusations are lies and more lies.
Sincerely, dear Diana, I do not know why you even entertain Chuck White’s theological elaborations.
He has no clue of theology. And now he has shown his utter ignorance of iconography.
He is an auto-defined apologist but in reality his knowledge of apologetics and theology is less than zero. At least, when it comes to his pseudo-criticism of the theology underlining Kiko’s catechesis.
All the catechesis of the Neocatechumenal Way has been approved AND LAUDED by the the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith. How can this man pretend to know more than the theologians at the Vatican?
This man already received two Doctorate’s honoris cause and soon he will receive the third. This means something, no?
Yes, but the site appears to be genuinely concerned with the analysis of Rublev's icons. Interesting then that they choose to side with the source in relation to what Kiko has done with the original icon?
Rather than inventing stories about the artwork, one should always ask the artist his intention regarding his artwork. Some artists paint only a pleasing picture for the eye to behold. Others paint abstract art while others are inspired by other artists, but paint their own personal versions as Chady Elias did.
Kiko did not do not anything to the original icon because the original icon is still there. And Kiko is not the only one fascinated with Byzantine art and icons. As I pointed out to you, Chady Elias is also fascinated with Byzantine art and has painted his own personal version and style.
JSB thinks he is better than C. White. Mr. White is just asking and trying to understand. Is it wrong or unlawful to ask or question authority, civil or church?
Actually, Mr. White does not ask any questions. He simply invents stories and come up with his own conclusions based on his made up stories. Not once did he ever did his homework to investigate other ancient paintings or artwork done by other Catholic artists.
You can make all the justification for white...as you say it asking or trying to understand but his actions do not reflect the nature of a man trying to find truth.
Why does he believe that Kiko does not believe in the Trinity? Don't you think that 4 Popes with all their resources in the Vatican would have exposed Kiko if whites claim had any validity?
and the NCW continues to grow....growing in Spirit that cannot be denied or stopped.
The problem with white and rohr is that once you fire a bullet from a gun; you cannot take it back.
Their lies have been exposed.
They cannot stop lying because to do so will destroy whatever credibility they think they still have.
Anyone who listened to the tape of Father Veraldi should already know that he was struggling with the English language. And when a speaker struggle with the English language, his/her sentences does not come out right the way the speaker actually wants it if he/she were speaking in their native language. From the tape in the jungle, this is how Father Veradi started his talk:
"...very action, action of liturgy. Liturgical action. Also when we sight the son by ourself, because as a church we pray for everybody. And then there is Jesus Christ inside,"
Just by reading the above, a person fluent in English can already tell that what Fr. Veraldi did not master English. It takes patience and time to try and figure out exactly what he means.
The rest of White's exhibits are asinine. For example, Chuck White says that "Holy Trinity" is mentioned only once; therefore, he concludes that Kiko does NOT believe in the Holy Trinity. If the person does not believe in the Holy Trinity, he will simply say 'I do not believe in it." That is how you can conclude whether the person believes in the Holy Trinity or not.
It is absolutely relevant that in hundreds of pages of ramblings there is only one passing reference to the Trinity. Coupled with some dubious statements on the incarnation and sin, Kiko's teaching is questionable.
Also, there are some misunderstandings that can be put down to poor language skills. In the case of the stated "sinfulness of Jesus" this is not the case. The priest in question clearly refers to Jesus having been forgiven. How can that be Diana? What's you spin on that?
That is a question you should have asked Father Veraldi instead of trying to invent stories. The possibility exists that Father Veraldi may have been referring to what St. Paul said. According to the Holy Bible
2 Corinthians 5:21 God made him who had no sin to be sin [fn] for us, so that in him we might become the righteousness of God.
Before you judge Father Veraldi ,try and figure out what St. Paul meant when he said that Christ was made to be sin.
"Before you judge Father Veraldi ,try and figure out what St. Paul meant when he said that Christ was made to be sin."
Don't you mean I should look at what Scripture says and the Church teaches?
For example, from Catholic Answers: "In the Ignatius Catholic Bible, New Testament, Second Catholic Edition RVS ...(pg 320)...Scott Hahn notes that Paul uses an Old Testament Greek idiom where the word "sin" means "sin offering" [Lev 4:21, 5:12, 6:25 as well as Isa 53:10]"
"2 Corinthains 5:21 is a general reference to animal sacrifice as practiced by Old Testament Jews, and a direct reference to the prophecy in Isaiah 53.
For our sake he made him to be sin who did not know sin, so that we might become the righteousness of God in him. (2 Corinthains 5:21)
When a sin offering was made in the Old Testament, the priest and penitent would lay hands on the animal and pray, transferring the sin of the penitent to the animal, who would then die in place of the penitent who transgressed the covenant. Remember that the Bible is a Jewish book, and we have to always read it in light of the Jewish culture and religion which produced it. The covenant was everything to the Jews, and transgression of the covenant demanded death as a punishment. Animal sacrifice was a way to satisfy the demands of the covenant and thereby save the sinner from a death sentence.
1 Corinthians 5:21 is a direct reference to the writings of the prophet Isaiah, who said that a man would come to "Become sin" for us, just like the animals who "Became sin" through the laying on of hands during a sin offering. In doing so, this man would save us from the death sentence.
We had all gone astray like sheep, all following our own way; But the LORD laid upon him the guilt of us all.
Though harshly treated, he submitted and did not open his mouth; Like a lamb led to slaughter or a sheep silent before shearers, he did not open his mouth.
Seized and condemned, he was taken away. Who would have thought any more of his destiny? For he was cut off from the land of the living, struck for the sins of his people.
He was given a grave among the wicked, a burial place with evildoers, Though he had done no wrong, nor was deceit found in his mouth (Isaiah 53:6-9)
Being "Struck for the sins of the people" was a reference to the knife - a small sword really - used to slaughter the large animals such as goats, lambs and bulls. Peter the Pope references the same prophecy of Isaiah.
For to this you have been called, because Christ also suffered for you, leaving you an example that you should follow in his footsteps. “He committed no sin, and no deceit was found in his mouth.” When he was insulted, he returned no insult; when he suffered, he did not threaten; instead, he handed himself over to the one who judges justly. (1 Peter 2:21-23)"
So, what is your point, Diana? Do you agree with the statements made by that NCW priest?
If P. Veraldi isn't able to explain himslef correctly in english he can't teach fundamentals of Catholic doctrine. I don't master english, I don't go around teaching theology in a Seminary. So your first proof (P.Veraldi doesn't master english) is worthless. In addition the actual Roman Catholic Bible reports that St. Paul citation as:
"For our sake he made the sinless one A VICTIM FOR SIN, so that in him we might become the uprightness of God."
P. Veraldi should know, and you should too. Your second proof is also worthless.
Actually, I would go directly to the FOOTNOTES in the Holy Bible regarding that biblical passage. If you had done that, you would find that the passage had absolutely nothing to do about animal sacrifice. It had to do with Christ becoming one with sinful man. According to the footnotes or commentary on 2 Corinthians 5:21:
"God made Christ one with sinful humanity in order to make the human race one with his obedience and saving justice. see 5:14e; Rm 5:19l, Perhaps "victim for sin" should here be taken as meaning "sin", since the same Hebrew word hata't can have both senses. see Lv 4:1-5;13"
(Taken from the New Jerusalem Bible)
This is what we learned in the NCW. You do not make your own interpretation. That is what Protestants do. We read the interpretation of the Church, which are found in the references and footnotes of the New Jerusalem Bible or the Jerusalem Bible. The biblical passage is not saying that Christ committed any sins for we know that Christ is not a sinner. But through His incarnation, He became man.........He became one of us despite that we are sinners and He isn't.
I am certain that Father Veraldi can teach Catholic doctrine better in his native language. I would not judge him so harshly if I were you. After all, if you were in a foreign country and have not mastered the language of the people, would it be fair to judge you "stupid" simply because you have not yet mastered their language??? If you expect the seminarians to understand your culture, I would hope that you would also learn to become more understanding of culture when you visit other foreign countries.
I am not judging him at all, I am sure that he knows doctrine, but as a foreigner maybe he can't be a good teacher, for now. Of course I do not judge a person "stupid" for not being able to talk correctly, annyway I would correct him. Kiko does the same. He doesn't master italian, so he makes often mistakes, anyway those mistakes aren't corrected at all, they become part of NCW catechesis and are translated in all languages as they are pronounced by Kiko. Think to "the Devil is his master", "il Maligno è il suo signore" referred to actual human condition. Kiko needs to be corrected when he is ambiguous or erroneous.
What makes you think that we do not correct our brothers in the Way???? In this blog, I have corrected members of the Way. Just recently a brother walking in the Way posted what I believe to be an error about the Council of Trent, and I corrected him. Furthermore, the Catechetical Directory that we have is written in the English language so the catechists can read it. Every catechist also have a priest to guide them in the teachings of the Church in case they do not understand something in the Directory.
It was the Vatican who told Kiko to receive the Body of Christ standing up rather than sitting down. Since 2008, there was a change in the way we receive the Eucharist. We receive the Body of Christ standing up because that is what the Vatican wanted us to do. We receive the Body of Christ standing up.
No, only if you use a sense of "receive" that the Church doesn't use. To receive is to receive Jesus into your being. This distinction can only be made since permission to break the law of receiving on the tongue has been given. Clearly the language surrounding the supposed "change" was intended to stop the practise of "sitting" for communion. Kiko decided that he wanted you all to sit. So you did - like good puppies. In this way he side-stepped the "correction".
Diana, please don't mix up arguments. You, like me, like all Neo's of the world, have celebrated an illicit Eucharist from 1968 to 2008 (40 YEARS), following Carmen's and Kiko's vision of Liturgy (no Credo, no Agnus Dei, communion always sit down, and so on). Before you say it, Annibale Bugnini did not have the authority to change the Liturgy, so his 1974 "Nota laudatoria" was useless.
During those years from 1968 to 2008, two popes (John Paul II and Benedict XVI) celebrate the Eucharist in the NCW. During those years, it is not illicit because it was still at the experimental stage. The Statutes that we had at that time were not yet approved and therefore not considered illicit. In other words, you cannot call illicit something that was still at the experimental stage and not yet approved. We now have the approved Statutes, which was published in 2008. Changes were made in our celebration in 2008.
Benedict XVI did not celebrate mass in the NCW. Perhaps Cardinal Ratzinger did, but not as pope. As pope he did try to get the NCW to stop sitting and follow the GIRM though. Unfortunately the NCW disobeyed.
Pope JOhn Paul II celebrated with the NCW only once in his long pontificate, in 1988 I think. After that he insisted on changes being made. What does that tell you?
Dear Diana at 7.56, though the statutes may not have been definitive, the GIRM existed throughout that period, and the clear instructions of the Church were set aside by Kiko and you all. THAT is illicit.
Again, the celebrations of the Way were placed on "ad experimentum" for five years until the approval of the Statutes. The NCW was never in violation during that waiting period even if the GIRM existed. Ad experimentum is an expression in Latin terminology used in legal - Church to indicate approval or time-limited extension, for example for a new law or a new ritual.
The neocatechumenal way made unapproved and illicit changes to the Mass prior to the ad experimentum statutes. Since the definitive statutes have been approved they continue to ignore the lawful instruction of the Church
Even before the "ad experimentum" statutes, we did not make any illicit changes to the Mass. According to the Catholic News Agency (capitalization is mine):
" During the ad expermientum period of approval of the statutes, the Council had the chance to witness the great contribution the Neocatechumenal Way makes to the new evangelization through a catechetical-liturgical praxis, [that has been] esteemed DURING ITS MORE THAN FORTY YEARS OF EXISTANCE."
The Pontifical Council of the Laity has praised the catechetical-liturgical-praxis after studying which they find remarkable even after more than 40 years. Some modifications were made upon approval of the 2008 Statutes, and those were mentioned in the Approved Statutes. There is nothing in the Vatican saying that the Way has been practicing the Mass illicitly. That is only a rumor coming from those who oppose the Way.
"As Chuck White demonstrates in his newest expose of Kiko's ill theology, Kiko obviously has a different God than ours."
Then Tim Rohr cites Chuck White's weblink. A different God?????? Both Tim Rohr and Chuck White thinks that Kiko and the NCW does not believe in the Trinitarian God, but in a different god. There is your evidence.
So, if I had a blog and I posted a link to a post on your blog and said that "Diana demonstrates that the world is flat," then that would be true? You are not making any sense.
All blogs are opinions rather than facts. The jungle and thoughtful Catholic are also opinion blogs. Tim Rohr can present documents, but all his interpretation of those documents are simply his opinions.
I read both your blog and the other two mentioned. Tim shows evidence that the ad experimentum period practices were changed and two years were given by the Pope to comply with the changes regarding receiving and consummung Holy Communion. The change was to follow the liturgical books, that is, to receive communion and consume the bread/host immediately. I know some people in the NCW who tell me they receive the bread then keep the bread in hand and wait until all have received the bread in hand. Then all consume the bread at the same time including the presbyter. Is this correct? I don't want to wait once I have received the host, I want to and do consume it immediately. It seems disrespectful to me to the Body and Blood of Christ to wait. I am interested in the NCW but this way of receiving the consecrated bread and then waiting to consume it would be a problem for me. If this is the practice of the NCW what is the explanation for it? If I joined, I think it would be hard for me to do this. Even harder than the public confessions. I hope you will answer my questions. Thank you, Diana, Eleanor Aguon
The change that took place in 2008 is that we receive the Body of Christ standing, then we sit and contemplate on His Body. We do not consume the Body of Christ immediately because the priest has not taken Holy Communion. We consume the Body of Christ together with the priest.
Waiting for everyone including the priest to receive the Body of Christ is not disrespectful. Why? Because the priests do it in a concelebrated Mass. According to the GIRM regarding the concelebrated Mass:
"The concelebrants may, however, remain in their places and take the Body of Christ from the paten presented to them by the principal celebrant or by one or more of the concelebrants, or by passing the paten one to another.
Then the principal celebrant takes a host consecrated in the same Mass, holds it slightly raised above the paten or the chalice, and, facing the people, says the Ecce Agnus Dei (This is the Lamb of God). With the concelebrants and the people he continues, saying the Domine, non sum dignus (Lord, I am not worthy).
Then the principal celebrant, facing the altar, says quietly, Corpus Christi custodiat me ad vitam aeternam (May the body of Christ bring me to everlasting life), and reverently receives the Body of Christ. The concelebrants do likewise, communicating themselves."
As you can see in a concelebrated Mass by priests and bishops, they do not consume the Body of Christ immediately. They wait and consume it together. If you say that it is disrespectful to wait, then are these priests showing disrespect because they did not consume the Body of Christ immediately, but waited?
Doesn't the priest receive communion after the consecration of the bread and wine? So the priest consecrates the bread and wine but does not consume the bread. He then gives the bread to the communicants who go back to stand in their place, bread in hand, and he is the last one to receive the bread and then everyone consumes at once. I still would want to consume when I receive the bread/host. I don't see the point in waiting. Do you have to do it that way? Can non NCW members attend the small community Mass? Thanks for answering my questions. Eleanor Aguon
That is the way it is done in the NCW. The members consumes the Body of Christ together with the priest. To consume the Body of Christ before the priest has holy communion is illicit. Our Eucharist has been approved by Rome. The NCW celebrates Mass the same way worldwide.
Yes, non-NCW members can attend the small community Mass.
Why would consuming the consecrated bread before the priest be illicit? The consecrated bread is the Body and Blood of Christ at the time of consecration. By illicit do you mean in the sense that the priest should consume first or at the same time as the NCW members? The NCW members would be performing an illicit practice to consume before the priest. To consume before the priest is the illicit act, correct? I wouldn't be able to wait to consume. Would that be a problem if I were to attend an NCW small community Mass? Where in the liturgical books or in the statutes approved in 2008 does it state that all can receive the consecrated bread, return to their place with consecrated bread in hand, and consume together with the priest receiving the consecrated bread last? I saw that moving of the sign of peace was approved in the 2008 statutes but didn't see in writing that the way of receiving and consuming after a time of waiting was approved. Does the NCW follow the Roman rite? Thank you, Diana. Eleanor Aguon
When the Pope tells us that we are to receive the Body of Christ standing and then sit and wait until everyone receives the Body of Christ, and then we can consume it together with the priest, the NCW will obey the Pope's instruction. We are not going to say, "Pope, we will do it when you put it down in writing." At the Beginning of the Year Convivience in 2008, I heard Father Pius say that these are the new instructions coming from the Pope. We received these instructions from Kiko Arguello who in turned received the same instructions from Pope Benedict XVI.
However, if you do not believe any of it, you can always write a letter of complaint to the Vatican explaining to them why you disagree with the way the NCW is doing the Eucharist. Yes, we follow the Roman rite, and there are 9 Roman rites in the Latin Church......each one a little different, but still Catholic.
Thank you for your explanation, Diana. I understand you to say that a verbal instruction was given to Kiko Arguello by the Pope for the members of the NCW to receive the consecrated bread, hold it in the hand, return to their seat and wait to consume the host after the priest receives the consecrated bread last and then all consume. I thought the statutes approved in 2008 were given to Kiko Arguello in a written form. This seems not to be the case, is that correct? I am trying to understand that's why I have so many questions. I would probably not receive communion should I attend a NCW liturgy as I would find it difficult to wait to consume the consecrated bread. That would be the best solution for me personally. You have explained this matter of receiving, waiting, and then all consuming the consecrated bread. Of course it is correct to follow the Pope's verbal instructions given to Kiko Arguello. Not to do so would be illicit, correct? You seemed to take offense at my questioning this difference between a NCW Mass and a non-NCW Mass celebrated by the larger congregation in the church itself. I am trying to learn about the NCW and see if it would be a good fit for me. The next step would be for me to attend a small community liturgy. Which parish and priest would you recommend? Eleanor Aguon
I apologize if you misconstrue my statements as an offense. It was not meant to be taken as such. From what I understood, there were some verbal instructions. News report show that Kiko and the Vatican has been working together in regards to how to celebrate the Eucharist. In an interview, Giuseppe Gennarini (a spokesperson for the Way) stated:
"For the first time, the Holy See has accepted several variations to the way the Eucharist is celebrated within the context of the Neocatechumenal Way, as licit adaptations to help contemporary man to better receive the grace communicated by the sacraments.
To the best of my knowledge, this is the only case in which the Holy See has granted such an explicit permission to an ecclesial group.
Until now we had done so with verbal authorization from the [Vatican] congregation, but not in writing. In fact, John Paul II had always supported this concept, and he even expressed it in his apostolic letter 'Dies Domini,' in which he spoke about the possibility that 'in view of special needs in the area of formation and pastoral care' such celebrations of the Sunday Mass could take place."
However, I am certain that even that verbal instruction was LATER written down somewhere. Why? Because the NCW would not be able to celebrate the Eucharist in exactly the same manner worldwide if instructions were actually passed down orally. Any verbal instructions passed down could easily have changed to some degree due to human error. The only way to ensure that ALL communities worldwide celebrate the Eucharist exactly the same way would be by a written document. That is the only logical explanation.
You asked which parish and priest would I recommend? If you are seriously considering being part of a community, you need to attend the catechesis so you can be born into a community. If you only wish to attend the Eucharist, you can also do that. The parishes that has the Neocatechumenal Way is Agana, Barrigada, Chalan Pago, Tamuning, Agat, Merizo and Umatac, Yigo, and Asan. It is always ideal to pick the one closest to where you live.
Diana, how can Eleanor "be born into a community"? This is a new concept apart from mainstream Catholicism as far as I can see. You do not need to be "born into a community" in order to receive sacraments, in this case the sacrament of Eucharist, in the Catholic church. So why do you think Eleanor should do that?
We learned here that neocathedumenal mass is part of the weekend celebrations of masses at a parish. Then how can you set up condition for attending? Parishes offer services to the faithful to participate in holy masses each Saturday and Sunday following their own individual choice and preference. Mass is a service that the parish is required to offer to everyone who attend. Also, Eucharist must be served to everyone in good standing who is requesting it. This is at least how the Catholic church used to be in the past.
How can you say liturgy is God? Which liturgy? The neo or the regular liturgy? How about the Latin mass or the Eastern Catholic rite? All these are God? The same questions can be asked about masses and liturgies of other Christian denominations. Are they also God? Or how about the services of various Jewish denominations? Each of them has its own liturgies. Are these also God? Can you see my point, Diana? This does not make much sense.
To be born into a community means to become the fourth community of Barrigada Church or the sixth community of Agat so that each person has a community they walk in and celebrate in small communities with as the Statutes stated:
"Within the parish, the Neocatechumenate is lived in small community - called neocatechumenal community - since the complete or common form for the Christian initiation of adults is communitarian.
The initial catechesis ad the neocatechumenal itinerary are based on the three fundamental elements (tripod) of Christian life underlined by the Second Vatican Council: Word of God, Liturgy and Community (Ch.III)"
If she wishes to join the NCW, she will have a community to walk with and celebrate with as stated above in the approved Statutes. The Eucharist is open to anyone. The celebration of the word, on the other hand, is NOT open to everyone, but only to community members. ONLY the Eucharist is open to everyone.
Diana, what you quote says absolutely nothing about "being born into a community". If you set up this requirement, you do not follow your statutes. Initial catechesis is only for those who haven't been been baptized and haven't heard any kind of Catholic catechesis before, correct? That is why it is "initial"! This is the only way it could make any sense...
How do you think the first community, second community, third community, etc. of Agana Church came to be? According to the Catechism of the Catholic Church:
CCC Where infant Baptism has become the form in which this sacrament is usually celebrated, it has become a single act encapsulating the preparatory stages of Christian initiation in a very abridged way. By its very nature infant Baptism requires a post-baptismal catechumenate. Not only is there a need for instruction after Baptism, but also for the necessary flowering of baptismal grace in personal growth. The catechism has its proper place here.
The Neocatecchumenal Way fulfills this because the Neocatechumenate is a post-baptismal catechumen.
Thank you, Anonymous May 10, 2015 at 1:13 p.m, for the info about the catchesis at Chalan Pago. Is it permitted to ask questions of the catechist? An acquaintance who is in NCW told me no questions are allowed. Is that true? Diana, is there a book on the NCW approved by Kiko Arguelles that tells the history of the NCW? I will seriously consider attending a session at Chalan Pago. What is the purpose of the public confession? I would be hugely embarrassed to tell my peccadilloes to a group of people. Still not comfortable with the NCW manner of the communion. Is there any way to read about how one begins in the NCW and progresses? I like to be informed when I start something new to me. Thank you, Diana. Eleanor Aguon
If you are going to attend the catechesis in Chalan Pago, you can speak and ask your questions to the pastor there. If I am not mistaken, I believe the pastor of Chalan Pago is Father Edivaldo. There is a book written by Kiko Arguello that tells the history of the Way. The title of the book is "Kerygma" and published by Ignatius Press.
Diana, I asked my questions sincerely. I hope you only misplaced them and did not just omitted. Let me repeat. You should tell Eleanor that your statutes place people who join the Way into a preliminary "pre-catechumenate" stage, as if they had never received catechesis. Placing them into this preliminary stage of faith overrides their whole previous faith life in the Catholic formation. They will be novices among their neocatechumenate brothers.
I am talking about a daughter who joined the Way. After several years she convinced her parents who gave her the best Catholic education and raised her into a faith centered life, she convinced her own parents to join as well. Then her parents became pre-catechumenates in the Way, while she is already a high ranking catechist brother. How about that Diana? I hope you don't think there is anything wrong with this situation. But again, is this not something Eleanor should be aware of before joining the NCW?
Thank you, Diana, for the book written by Kiko Arguello, about the history of the NCW. That should be a good intro for me and answer many questions. I will see about contacting the pastor of Chalan Pago. That's a convenient parish for me should I join in the catechesis. Eleanor Aguon
You stated: " Certainly is interesting how people have remained Catholic all their lives without the Way."
When the Way was not here, the attendance in the Catholic Church dwindled. Catholics committed more abortion on this island. There is a high divorce rate among Catholics on this island. Over time, Catholics have allowed their children to cohabitate with their boyfriend or girlfriend under their roof. Is this what it really means to be Catholic??? The fact that many of these things were happening about Catholics only showed that Catholics have lost their faith.
You stated: "You should tell Eleanor that your statutes place people who join the Way into a preliminary "pre-catechumenate" stage, as if they had never received catechesis."
This information you give is incorrect, and I do not know where you even got this information. Please do not spread rumors. Faith is a gift from God. It is not something you obtained on your own (See the Catechism of the Catholic Church #162).
According to the approved Statutes of the Neocatechumenal Way:
§ 1. The first phase of the Neocatechumenate is the precatechumenate, which is a time of kenosis75 in order to learn to walk in humility.76 It is divided into two steps:
1st. In the first step, which goes from the initial catecheses until the first scrutiny, and which lasts approximately two years, the neocatechumens learn the language of the Bible by celebrating each week the Word of God, with simple themes that run throughout the whole of Scripture, such as water, rock, lamb, etc. The Word of God, the Eucharist and the community gradually help the neocatechumens to be emptied of false concepts of themselves and of God and to descend into their reality of being sinners in need of conversion, rediscovering the gratuitousness of the love of Christ, who forgives them and loves them. In the concluding celebration of the first scrutiny, after the inscription of the name, they ask the Church to help them mature in faith in order to do works of eternal life,77 and then they receive the sign of the glorious cross of Christ, which illuminates the salvific role of the cross in the life of each person.
2nd. In the second step, of similar length, the neocatechumens celebrate the great stages of the history of salvation - Abraham, Exodus, Desert, Promised Land, etc. - and a time is given to them so that they may prove to themselves the sincerity of their intention to follow Jesus Christ78 in the light of his Word: “You cannot serve both God and money” (Mt 6:24).
What is the exact meaning of pre-catechumenate? "Pre" means before. Before what, Diana? Before accepted as Christian? When someone is "born into a community" that person becomes a pre-catechumenate just as quoted from your statutes. However, we are talking about people who might have been in Catholic formation for decades before joining the NCW. This is the point here, dear Diana. Is this not puzzling for you? Two years until inscription of name and sign of cross? This might be appropriate for newly evangelized folks who learn about the Catholic faith the first time. But how about re-evangelized Catholics who have already learned about Christ a lot before?
Now, you are inventing stories. Where in the approved statutes does it say that "pre" means before being accepted as a Christian? A baptized Catholic already belongs to God's family. I gave you the definition of "precatechumenate" as it was stated In the approved Statutes. If you have a problem with the definition and with the two-year stages of the Way, then bring it up to the Vatican because they were the ones who approved the Statutes.
"When the Way was not here, the attendance in the Catholic Church dwindled. "
This is such utter rot. The Neocatechumenal "Way" was not here (in the Catholic Church) for nineteen centuries. Apparently the Church dwindled in that time?
Diana, I am not inventing stories. Did not you see the question mark at the end of my question, please? Do not confuse questions with statements, especially if the question is directed to you. The reason we ask you is that we respect you as a speaker for the neocatechumen. We would like to honestly understand what you say. We ask you because we would like to absorb more factual elements into our knowladge about the Way. So please, open up to our questions, We consider you as representing this movement in a faithful manner so that the information you provide can be taken as first hand information. Is this not the reason you maintain your blog so that we may have first hand information about the neocetechumenate, Diana?
I was asking about the meaning of preücatechumen, because "pre" means before or in advance on the time line. You said people would be "born into a community" after they learn the catechesis whatever this means. I assume it happens metaphorically not truly in the physical sense. Then they are in pre-catechumenate. This could mean before being in the catechumenate. I actually talked to middle aged and elderly people who would feel awkward to be placed into a pre-catechumenate stage after being in Catholic formation for many years, perhaps even decades. If this is not a concern for you dear Diana, then you don't need to address this, of course.
I only ask you, please, honestly tell us the meaning of two years of pre-catechumenate for adult baptized and mostly confirmed people of Catholic faith. What is "pre" for in this initial stage? Does it count if someone has been baptised and confirmed many years earlier or should someone just start everything anew from square one? Thanks for your attention.
I was referring to the time here in Guam. Somewhere the vast majority of Catholics lost their faith. Just look at how many of them are cohabitating rather than entering the sacrament of marriage. And look at how many parents actually allow their children to cohabitate with their boyfriends or girlfriends UNDER their roof. Look at how many Catholics go to church only out of obligation. Look at how many of them only go to church on Christmas and Easter. Look at how many of them divorced their spouse and how many of them married in civil court. Many Catholics on Guam lost their faith a long time ago even BEFORE the Way was on Guam.
You stated: "You said people would be "born into a community" after they learn the catechesis whatever this means."
I never said such thing. On May 10, at 6:42 am, I stated: "If you are seriously considering being part of a community, you need to ATTEND the catechesis so you can be born into a community." Nowhere did I say that you needed to LEARN the catechesis in order to be born into a community. You simply need to attend and listen.
I also gave you the definition of "pre-catechumenate" according to how the Vatican defined it in our approved Statutes. If you have a problem with that definition, then bring it up to the Vatican and explain your concerns to them. The NCW, on the other hand, will follow what the Vatican laid out for us in the approved Statutes.
In your previous comment, you stated: "Then her parents became pre-catechumenates in the Way, while she is already a high ranking catechist brother. How about that Diana? I hope you don't think there is anything wrong with this situation."
Is the STATUS and RANK of a person all you really care about?
Matthew 18:3-4 And he said: “Truly I tell you, unless you change and become like little children, you will never enter the kingdom of heaven. Therefore, whoever takes the lowly position of this child is the greatest in the kingdom of heaven.
Diana, I don't have problem with the definition. I am turning to you because you can give first hand answers to questions about the neocatechumenate. At least this is how we perceive, respectfully, your blog. I like your response that "bring it up to the Vatican" because it shows you are trusting the authority of the church so much. Trust is very important. When someone is demanding answer about who allowed you to do this or that, then perhaps the best thing is to refer to some respected authority who is like a guiding post to show the proper direction.
However, my question was not a demand to tell who allowed you to do this or that. This was not my intention. My intention is not even related to the high authority because it is not about some kind of dilemma that has to be decided one way or the other. My question was not that kind. My question was a request of clarification because I am confused and I do not understand this thing in the Way. So please, just relax and re-read my question with a different eye in a different state of mind, please.
Perhaps, you do not even notice that your answer like "bring it up to the Vatican" might come through as a little bit arrogant for those who asked their question with the true intention of learning new things and clarifying confusion about difficult topics. Thanks.
I already gave you the definition of "pre-neocatechumenate" straight from the approved Statutes. As you can see, it never had anything to do with the status or rank of a person, which you are actually more concern about.
If you are really here for clarification, they why do you continue to contradict my clarifications?? For example, I already said: "To be born into a community means to become the fourth community of Barrigada Church or the sixth community of Agat so that each person has a community they walk in and celebrate in small communities with as the Statutes stated:"
And what was your response to my clarification of what it means to be born into a community? You stated: "Diana, what you quote says absolutely nothing about "being born into a community". If you set up this requirement, you do not follow your statutes. Initial catechesis is only for those who haven't been been baptized and haven't heard any kind of Catholic catechesis before, correct? That is why it is "initial"! This is the only way it could make any sense..."
The Neocatechumenal Way is an itinerary of Christian formation, and the Vatican who approved our Statutes understood that this formation is a POST-Baptismal one. In other words, they are aware that most of the members of the Way are already baptized. Most of the Catholics who join the Way are here because they want to grow in faith to become closer to God. Others are here because they were inspired to become itinerants or mission families. Of course, non-Catholics who wish to join the Catholic Church are also welcome in the Way, but a vast majority of the members of the Way are baptized Catholics, some of whom have gone on to become missionaries, nuns, priests, or mission families.
Kiko has been catechizing for over fifty years, so it should be pretty easy to put Chuck White and the Thoughtful Catholic into his place. Just post some links to examples of Kiko explicitly talking about the Trinity. It's so crucial to baptism that Kiko MUST have had many catecheses on the topic. Chuck says that Kiko is silent on Christ's pre-existence as the Second Person. There's got to be links showing Kiko teaching that.
The fact that the NCW itself believes and teaches the Holy Trinity is evidence enough. All you had to do is ask any NCW catechists if they believe in the Holy Trinity.
p.s. and if we accept that God may be represented by a single ray in some (not all) eastern icons, what you say about the Rublev's icon re-managed by Kiko? What you say about "Dios es comunidad liturgia palabra"? What you say about the three distinct figures in evident contrast with those three angels in Rublev's icon?
When Kiko painted a painting after Rublev's icon, he was painting the Holy Family. That is why in Kiko's painting, you see a female and two males. Jesus is the man in the middle. Mary is on one side and Joseph on the other. You have Rublev's icon, which is a paining of the Holy Trinity. Kiko's painting, on the other hand, is a painting of the Holy Family despite that he got the idea from Rublev's icon. What YOU do not understand is that the Holy Trinity is a reflection of the Holy Family. This is Catholic teaching that the Holy Trinity is a reflection of the family (see the weblink below):
Kiko's used Rublev's icon and painted the Holy Family because he saw that the Holy Trinity is a reflection of the family. If you read the Catholic weblink, it explains how the Trinity is a reflection of a family. Unfortunately, Chuck White had other ulterior motives which is why he deliberately twisted Kiko's icon and invented stories about it. Chuck White NEVER bothered to asked Kiko or the NCW the meaning behind the icon.
As for Dios es comunidad liturgia palabra......what is wrong with that? Do you not believe that God is found in the community, in the liturgy and in the word that is celebrated? Do you not believe that Christ and His Church are one? Do you not believe that God is there speaking the liturgy of the word and most especially the liturgy of the Eucharist? Do you believe that the Holy Spirit dwells in each one of us?
I am perfectly aware of all you said, but that's not the point. Yes God can be found in community (not only Neo community, obviously), we can hear Him speak in Liturgy and in God's Word, but it's a bit odd to read this on a Kiko's icon: Word, Community and Liturgy are your "tripod". God is NCW tripod? This is not acceptable, Don't you think God IS way greater than this? Yes those are IMAGES of God, but images are NOT God in Hs essence. Why Kiko writes "God IS..."? God can only be found in NCW? I know that the Kiko's painting is "the Holy Family" ,but the simbology is nonsense. I have never seen Sain Joseph dressed as Holy Spirit (in green), ora Holy Blessed Virgin Mary in gold and purple, like God Father. This is a bit strange don't you think?
I would find it more strange if Kiko had said "neo community, neo liturgy, and neo word." The Catholic Church is a community of people. The Catholic Church has a liturgy and the Catholic Church has the word of God. Where in any of those words do you see Kiko saying that God is neo community, neo litury, and neo word???" That is only YOU saying it. Do not put in Kiko's mouth words he never spoke. Kiko painted the Holy family. Jesus, Mary, and Joseph were human beings more than 2000 years ago. Who knows what color of dress they wore?
Sandavi is absolutely right about this. The statement "Dios es comunidad liturgia palabra" Is without doubt referring to the tripod. Anyone in the NCW knows this by sight or sound. The tripod (a NCW term and construct) is identified with God. In others words - to accept the proposition of the NCW tripod is to accept God and to reject is to reject God. This is the purpose of the phrase. There is no other reason to put it there.
Secondly, you get yourself into trouble, Diana, when you try to defend the indefensible. The article you linked does not "explain how the Trinity is a reflection of a family". But rather that the family is an image or reflection of the Trinity. This is important. Also, as sandavi says, Kiko co-opts the symbology of Rublev's icon while distorting the meaning and origin of that same symbology. Do you honestly think Rublev was unaware of the relationship between the Trinity and the Holy family? Or do you think that idea was hidden until your savior Kiko appeared?
Rublev chooses particular contexts, and particular deep symbolism for his icons - Kiko rides these for his own purposes (ie extolling his creation) while distorting and making a caricature of Christianity.
"Tripod" in the NCW is another word for foundation. The foundation of the NCW is the same as the foundation of the Catholic Church, which is the reason why Kiko never said "neo community, neo liturgy, and neo word." There is no such thing. The foundation of the Catholic Church is also the parish community. Without the parish community, the Church ceases to exist because the Church has always been the assembly gathered together. It was never a stone building, but a living building. When Christ said, I will build my Church, He was not speaking of stone buildings, but of an assembly of people.......in other words, a community.
CCC 834 Particular Churches are fully catholic through their communion with one of them, the Church of Rome "which presides in charity." "For with this church, by reason of its pre-eminence, the whole Church, that is the faithful everywhere, must necessarily be in accord." Indeed, "from the incarnate Word's descent to us, all Christian churches everywhere have held and hold the great Church that is here [at Rome] to be their only basis and foundation since, according to the Savior's promise, the gates of hell have never prevailed against her."
Another foundation of the Catholic Church is the liturgy, especially the Eucharist. According to the Catechism of the Catholic Church:
CCC 2181 The Sunday Eucharist is the foundation and confirmation of all Christian practice.......
One of the tripods of the NCW is also the Eucharist.
The Word of God is another foundation of the Catholic Church: Jesus Christ is the Word came down in the flesh. He is the founder of the Church.. The word of God is also sacred scripture, which came down to us through the Church. It was the Church's duty to preserve the word of God.
In the NCW, sacred scripture, the Catechism, and the documents of the Church Fathers are what we study to be closer to Christ. According to the Catechism:
CCC 134 All sacred Scripture is but one book, and this one book is Christ, "because all divine Scripture speaks of Christ, and all divine Scripture is fulfilled in Christ" (Hugh of St. Victor, De arca Noe 2, 8: PL 176, 642: cf. ibid. 2, 9: PL 176, 642-643
According to the Catechism, all sacred scripture is one book and this one book is Christ. So, Kiko was correct when he said that God is the word. God is the community because we are His Body. God is the Liturgy because His Body and Blood is what we eat and drink. God is also the word, the living Word.....Jesus Christ. And God speaks to us even through sacred Scripture. The tripod of the NCW is no different than the foundation of the Catholic Church. You simply did not understand it that way because you tend to separate the NCW from the Catholic Church when it is actually one and part of the Catholic Church. There is no such thing as neo community because there is only one community - the Catholic Community. There is no such thing as neo liturgy because the liturgy of the Catholic Church are one regardless of whether is a Tridintine Mass, an Eastern Catholic Mass, a Novus Ordo Mass, etc. There is no such thing as a neo word because the Catholic Church has only one founder and we all read the same sacred scripture.
"There is no such thing as neo community because there is only one community - the Catholic Community. There is no such thing as neo liturgy because the liturgy of the Catholic Church are one regardless of whether is a Tridintine Mass, an Eastern Catholic Mass, a Novus Ordo Mass, etc. There is no such thing as a neo word because the Catholic Church has only one founder and we all read the same sacred scripture. "
Except that this is not true. There is a "neo-community" - you speak about it all the time, and we see it in its diabolical action. There is also a "neo liturgy" because although you claim you are not a group, an organisation or an order, you do things differently to the rest of us in the Roman Rite; and there is such a thing as a "neo-word" - hidden though it is in thirteen volumes of unpublished Gnosticism.
The word "neocatechumenate" existed since the first century. You can look it up. Those who were going through baptism in the Early Church were called neocatechumenates. Neocatechumenates is a Catholic term used by the Early Christians; therefore, Kiko did not develop anything new.
Surely you mean "catechumen"? Can you provide a source to your claim that the word "neocatechumenate" was used to designate "Those who were going through baptism in the Early Church"?
Dear Diana, your replies to anonymous are out of context. It seems to me that you are clutching at straws, a little bit. First, Kiko's paintings can't be treated or considered like crucifix: Crucifix is the holiest symbol of Christianity, Kiko's painting are just.... paintings. Anyway, I am aware that you have only one type of crucifix, that one on rod designed by Kiko itself, but if you go around in all churches of the world I am pretty sure that you couldn't find two identical crucifixes. Instead, wherever you will go in Neo churches you will find always IDENTICAL Kiko's paintings and crucifixes. Everywhere. Not only paintings, but also altars, presbyteriums, chapels, tabernacles, and so on. Everywhere identical. The paintings in Oulu are identical to that in Scandicci. A bit weird, isn't it? It's not a matter of symbols only , but the way those symbols are crafted: all crafted equals, by Kiko's apprentices. Weird and disturbing cult of personality. Second: You insist in your personal interpretation of Catechism. Saying that God is present IN word, liturgy and community, isn’t the same to say that God IS word, liturgy and community. God is Himself, God is Father, Son and Holy Spirit. We can say that He makes himself present in word, Liturgy and community. As anonymous said, reading “Dios es communidad, liturgia, palabra” one could think that leaving Neocatechumenal Way is betray God … Maybe Kiko could explain himself better? Why we need to interpret Kiko’s words all the times? Third: The only Founder, the unique foundation of Catholic Church is Christ, the true Chief of Church, the Head of Mystic Body. Liturgy, word and community are the ways we meet with Him, the places where He, with all His eternal and infinite love, permits us to make a true personal experience of Him and hear Him speak. The “tripod”, as teached in NCW is foundation for NCW practices, not Church in all his extent: is YOUR way of living the faith, not the only, not the best way. God is IN Neocatechumenal Way only insofar the NCW do what Church desires. One can live Liturgy in a normal church, listen to Word of God at Mass (or in a Lectio Divina, everywhere he needs), and live parish fully, being part of the whole Christian community. We all know, like all your catechesis say everywhere, that for you WORD is the liturgy of word made during the week, COMMUNITY is your NC community, with your brothers, and LITURGY is your Liturgy, not else.
Fourth The word "neocatechumenate" never existed before Kiko. There was a catechumenate (and there is still today) for those pagans converted to christianity, to bring them to Baptism. Not else. If you insist continuously of "NEOcatechumenate" one should think that you want to convert christians to kikians.
Taking its inspiration from the catechumenate of the early Catholic Church, by which converts from paganism were prepared for baptism, it provides post-baptismal formation to adults who are already members of the Church
In ecclesiology, a catechumen (/ˌkætɨˈkjuːmən, -mɛn/; via Latin catechumenus from Greek κατηχούμενος katēkhoumenos, "one being instructed", from κατά kata, "down" and ἦχος ēkhos, "sound") is one receiving instruction from a catechist in the principles of the Christian religion with a view to baptism. The title and practice is most often used by Orthodox Christians and by Roman Catholics.
Thank you for correcting me. It is catechumen. The word "neo" means new. According to the APPROVED Statutes by the Vatican, the Neocatechumenate is a post-baptismal catechumenate.
First of all, Kiko's paintings are now part of the Catholic Church and can be seen in many Catholic Churches today. A crucifix is a crucifix regardless of who constructed it. The paintings of Leonardo da Vinci is also the same everywhere. You are only making a petty argument of icons and statues. A cult has nothing to do with icons and statues otherwise the entire Catholic Church would be guilty of being a cult.
Second, the Catechism of the Catholic Church does say this (Capitalization is mine):
CCC 134 All sacred Scripture is but one book, and this one book IS Christ, "because all divine Scripture speaks of Christ, and all divine Scripture is fulfilled in Christ"
The Catechism clearly explains why this one book (Scripture) is Christ. It is because scripture speaks of Christ and all divine Scripture is fulfilled in Christ. Are you going to tell me that the Catechism is incorrect in saying that "this one book IS Christ?" For the same reason, the phrase, "God is community, liturgy, and word" is also true.
One, God is community. Why? Because the community is His Body. If you separate the head from the body, you have a dead body. The Head and Body of the Church is one. Some Traditional Latin Catholics disagree with Vatican II for having the priest face the congregation. They felt that the Novus Ordo Mass has become people-centered rather than God-centered. They do not understand that God is in the people. Christ has always been one with His people. Any persecution of His community (Church) is also a persecution on Him. In fact, Christ told His Apostles that if they reject them, they reject Him. When St. Paul persecuted Christians, Christ appeared to St. Paul and said, "Saul, Saul, why are you persecuting ME?" Mother Teresa of Calcutta also stated that every time she tends to a poor person, she sees Jesus Christ. Apparently, Kiko (like all the saints) see that God is the community because he saw Him there. Furthermore, we NEVER call ourselves "neo community." We call ourselves "The first community of Barrigada Church", "the second community of Asan Church" or "the third community of Agana". That is how we address ourselves. The only ones who say "neo community" are those who oppose the Way and the Archbishop of Guam.
Two, God is the liturgy. The Liturgy is the word and through the liturgy (especially the Eucharist) one can recognize Christ. The Apostles never recognized that Jesus was with them until they broke bread.
Three. God is the word. God is the Word made flesh. And the Catechism explains why scripture is also Christ.
In the third place, you stated: "The “tripod”, as teached in NCW is foundation for NCW practices, not Church in all his extent: is YOUR way of living the faith, not the only, not the best way."
WHERE in any of my comments did I ever say that the NCW is the ONLY and BEST way to live the faith???????? It was YOU who interpreted Kiko's simple phrase to mean "neo community, neo liturgy, and neo word." YOU were the one who put "neo" in the phrase. Kiko never did that. Where in any of Kiko's words or my words was it said that the NCW is the ONLY and BEST way to live the faith??? YOU were the one who said that. It was never Kiko or me who formed those words.
Lastly, you are correct that it was the word "catechumen" that existed in the Early Christianity. The word "neocatechumenate" is a post-baptismal catechumen because we are already baptized. Furthermore, we are NOT Kikans. That is insulting. We are Catholics. The Pope recognize us as Catholics. It is only YOU who do not recognize us as Catholics, which is why you call us "Kikans." But it does not matter. The fact that the Pope recognize us as Catholics and given us his full support is what matters because he is the Vicar of Christ.
Kiko's painting says, "Dios ES Comunidad, Liturgia, Palabra" in Spanish, or "God IS Community, Liturgy, Word"
Well, I know that God IS love [I John 4:8], and I know that God IS truth [John 14:6], but I'm trying to find out where the bible says "God is liturgy." Can you help me, Diana?
The Holy Spirit is also God. He is the third person in the Holy Trinity, and according to the Catechism of the Catholic Church (capitalization is mine):
CCC 691 ............By joining the two terms, Scripture, LITURGY, and theological language DESIGNATE THE INEXPRESSIBLE PERSON OF THE HOLY SPIRIT,.............
LOL, you are completely misinterpreting the Catechism! CCC 691 says that scripture, liturgy and theological language all "designate", i.e. name, the Third Person of the Holy Trinity by joining the two words, "holy" and "spirit", so that that there is no possibility of equivocation or ambiguity. It is NOT saying that "liturgy" is another name for the Holy Spirit!
Here, you must quote all of the words of CCC 691:
691 "Holy Spirit" is the proper name of the one whom we adore and glorify with the Father and the Son. The Church has received this name from the Lord and professes it in the Baptism of her new children.16
The term "Spirit" translates the Hebrew word ruah, which, in its primary sense, means breath, air, wind. Jesus indeed uses the sensory image of the wind to suggest to Nicodemus the transcendent newness of him who is personally God's breath, the divine Spirit.17 On the other hand, "Spirit" and "Holy" are divine attributes common to the three divine persons. By joining the two terms, Scripture, liturgy, and theological language designate the inexpressible person of the Holy Spirit, without any possible equivocation with other uses of the terms "spirit" and "holy."
Actually, the Catechism specifies that the Holy Spirit is present in the scriptures and liturgy. According to the Catechism:
CCC 134 All sacred Scripture is but one book, and this one book is Christ, "because all divine Scripture speaks of Christ, and all divine Scripture is fulfilled in Christ" (Hugh of St. Victor, De arca Noe 2, 8: PL 176, 642: cf. ibid. 2, 9: PL 176, 642-643).
If this one book is Christ due to the fact that all scripture speaks of Christ and is fulfilled in Christ, how much more the liturgy.....especially the Eucharist where Christ's Body and Blood is actually there? In every liturgical sacrament, it is Christ who absolves the sinner during the Sacrament of Reconciliation, it is Christ who speaks in the liturgy, and it is Christ whose body and blood we eat and drink. It is through the liturgy, especially the breaking of bread that we recognize Christ.
Please explain: all these people who have a problem with the icon of the Madonna that says God is word liturgy communion are saying that God is NOT in the word of God, that he is NOT communion and that he is NOT in the liturgy?
@ Anonymous May 7, 2015 at 10:08 AM said: "... but in reality his knowledge of apologetics and theology is less than zero. At least, when it comes to his pseudo-criticism of the theology underlining Kiko’s catechesis".
Dear Anonymous, Can you prove you to be able to discuss about theology underlying the Kiko's iconographic catechesis? I need an explanation of this: http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-JLkQ84ryA-M/UEpNxyQJndI/AAAAAAAAAeI/Rz07NFzSdHw/s400/cuadroprimera.jpg Can you help me? :-)
Art can be interpreted in many different ways just like words. The 3 rays can be interpreted as God in three persons and the single ray can be interpreted as there being only one God. Both interpretations are right on spot. What's wrong is making unfounded accusations.
picture worth a thousand words
ReplyDeletemore pictures please
Dear Anonymous at 7:31 am,
DeleteIn this case, it depends on who interprets those pictures. There are icons showing the Holy Spirit with many rays. One wonders how Chuck White would interpret those icons. Perhaps, he will interpret them as meaning that the Early Christians believed in many gods due to the many rays????
Chuck white is grasping at straws. If he knew anything about art, he would know that all the ancient and medieval religious painters formed what is known as a school of artists who learned copied and imitated the artists work. All the medieval greats, fra Angelico, Giotto, the Renaissance greats da Vinci raffaello all the Byzantine artists Russians like rubles had schools of painters that followed them. Same goes with kiko. this is not because of cult of personality but because great religious art helps one to pray and so everyone wants the best for their churches. Name one religious artist that is producing art of that quality today. The only one I can think of is Chagall and he has been dead these 50 years. The sisters of Bethlehem have beautiful statuary. They adopt the same formula as kiko. While he has made a fusion of Byzantine and modern art, as el Greco did with Byzantine and mannerist art, the sisters of Bethlehem have made a fusion of modern and Romanesque art. Please name other religious contemporary artists whose art is not a quasi grotesque mix of exaggerated forms and purple brown colors.
DeleteHaving said this, why are people listening to chuck white? He is a tridintine catholic barely in communion with Rome. His criticizing the ncw is only his covert way of denouncing the whole church. He does not agree with Vatican 2 and so he hates the way because it is the embodiment of Varican 2. By criticizing the way he has found a cowardly way of saying that he rejects the Catholic Church and her teachings.
One word do describe White: DESPERATION.
ReplyDeletein the last words of St. Thomas Aquinas;
ReplyDeleteIf in this world there be any knowledge of this sacrament stronger than that of faith, I wish now to use it in affirming that I firmly believe and know as certain that Jesus Christ, True God and True Man, Son of God and Son of the Virgin Mary, is in this Sacrament . . . I receive Thee, the price of my redemption, for Whose love I have watched, studied, and laboured. Thee have I preached; Thee have I taught. Never have I said anything against Thee: if anything was not well said, that is to be attributed to my ignorance. Neither do I wish to be obstinate in my opinions, but if I have written anything erroneous concerning this sacrament or other matters, I submit all to the judgment and correction of the Holy Roman Church, in whose obedience I now pass from this life.
Desperation....maybe....ignorance....who is to say? What is clearly evident is they will never submit to the correction of and judgment of the Church who is represented by Arch Bishop Apuron.
I believe that foremost, they are not in communion with the Spirit and faith of Jesus Christ but of their own intellect and pride.
JSB
JSB,
ReplyDeleteI understand a little bit of icons, What I don’t understand is why only Kiko’s work is allowed to be used by communities of the Neocatechumenal Way. My question extends to his music too. Why were the songs of other itenerant catechists remove from the Songbook? Why the cult of personality?
How can the works of man compare to the works of our Father, his Son and the Holy Spirit?
DeleteKiko's works are for nothing if he himself works for the glory of Kiko.
It is not the Arch Bishop Apuron working for the glory of himself but to bring the Glory of God to those who DO NOT TRULY KNOW God.
How can man fathom the dimensions of our Fathers eternal love; or measure the perimeter of his Sons forgiving heart or the Spirits endless patience with the disobedient children of God.
Impossible to those who think they already know something
It is not what we as men have done for GOD; it is what God has done for us Anonymous May 7th 10:08.
JSB
You know the most popular song in the songbook? Psalm 150. That was not arranged by kiko.
DeleteShema was not arranged by kiko. Give thanks to the lord was not arranged by kiko.
I could go on.
All the accusations are lies and more lies.
Sincerely, dear Diana, I do not know why you even entertain Chuck White’s theological elaborations.
ReplyDeleteHe has no clue of theology. And now he has shown his utter ignorance of iconography.
He is an auto-defined apologist but in reality his knowledge of apologetics and theology is less than zero. At least, when it comes to his pseudo-criticism of the theology underlining Kiko’s catechesis.
All the catechesis of the Neocatechumenal Way has been approved AND LAUDED by the the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith. How can this man pretend to know more than the theologians at the Vatican?
This man already received two Doctorate’s honoris cause and soon he will receive the third. This means something, no?
Dear Anonymous at10:08 am,
DeleteI do not entertain his theological elaborations. I merely show his desperation.
I don't think you could describe this site as "anti-Neo", although they are evidently not pleased with Kiko's icons:
ReplyDeletehttp://rublev-museum.livejournal.com/51662.html
Dear Anonymous at 10:49 am,
DeleteThe person posted the source of his article. And the source is an anti-Neo website.
Yes, but the site appears to be genuinely concerned with the analysis of Rublev's icons. Interesting then that they choose to side with the source in relation to what Kiko has done with the original icon?
DeleteDear Anonymous at 10:49 am,
DeleteRather than inventing stories about the artwork, one should always ask the artist his intention regarding his artwork. Some artists paint only a pleasing picture for the eye to behold. Others paint abstract art while others are inspired by other artists, but paint their own personal versions as Chady Elias did.
Kiko did not do not anything to the original icon because the original icon is still there. And Kiko is not the only one fascinated with Byzantine art and icons. As I pointed out to you, Chady Elias is also fascinated with Byzantine art and has painted his own personal version and style.
Well, I don't know about this Chady Elias, but he at least constructs his icons in the traditional way - no black pools for eyes in those images.
DeleteOne can only say, what the....
http://www.camino-neocatecumenal.org/neo/ICONOGRAFIA/Iconos%20Kiko/ultima_cena.jpg
http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-IrTrkehcgPg/UEKyPsDObII/AAAAAAAAAHA/3TZ3LqjwDOI/s1600/218_virgen_adviento_iconos_del_camino_neocatecumenal_jpg.jpg
JSB thinks he is better than C. White. Mr. White is just asking and trying to understand. Is it wrong or unlawful to ask or question authority, civil or church?
ReplyDeleteDear Anonymous at 11:23 am,
DeleteActually, Mr. White does not ask any questions. He simply invents stories and come up with his own conclusions based on his made up stories. Not once did he ever did his homework to investigate other ancient paintings or artwork done by other Catholic artists.
You can make all the justification for white...as you say it asking or trying to understand but his actions do not reflect the nature of a man trying to find truth.
DeleteWhy does he believe that Kiko does not believe in the Trinity? Don't you think that 4 Popes with all their resources in the Vatican would have exposed Kiko if whites claim had any validity?
and the NCW continues to grow....growing in Spirit that cannot be denied or stopped.
The problem with white and rohr is that once you fire a bullet from a gun; you cannot take it back.
Their lies have been exposed.
They cannot stop lying because to do so will destroy whatever credibility they think they still have.
What about White's other 7 exhibits? Especially Fr. Veraldi's lecture? Or the sections from the Way's catechetical directory?
ReplyDeleteDear Anonymous at 12:14 pm,
DeleteAnyone who listened to the tape of Father Veraldi should already know that he was struggling with the English language. And when a speaker struggle with the English language, his/her sentences does not come out right the way the speaker actually wants it if he/she were speaking in their native language. From the tape in the jungle, this is how Father Veradi started his talk:
"...very action, action of liturgy. Liturgical action. Also when we sight the son by ourself, because as a church we pray for everybody. And then there is Jesus Christ inside,"
Just by reading the above, a person fluent in English can already tell that what Fr. Veraldi did not master English. It takes patience and time to try and figure out exactly what he means.
The rest of White's exhibits are asinine. For example, Chuck White says that "Holy Trinity" is mentioned only once; therefore, he concludes that Kiko does NOT believe in the Holy Trinity. If the person does not believe in the Holy Trinity, he will simply say 'I do not believe in it." That is how you can conclude whether the person believes in the Holy Trinity or not.
It is absolutely relevant that in hundreds of pages of ramblings there is only one passing reference to the Trinity. Coupled with some dubious statements on the incarnation and sin, Kiko's teaching is questionable.
DeleteAlso, there are some misunderstandings that can be put down to poor language skills. In the case of the stated "sinfulness of Jesus" this is not the case. The priest in question clearly refers to Jesus having been forgiven. How can that be Diana? What's you spin on that?
Dear Anonymous at 1:47 pm,
DeleteThat is a question you should have asked Father Veraldi instead of trying to invent stories. The possibility exists that Father Veraldi may have been referring to what St. Paul said. According to the Holy Bible
2 Corinthians 5:21 God made him who had no sin to be sin [fn] for us, so that in him we might become the righteousness of God.
Before you judge Father Veraldi ,try and figure out what St. Paul meant when he said that Christ was made to be sin.
"Before you judge Father Veraldi ,try and figure out what St. Paul meant when he said that Christ was made to be sin."
DeleteDon't you mean I should look at what Scripture says and the Church teaches?
For example, from Catholic Answers:
"In the Ignatius Catholic Bible, New Testament, Second Catholic Edition RVS ...(pg 320)...Scott Hahn notes that Paul uses an Old Testament Greek idiom where the word "sin" means "sin offering" [Lev 4:21, 5:12, 6:25 as well as Isa 53:10]"
"2 Corinthains 5:21 is a general reference to animal sacrifice as practiced by Old Testament Jews, and a direct reference to the prophecy in Isaiah 53.
For our sake he made him to be sin who did not know sin, so that we might become the righteousness of God in him. (2 Corinthains 5:21)
When a sin offering was made in the Old Testament, the priest and penitent would lay hands on the animal and pray, transferring the sin of the penitent to the animal, who would then die in place of the penitent who transgressed the covenant. Remember that the Bible is a Jewish book, and we have to always read it in light of the Jewish culture and religion which produced it. The covenant was everything to the Jews, and transgression of the covenant demanded death as a punishment. Animal sacrifice was a way to satisfy the demands of the covenant and thereby save the sinner from a death sentence.
1 Corinthians 5:21 is a direct reference to the writings of the prophet Isaiah, who said that a man would come to "Become sin" for us, just like the animals who "Became sin" through the laying on of hands during a sin offering. In doing so, this man would save us from the death sentence.
We had all gone astray like sheep,
all following our own way;
But the LORD laid upon him
the guilt of us all.
Though harshly treated, he submitted
and did not open his mouth;
Like a lamb led to slaughter
or a sheep silent before shearers,
he did not open his mouth.
Seized and condemned, he was taken away.
Who would have thought any more of his destiny?
For he was cut off from the land of the living,
struck for the sins of his people.
He was given a grave among the wicked,
a burial place with evildoers,
Though he had done no wrong,
nor was deceit found in his mouth
(Isaiah 53:6-9)
Being "Struck for the sins of the people" was a reference to the knife - a small sword really - used to slaughter the large animals such as goats, lambs and bulls. Peter the Pope references the same prophecy of Isaiah.
For to this you have been called, because Christ also suffered for you, leaving you an example that you should follow in his footsteps.
“He committed no sin,
and no deceit was found in his mouth.”
When he was insulted, he returned no insult; when he suffered, he did not threaten; instead, he handed himself over to the one who judges justly.
(1 Peter 2:21-23)"
So, what is your point, Diana? Do you agree with the statements made by that NCW priest?
If P. Veraldi isn't able to explain himslef correctly in english he can't teach fundamentals of Catholic doctrine. I don't master english, I don't go around teaching theology in a Seminary. So your first proof (P.Veraldi doesn't master english) is worthless.
DeleteIn addition the actual Roman Catholic Bible reports that St. Paul citation as:
"For our sake he made the sinless one A VICTIM FOR SIN, so that in him we might become the uprightness of God."
P. Veraldi should know, and you should too.
Your second proof is also worthless.
Dear Anonymous at 4:38 am,
DeleteActually, I would go directly to the FOOTNOTES in the Holy Bible regarding that biblical passage. If you had done that, you would find that the passage had absolutely nothing to do about animal sacrifice. It had to do with Christ becoming one with sinful man. According to the footnotes or commentary on 2 Corinthians 5:21:
"God made Christ one with sinful humanity in order to make the human race one with his obedience and saving justice. see 5:14e; Rm 5:19l, Perhaps "victim for sin" should here be taken as meaning "sin", since the same Hebrew word hata't can have both senses. see Lv 4:1-5;13"
(Taken from the New Jerusalem Bible)
This is what we learned in the NCW. You do not make your own interpretation. That is what Protestants do. We read the interpretation of the Church, which are found in the references and footnotes of the New Jerusalem Bible or the Jerusalem Bible. The biblical passage is not saying that Christ committed any sins for we know that Christ is not a sinner. But through His incarnation, He became man.........He became one of us despite that we are sinners and He isn't.
Dear sandavi at 11:08 pm,
DeleteI am certain that Father Veraldi can teach Catholic doctrine better in his native language. I would not judge him so harshly if I were you. After all, if you were in a foreign country and have not mastered the language of the people, would it be fair to judge you "stupid" simply because you have not yet mastered their language??? If you expect the seminarians to understand your culture, I would hope that you would also learn to become more understanding of culture when you visit other foreign countries.
I am not judging him at all, I am sure that he knows doctrine, but as a foreigner maybe he can't be a good teacher, for now. Of course I do not judge a person "stupid" for not being able to talk correctly, annyway I would correct him.
DeleteKiko does the same. He doesn't master italian, so he makes often mistakes, anyway those mistakes aren't corrected at all, they become part of NCW catechesis and are translated in all languages as they are pronounced by Kiko.
Think to "the Devil is his master", "il Maligno è il suo signore" referred to actual human condition. Kiko needs to be corrected when he is ambiguous or erroneous.
Dear sandavi,
DeleteWhat makes you think that we do not correct our brothers in the Way???? In this blog, I have corrected members of the Way. Just recently a brother walking in the Way posted what I believe to be an error about the Council of Trent, and I corrected him. Furthermore, the Catechetical Directory that we have is written in the English language so the catechists can read it. Every catechist also have a priest to guide them in the teachings of the Church in case they do not understand something in the Directory.
Show me the last time you corrected Kiko. Or that anyone corrected Kiko?
DeleteDear Anonymous at 10:41 am,
DeleteIt was the Vatican who told Kiko to receive the Body of Christ standing up rather than sitting down. Since 2008, there was a change in the way we receive the Eucharist. We receive the Body of Christ standing up because that is what the Vatican wanted us to do. We receive the Body of Christ standing up.
"We receive the Body of Christ standing up."
DeleteNo, only if you use a sense of "receive" that the Church doesn't use. To receive is to receive Jesus into your being. This distinction can only be made since permission to break the law of receiving on the tongue has been given. Clearly the language surrounding the supposed "change" was intended to stop the practise of "sitting" for communion. Kiko decided that he wanted you all to sit. So you did - like good puppies. In this way he side-stepped the "correction".
Diana, please don't mix up arguments. You, like me, like all Neo's of the world, have celebrated an illicit Eucharist from 1968 to 2008 (40 YEARS), following Carmen's and Kiko's vision of Liturgy (no Credo, no Agnus Dei, communion always sit down, and so on). Before you say it, Annibale Bugnini did not have the authority to change the Liturgy, so his 1974 "Nota laudatoria" was useless.
DeleteDear Sandavi,
DeleteDuring those years from 1968 to 2008, two popes (John Paul II and Benedict XVI) celebrate the Eucharist in the NCW. During those years, it is not illicit because it was still at the experimental stage. The Statutes that we had at that time were not yet approved and therefore not considered illicit. In other words, you cannot call illicit something that was still at the experimental stage and not yet approved. We now have the approved Statutes, which was published in 2008. Changes were made in our celebration in 2008.
Benedict XVI did not celebrate mass in the NCW. Perhaps Cardinal Ratzinger did, but not as pope. As pope he did try to get the NCW to stop sitting and follow the GIRM though. Unfortunately the NCW disobeyed.
DeletePope JOhn Paul II celebrated with the NCW only once in his long pontificate, in 1988 I think. After that he insisted on changes being made. What does that tell you?
Dear Diana at 7.56, though the statutes may not have been definitive, the GIRM existed throughout that period, and the clear instructions of the Church were set aside by Kiko and you all. THAT is illicit.
DeleteDear Anonymous at 11:55 am,
DeleteBenedict XVI and Cardinal Ratzinger are the same person. The changes were already made after the experimental stage was over. What does that tell you?
Nothing really.
DeleteDear Anonymous at 11:56 am,
DeleteAgain, the celebrations of the Way were placed on "ad experimentum" for five years until the approval of the Statutes. The NCW was never in violation during that waiting period even if the GIRM existed. Ad experimentum is an expression in Latin terminology used in legal - Church to indicate approval or time-limited extension, for example for a new law or a new ritual.
The neocatechumenal way made unapproved and illicit changes to the Mass prior to the ad experimentum statutes. Since the definitive statutes have been approved they continue to ignore the lawful instruction of the Church
DeleteDear Anonymous at 3:22 pm,
DeleteEven before the "ad experimentum" statutes, we did not make any illicit changes to the Mass. According to the Catholic News Agency (capitalization is mine):
" During the ad expermientum period of approval of the statutes, the Council had the chance to witness the great contribution the Neocatechumenal Way makes to the new evangelization through a catechetical-liturgical praxis, [that has been] esteemed DURING ITS MORE THAN FORTY YEARS OF EXISTANCE."
http://www.catholicnewsagency.com/news/holy_see_to_send_decree_of_approval_to_leaders_of_neocatechumenal_way/
The Pontifical Council of the Laity has praised the catechetical-liturgical-praxis after studying which they find remarkable even after more than 40 years. Some modifications were made upon approval of the 2008 Statutes, and those were mentioned in the Approved Statutes. There is nothing in the Vatican saying that the Way has been practicing the Mass illicitly. That is only a rumor coming from those who oppose the Way.
Diana, you said, "...therefore, he [Chuuk White] concludes that Kiko does NOT believe in the Holy Trinity."
ReplyDeleteCan you point to anywhere in his post where he says that Kiko does not believe in the Trinity?
Dear Anonymous at 3:54 pm,
DeleteAccording to Tim Rohr in Junglewatch, he stated:
"As Chuck White demonstrates in his newest expose of Kiko's ill theology, Kiko obviously has a different God than ours."
Then Tim Rohr cites Chuck White's weblink. A different God?????? Both Tim Rohr and Chuck White thinks that Kiko and the NCW does not believe in the Trinitarian God, but in a different god. There is your evidence.
So, if I had a blog and I posted a link to a post on your blog and said that "Diana demonstrates that the world is flat," then that would be true? You are not making any sense.
DeleteDear Amos,
DeleteAll blogs are opinions rather than facts. The jungle and thoughtful Catholic are also opinion blogs. Tim Rohr can present documents, but all his interpretation of those documents are simply his opinions.
I read both your blog and the other two mentioned. Tim shows evidence that the ad experimentum period practices were changed and two years were given by the Pope to comply with the changes regarding receiving and consummung Holy Communion. The change was to follow the liturgical books, that is, to receive communion and consume the bread/host immediately. I know some people in the NCW who tell me they receive the bread then keep the bread in hand and wait until all have received the bread in hand. Then all consume the bread at the same time including the presbyter. Is this correct? I don't want to wait once I have received the host, I want to and do consume it immediately. It seems disrespectful to me to the Body and Blood of Christ to wait. I am interested in the NCW but this way of receiving the consecrated bread and then waiting to consume it would be a problem for me. If this is the practice of the NCW what is the explanation for it? If I joined, I think it would be hard for me to do this. Even harder than the public confessions. I hope you will answer my questions.
DeleteThank you, Diana,
Eleanor Aguon
Dear Eleanor Aguon,
DeleteThe change that took place in 2008 is that we receive the Body of Christ standing, then we sit and contemplate on His Body. We do not consume the Body of Christ immediately because the priest has not taken Holy Communion. We consume the Body of Christ together with the priest.
Waiting for everyone including the priest to receive the Body of Christ is not disrespectful. Why? Because the priests do it in a concelebrated Mass. According to the GIRM regarding the concelebrated Mass:
"The concelebrants may, however, remain in their places and take the Body of Christ from the paten presented to them by the principal celebrant or by one or more of the concelebrants, or by passing the paten one to another.
Then the principal celebrant takes a host consecrated in the same Mass, holds it slightly raised above the paten or the chalice, and, facing the people, says the Ecce Agnus Dei (This is the Lamb of God). With the concelebrants and the people he continues, saying the Domine, non sum dignus (Lord, I am not worthy).
Then the principal celebrant, facing the altar, says quietly, Corpus Christi custodiat me ad vitam aeternam (May the body of Christ bring me to everlasting life), and reverently receives the Body of Christ. The concelebrants do likewise, communicating themselves."
http://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/congregations/ccdds/documents/rc_con_ccdds_doc_20030317_ordinamento-messale_en.html#II._CONCELEBRATED_MASS
As you can see in a concelebrated Mass by priests and bishops, they do not consume the Body of Christ immediately. They wait and consume it together. If you say that it is disrespectful to wait, then are these priests showing disrespect because they did not consume the Body of Christ immediately, but waited?
Doesn't the priest receive communion after the consecration of the bread and wine? So the priest consecrates the bread and wine but does not consume the bread. He then gives the bread to the communicants who go back to stand in their place, bread in hand, and he is the last one to receive the bread and then everyone consumes at once. I still would want to consume when I receive the bread/host. I don't see the point in waiting. Do you have to do it that way? Can non NCW members attend the small community Mass? Thanks for answering my questions.
DeleteEleanor Aguon
Dear Eleanor Aguon,
DeleteThat is the way it is done in the NCW. The members consumes the Body of Christ together with the priest. To consume the Body of Christ before the priest has holy communion is illicit. Our Eucharist has been approved by Rome. The NCW celebrates Mass the same way worldwide.
Yes, non-NCW members can attend the small community Mass.
Why would consuming the consecrated bread before the priest be illicit? The consecrated bread is the Body and Blood of Christ at the time of consecration. By illicit do you mean in the sense that the priest should consume first or at the same time as the NCW members? The NCW members would be performing an illicit practice to consume before the priest. To consume before the priest is the illicit act, correct? I wouldn't be able to wait to consume. Would that be a problem if I were to attend an NCW small community Mass?
DeleteWhere in the liturgical books or in the statutes approved in 2008 does it state that all can receive the consecrated bread, return to their place with consecrated bread in hand, and consume together with the priest receiving the consecrated bread last? I saw that moving of the sign of peace was approved in the 2008 statutes but didn't see in writing that the way of receiving and consuming after a time of waiting was approved. Does the NCW follow the Roman rite?
Thank you, Diana.
Eleanor Aguon
Dear Elenor Aguon,
DeleteWhen the Pope tells us that we are to receive the Body of Christ standing and then sit and wait until everyone receives the Body of Christ, and then we can consume it together with the priest, the NCW will obey the Pope's instruction. We are not going to say, "Pope, we will do it when you put it down in writing." At the Beginning of the Year Convivience in 2008, I heard Father Pius say that these are the new instructions coming from the Pope. We received these instructions from Kiko Arguello who in turned received the same instructions from Pope Benedict XVI.
However, if you do not believe any of it, you can always write a letter of complaint to the Vatican explaining to them why you disagree with the way the NCW is doing the Eucharist. Yes, we follow the Roman rite, and there are 9 Roman rites in the Latin Church......each one a little different, but still Catholic.
Thank you for your explanation, Diana. I understand you to say that a verbal instruction was given to Kiko Arguello by the Pope for the members of the NCW to receive the consecrated bread, hold it in the hand, return to their seat and wait to consume the host after the priest receives the consecrated bread last and then all consume. I thought the statutes approved in 2008 were given to Kiko Arguello in a written form. This seems not to be the case, is that correct? I am trying to understand that's why I have so many questions.
DeleteI would probably not receive communion should I attend a NCW liturgy as I would find it difficult to wait to consume the consecrated bread. That would be the best solution for me personally.
You have explained this matter of receiving, waiting, and then all consuming the consecrated bread. Of course it is correct to follow the Pope's verbal instructions given to Kiko Arguello. Not to do so would be illicit, correct?
You seemed to take offense at my questioning this difference between a NCW Mass and a non-NCW Mass celebrated by the larger congregation in the church itself.
I am trying to learn about the NCW and see if it would be a good fit for me. The next step would be for me to attend a small community liturgy. Which parish and priest would you recommend?
Eleanor Aguon
Dear Eleanor Aguon,
DeleteI apologize if you misconstrue my statements as an offense. It was not meant to be taken as such. From what I understood, there were some verbal instructions. News report show that Kiko and the Vatican has been working together in regards to how to celebrate the Eucharist. In an interview, Giuseppe Gennarini (a spokesperson for the Way) stated:
"For the first time, the Holy See has accepted several variations to the way the Eucharist is celebrated within the context of the Neocatechumenal Way, as licit adaptations to help contemporary man to better receive the grace communicated by the sacraments.
To the best of my knowledge, this is the only case in which the Holy See has granted such an explicit permission to an ecclesial group.
Until now we had done so with verbal authorization from the [Vatican] congregation, but not in writing. In fact, John Paul II had always supported this concept, and he even expressed it in his apostolic letter 'Dies Domini,' in which he spoke about the possibility that 'in view of special needs in the area of formation and pastoral care' such celebrations of the Sunday Mass could take place."
http://www.camminoneocatecumenale.it/new/evento.asp?lang=en&id=16
However, I am certain that even that verbal instruction was LATER written down somewhere. Why? Because the NCW would not be able to celebrate the Eucharist in exactly the same manner worldwide if instructions were actually passed down orally. Any verbal instructions passed down could easily have changed to some degree due to human error. The only way to ensure that ALL communities worldwide celebrate the Eucharist exactly the same way would be by a written document. That is the only logical explanation.
You asked which parish and priest would I recommend? If you are seriously considering being part of a community, you need to attend the catechesis so you can be born into a community. If you only wish to attend the Eucharist, you can also do that. The parishes that has the Neocatechumenal Way is Agana, Barrigada, Chalan Pago, Tamuning, Agat, Merizo and Umatac, Yigo, and Asan. It is always ideal to pick the one closest to where you live.
Diana, how can Eleanor "be born into a community"? This is a new concept apart from mainstream Catholicism as far as I can see. You do not need to be "born into a community" in order to receive sacraments, in this case the sacrament of Eucharist, in the Catholic church. So why do you think Eleanor should do that?
DeleteWe learned here that neocathedumenal mass is part of the weekend celebrations of masses at a parish. Then how can you set up condition for attending? Parishes offer services to the faithful to participate in holy masses each Saturday and Sunday following their own individual choice and preference. Mass is a service that the parish is required to offer to everyone who attend. Also, Eucharist must be served to everyone in good standing who is requesting it. This is at least how the Catholic church used to be in the past.
How can you say liturgy is God? Which liturgy? The neo or the regular liturgy? How about the Latin mass or the Eastern Catholic rite? All these are God? The same questions can be asked about masses and liturgies of other Christian denominations. Are they also God? Or how about the services of various Jewish denominations? Each of them has its own liturgies. Are these also God? Can you see my point, Diana? This does not make much sense.
Dear Anonymous at 7:25 am,
DeleteTo be born into a community means to become the fourth community of Barrigada Church or the sixth community of Agat so that each person has a community they walk in and celebrate in small communities with as the Statutes stated:
"Within the parish, the Neocatechumenate is lived in small community - called neocatechumenal community - since the complete or common form for the Christian initiation of adults is communitarian.
The initial catechesis ad the neocatechumenal itinerary are based on the three fundamental elements (tripod) of Christian life underlined by the Second Vatican Council: Word of God, Liturgy and Community (Ch.III)"
If she wishes to join the NCW, she will have a community to walk with and celebrate with as stated above in the approved Statutes. The Eucharist is open to anyone. The celebration of the word, on the other hand, is NOT open to everyone, but only to community members. ONLY the Eucharist is open to everyone.
Diana, what you quote says absolutely nothing about "being born into a community". If you set up this requirement, you do not follow your statutes. Initial catechesis is only for those who haven't been been baptized and haven't heard any kind of Catholic catechesis before, correct? That is why it is "initial"! This is the only way it could make any sense...
DeleteDear Anonymous at 8:11 am,
DeleteHow do you think the first community, second community, third community, etc. of Agana Church came to be? According to the Catechism of the Catholic Church:
CCC Where infant Baptism has become the form in which this sacrament is usually celebrated, it has become a single act encapsulating the preparatory stages of Christian initiation in a very abridged way. By its very nature infant Baptism requires a post-baptismal catechumenate. Not only is there a need for instruction after Baptism, but also for the necessary flowering of baptismal grace in personal growth. The catechism has its proper place here.
The Neocatecchumenal Way fulfills this because the Neocatechumenate is a post-baptismal catechumen.
Certainly is interesting how people have remained Catholic all their lives without the Way.
DeleteEleanor, if you want to join the Way, there is catechesis going on in Chalan Pago Church every Monday and Thursday evening at 7:30 pm.
DeleteThank you, Anonymous May 10, 2015 at 1:13 p.m, for the info about the catchesis at Chalan Pago. Is it permitted to ask questions of the catechist? An acquaintance who is in NCW told me no questions are allowed. Is that true?
DeleteDiana, is there a book on the NCW approved by Kiko Arguelles that tells the history of the NCW? I will seriously consider attending a session at Chalan Pago. What is the purpose of the public confession? I would be hugely embarrassed to tell my peccadilloes to a group of people. Still not comfortable with the NCW manner of the communion.
Is there any way to read about how one begins in the NCW and progresses? I like to be informed when I start something new to me.
Thank you, Diana.
Eleanor Aguon
Dear Eleanor,
DeleteIf you are going to attend the catechesis in Chalan Pago, you can speak and ask your questions to the pastor there. If I am not mistaken, I believe the pastor of Chalan Pago is Father Edivaldo. There is a book written by Kiko Arguello that tells the history of the Way. The title of the book is "Kerygma" and published by Ignatius Press.
Diana, I asked my questions sincerely. I hope you only misplaced them and did not just omitted. Let me repeat. You should tell Eleanor that your statutes place people who join the Way into a preliminary "pre-catechumenate" stage, as if they had never received catechesis. Placing them into this preliminary stage of faith overrides their whole previous faith life in the Catholic formation. They will be novices among their neocatechumenate brothers.
DeleteI am talking about a daughter who joined the Way. After several years she convinced her parents who gave her the best Catholic education and raised her into a faith centered life, she convinced her own parents to join as well. Then her parents became pre-catechumenates in the Way, while she is already a high ranking catechist brother. How about that Diana? I hope you don't think there is anything wrong with this situation. But again, is this not something Eleanor should be aware of before joining the NCW?
Thank you, Diana, for the book written by Kiko Arguello, about the history of the NCW. That should be a good intro for me and answer many questions. I will see about contacting the pastor of Chalan Pago. That's a convenient parish for me should I join in the catechesis.
DeleteEleanor Aguon
Dear Anonymous at May10, 10:31 am,
DeleteYou stated: " Certainly is interesting how people have remained Catholic all their lives without the Way."
When the Way was not here, the attendance in the Catholic Church dwindled. Catholics committed more abortion on this island. There is a high divorce rate among Catholics on this island. Over time, Catholics have allowed their children to cohabitate with their boyfriend or girlfriend under their roof. Is this what it really means to be Catholic??? The fact that many of these things were happening about Catholics only showed that Catholics have lost their faith.
Dear Anonymous at 11:15 am,
DeleteYou stated: "You should tell Eleanor that your statutes place people who join the Way into a preliminary "pre-catechumenate" stage, as if they had never received catechesis."
This information you give is incorrect, and I do not know where you even got this information. Please do not spread rumors. Faith is a gift from God. It is not something you obtained on your own (See the Catechism of the Catholic Church #162).
According to the approved Statutes of the Neocatechumenal Way:
§ 1. The first phase of the Neocatechumenate is the precatechumenate, which is a time of kenosis75 in order to learn to walk in humility.76 It is divided into two steps:
1st. In the first step, which goes from the initial catecheses until the first scrutiny, and which lasts approximately two years, the neocatechumens learn the language of the Bible by celebrating each week the Word of God, with simple themes that run throughout the whole of Scripture, such as water, rock, lamb, etc. The Word of God, the Eucharist and the community gradually help the neocatechumens to be emptied of false concepts of themselves and of God and to descend into their reality of being sinners in need of conversion, rediscovering the gratuitousness of the love of Christ, who forgives them and loves them. In the concluding celebration of the first scrutiny, after the inscription of the name, they ask the Church to help them mature in faith in order to do works of eternal life,77 and then they receive the sign of the glorious cross of Christ, which illuminates the salvific role of the cross in the life of each person.
2nd. In the second step, of similar length, the neocatechumens celebrate the great stages of the history of salvation - Abraham, Exodus, Desert, Promised Land, etc. - and a time is given to them so that they may prove to themselves the sincerity of their intention to follow Jesus Christ78 in the light of his Word: “You cannot serve both God and money” (Mt 6:24).
What is the exact meaning of pre-catechumenate? "Pre" means before. Before what, Diana? Before accepted as Christian? When someone is "born into a community" that person becomes a pre-catechumenate just as quoted from your statutes. However, we are talking about people who might have been in Catholic formation for decades before joining the NCW. This is the point here, dear Diana. Is this not puzzling for you? Two years until inscription of name and sign of cross? This might be appropriate for newly evangelized folks who learn about the Catholic faith the first time. But how about re-evangelized Catholics who have already learned about Christ a lot before?
DeleteDear Anonymous at 3:34 pm,
DeleteNow, you are inventing stories. Where in the approved statutes does it say that "pre" means before being accepted as a Christian? A baptized Catholic already belongs to God's family. I gave you the definition of "precatechumenate" as it was stated In the approved Statutes. If you have a problem with the definition and with the two-year stages of the Way, then bring it up to the Vatican because they were the ones who approved the Statutes.
"When the Way was not here, the attendance in the Catholic Church dwindled. "
DeleteThis is such utter rot. The Neocatechumenal "Way" was not here (in the Catholic Church) for nineteen centuries. Apparently the Church dwindled in that time?
Diana, I am not inventing stories. Did not you see the question mark at the end of my question, please? Do not confuse questions with statements, especially if the question is directed to you. The reason we ask you is that we respect you as a speaker for the neocatechumen. We would like to honestly understand what you say. We ask you because we would like to absorb more factual elements into our knowladge about the Way. So please, open up to our questions, We consider you as representing this movement in a faithful manner so that the information you provide can be taken as first hand information. Is this not the reason you maintain your blog so that we may have first hand information about the neocetechumenate, Diana?
DeleteI was asking about the meaning of preücatechumen, because "pre" means before or in advance on the time line. You said people would be "born into a community" after they learn the catechesis whatever this means. I assume it happens metaphorically not truly in the physical sense. Then they are in pre-catechumenate. This could mean before being in the catechumenate. I actually talked to middle aged and elderly people who would feel awkward to be placed into a pre-catechumenate stage after being in Catholic formation for many years, perhaps even decades. If this is not a concern for you dear Diana, then you don't need to address this, of course.
I only ask you, please, honestly tell us the meaning of two years of pre-catechumenate for adult baptized and mostly confirmed people of Catholic faith. What is "pre" for in this initial stage? Does it count if someone has been baptised and confirmed many years earlier or should someone just start everything anew from square one? Thanks for your attention.
Dear Anonymous at 8:41 pm,
DeleteI was referring to the time here in Guam. Somewhere the vast majority of Catholics lost their faith. Just look at how many of them are cohabitating rather than entering the sacrament of marriage. And look at how many parents actually allow their children to cohabitate with their boyfriends or girlfriends UNDER their roof. Look at how many Catholics go to church only out of obligation. Look at how many of them only go to church on Christmas and Easter. Look at how many of them divorced their spouse and how many of them married in civil court. Many Catholics on Guam lost their faith a long time ago even BEFORE the Way was on Guam.
Dear Anonymous at 9:50 pm,
DeleteYou stated: "You said people would be "born into a community" after they learn the catechesis whatever this means."
I never said such thing. On May 10, at 6:42 am, I stated: "If you are seriously considering being part of a community, you need to ATTEND the catechesis so you can be born into a community." Nowhere did I say that you needed to LEARN the catechesis in order to be born into a community. You simply need to attend and listen.
I also gave you the definition of "pre-catechumenate" according to how the Vatican defined it in our approved Statutes. If you have a problem with that definition, then bring it up to the Vatican and explain your concerns to them. The NCW, on the other hand, will follow what the Vatican laid out for us in the approved Statutes.
In your previous comment, you stated: "Then her parents became pre-catechumenates in the Way, while she is already a high ranking catechist brother. How about that Diana? I hope you don't think there is anything wrong with this situation."
Is the STATUS and RANK of a person all you really care about?
Matthew 18:3-4 And he said: “Truly I tell you, unless you change and become like little children, you will never enter the kingdom of heaven. Therefore, whoever takes the lowly position of this child is the greatest in the kingdom of heaven.
Diana, I don't have problem with the definition. I am turning to you because you can give first hand answers to questions about the neocatechumenate. At least this is how we perceive, respectfully, your blog. I like your response that "bring it up to the Vatican" because it shows you are trusting the authority of the church so much. Trust is very important. When someone is demanding answer about who allowed you to do this or that, then perhaps the best thing is to refer to some respected authority who is like a guiding post to show the proper direction.
DeleteHowever, my question was not a demand to tell who allowed you to do this or that. This was not my intention. My intention is not even related to the high authority because it is not about some kind of dilemma that has to be decided one way or the other. My question was not that kind. My question was a request of clarification because I am confused and I do not understand this thing in the Way. So please, just relax and re-read my question with a different eye in a different state of mind, please.
Perhaps, you do not even notice that your answer like "bring it up to the Vatican" might come through as a little bit arrogant for those who asked their question with the true intention of learning new things and clarifying confusion about difficult topics. Thanks.
Dear Anonymous at 9:15 am,
DeleteI already gave you the definition of "pre-neocatechumenate" straight from the approved Statutes. As you can see, it never had anything to do with the status or rank of a person, which you are actually more concern about.
If you are really here for clarification, they why do you continue to contradict my clarifications?? For example, I already said: "To be born into a community means to become the fourth community of Barrigada Church or the sixth community of Agat so that each person has a community they walk in and celebrate in small communities with as the Statutes stated:"
And what was your response to my clarification of what it means to be born into a community? You stated: "Diana, what you quote says absolutely nothing about "being born into a community". If you set up this requirement, you do not follow your statutes. Initial catechesis is only for those who haven't been been baptized and haven't heard any kind of Catholic catechesis before, correct? That is why it is "initial"! This is the only way it could make any sense..."
The Neocatechumenal Way is an itinerary of Christian formation, and the Vatican who approved our Statutes understood that this formation is a POST-Baptismal one. In other words, they are aware that most of the members of the Way are already baptized. Most of the Catholics who join the Way are here because they want to grow in faith to become closer to God. Others are here because they were inspired to become itinerants or mission families. Of course, non-Catholics who wish to join the Catholic Church are also welcome in the Way, but a vast majority of the members of the Way are baptized Catholics, some of whom have gone on to become missionaries, nuns, priests, or mission families.
Kiko has been catechizing for over fifty years, so it should be pretty easy to put Chuck White and the Thoughtful Catholic into his place. Just post some links to examples of Kiko explicitly talking about the Trinity. It's so crucial to baptism that Kiko MUST have had many catecheses on the topic. Chuck says that Kiko is silent on Christ's pre-existence as the Second Person. There's got to be links showing Kiko teaching that.
ReplyDeleteDear Anonymous at 7:23 pm,
DeleteThe fact that the NCW itself believes and teaches the Holy Trinity is evidence enough. All you had to do is ask any NCW catechists if they believe in the Holy Trinity.
p.s. and if we accept that God may be represented by a single ray in some (not all) eastern icons, what you say about the Rublev's icon re-managed by Kiko? What you say about "Dios es comunidad liturgia palabra"? What you say about the three distinct figures in evident contrast with those three angels in Rublev's icon?
ReplyDeleteDear sandavi,
DeleteWhen Kiko painted a painting after Rublev's icon, he was painting the Holy Family. That is why in Kiko's painting, you see a female and two males. Jesus is the man in the middle. Mary is on one side and Joseph on the other. You have Rublev's icon, which is a paining of the Holy Trinity. Kiko's painting, on the other hand, is a painting of the Holy Family despite that he got the idea from Rublev's icon. What YOU do not understand is that the Holy Trinity is a reflection of the Holy Family. This is Catholic teaching that the Holy Trinity is a reflection of the family (see the weblink below):
https://www.catholiccompany.com/blog/holy-family-holy-trinity-and-you
Kiko's used Rublev's icon and painted the Holy Family because he saw that the Holy Trinity is a reflection of the family. If you read the Catholic weblink, it explains how the Trinity is a reflection of a family. Unfortunately, Chuck White had other ulterior motives which is why he deliberately twisted Kiko's icon and invented stories about it. Chuck White NEVER bothered to asked Kiko or the NCW the meaning behind the icon.
As for Dios es comunidad liturgia palabra......what is wrong with that? Do you not believe that God is found in the community, in the liturgy and in the word that is celebrated? Do you not believe that Christ and His Church are one? Do you not believe that God is there speaking the liturgy of the word and most especially the liturgy of the Eucharist? Do you believe that the Holy Spirit dwells in each one of us?
Why are all the same paintings in the churches? It is boring.
DeleteI am perfectly aware of all you said, but that's not the point.
DeleteYes God can be found in community (not only Neo community, obviously), we can hear Him speak in Liturgy and in God's Word, but it's a bit odd to read this on a Kiko's icon: Word, Community and Liturgy are your "tripod". God is NCW tripod? This is not acceptable, Don't you think God IS way greater than this? Yes those are IMAGES of God, but images are NOT God in Hs essence. Why Kiko writes "God IS..."? God can only be found in NCW?
I know that the Kiko's painting is "the Holy Family" ,but the simbology is nonsense. I have never seen Sain Joseph dressed as Holy Spirit (in green), ora Holy Blessed Virgin Mary in gold and purple, like God Father. This is a bit strange don't you think?
Dear Anonymous at 8:19 am,
DeleteThat would be like saying why are there crucifixes in all the churches. Do you find the crucifix boring?????
Dear Sandavi,
DeleteI would find it more strange if Kiko had said "neo community, neo liturgy, and neo word." The Catholic Church is a community of people. The Catholic Church has a liturgy and the Catholic Church has the word of God. Where in any of those words do you see Kiko saying that God is neo community, neo litury, and neo word???" That is only YOU saying it. Do not put in Kiko's mouth words he never spoke. Kiko painted the Holy family. Jesus, Mary, and Joseph were human beings more than 2000 years ago. Who knows what color of dress they wore?
Sandavi is absolutely right about this. The statement "Dios es comunidad liturgia palabra" Is without doubt referring to the tripod. Anyone in the NCW knows this by sight or sound. The tripod (a NCW term and construct) is identified with God. In others words - to accept the proposition of the NCW tripod is to accept God and to reject is to reject God. This is the purpose of the phrase. There is no other reason to put it there.
DeleteSecondly, you get yourself into trouble, Diana, when you try to defend the indefensible. The article you linked does not "explain how the Trinity is a reflection of a family". But rather that the family is an image or reflection of the Trinity. This is important. Also, as sandavi says, Kiko co-opts the symbology of Rublev's icon while distorting the meaning and origin of that same symbology. Do you honestly think Rublev was unaware of the relationship between the Trinity and the Holy family? Or do you think that idea was hidden until your savior Kiko appeared?
Rublev chooses particular contexts, and particular deep symbolism for his icons - Kiko rides these for his own purposes (ie extolling his creation) while distorting and making a caricature of Christianity.
Dear Anonymous at 10:53 am,
Delete"Tripod" in the NCW is another word for foundation. The foundation of the NCW is the same as the foundation of the Catholic Church, which is the reason why Kiko never said "neo community, neo liturgy, and neo word." There is no such thing. The foundation of the Catholic Church is also the parish community. Without the parish community, the Church ceases to exist because the Church has always been the assembly gathered together. It was never a stone building, but a living building. When Christ said, I will build my Church, He was not speaking of stone buildings, but of an assembly of people.......in other words, a community.
CCC 834 Particular Churches are fully catholic through their communion with one of them, the Church of Rome "which presides in charity." "For with this church, by reason of its pre-eminence, the whole Church, that is the faithful everywhere, must necessarily be in accord." Indeed, "from the incarnate Word's descent to us, all Christian churches everywhere have held and hold the great Church that is here [at Rome] to be their only basis and foundation since, according to the Savior's promise, the gates of hell have never prevailed against her."
Another foundation of the Catholic Church is the liturgy, especially the Eucharist. According to the Catechism of the Catholic Church:
CCC 2181 The Sunday Eucharist is the foundation and confirmation of all Christian practice.......
One of the tripods of the NCW is also the Eucharist.
The Word of God is another foundation of the Catholic Church: Jesus Christ is the Word came down in the flesh. He is the founder of the Church.. The word of God is also sacred scripture, which came down to us through the Church. It was the Church's duty to preserve the word of God.
In the NCW, sacred scripture, the Catechism, and the documents of the Church Fathers are what we study to be closer to Christ. According to the Catechism:
CCC 134 All sacred Scripture is but one book, and this one book is Christ, "because all divine Scripture speaks of Christ, and all divine Scripture is fulfilled in Christ" (Hugh of St. Victor, De arca Noe 2, 8: PL 176, 642: cf. ibid. 2, 9: PL 176, 642-643
According to the Catechism, all sacred scripture is one book and this one book is Christ. So, Kiko was correct when he said that God is the word. God is the community because we are His Body. God is the Liturgy because His Body and Blood is what we eat and drink. God is also the word, the living Word.....Jesus Christ. And God speaks to us even through sacred Scripture. The tripod of the NCW is no different than the foundation of the Catholic Church. You simply did not understand it that way because you tend to separate the NCW from the Catholic Church when it is actually one and part of the Catholic Church. There is no such thing as neo community because there is only one community - the Catholic Community. There is no such thing as neo liturgy because the liturgy of the Catholic Church are one regardless of whether is a Tridintine Mass, an Eastern Catholic Mass, a Novus Ordo Mass, etc. There is no such thing as a neo word because the Catholic Church has only one founder and we all read the same sacred scripture.
"There is no such thing as neo community because there is only one community - the Catholic Community. There is no such thing as neo liturgy because the liturgy of the Catholic Church are one regardless of whether is a Tridintine Mass, an Eastern Catholic Mass, a Novus Ordo Mass, etc. There is no such thing as a neo word because the Catholic Church has only one founder and we all read the same sacred scripture. "
DeleteExcept that this is not true. There is a "neo-community" - you speak about it all the time, and we see it in its diabolical action. There is also a "neo liturgy" because although you claim you are not a group, an organisation or an order, you do things differently to the rest of us in the Roman Rite; and there is such a thing as a "neo-word" - hidden though it is in thirteen volumes of unpublished Gnosticism.
Dear Anonymous at 4:46 pm,
DeleteThe word "neocatechumenate" existed since the first century. You can look it up. Those who were going through baptism in the Early Church were called neocatechumenates. Neocatechumenates is a Catholic term used by the Early Christians; therefore, Kiko did not develop anything new.
Surely you mean "catechumen"? Can you provide a source to your claim that the word "neocatechumenate" was used to designate "Those who were going through baptism in the Early Church"?
DeleteDear Diana,
Deleteyour replies to anonymous are out of context. It seems to me that you are clutching at straws, a little bit.
First, Kiko's paintings can't be treated or considered like crucifix: Crucifix is the holiest symbol of Christianity, Kiko's painting are just.... paintings.
Anyway, I am aware that you have only one type of crucifix, that one on rod designed by Kiko itself, but if you go around in all churches of the world I am pretty sure that you couldn't find two identical crucifixes. Instead, wherever you will go in Neo churches you will find always IDENTICAL Kiko's paintings and crucifixes. Everywhere. Not only paintings, but also altars, presbyteriums, chapels, tabernacles, and so on. Everywhere identical. The paintings in Oulu are identical to that in Scandicci. A bit weird, isn't it? It's not a matter of symbols only , but the way those symbols are crafted: all crafted equals, by Kiko's apprentices. Weird and disturbing cult of personality.
Second: You insist in your personal interpretation of Catechism. Saying that God is present IN word, liturgy and community, isn’t the same to say that God IS word, liturgy and community. God is Himself, God is Father, Son and Holy Spirit. We can say that He makes himself present in word, Liturgy and community. As anonymous said, reading “Dios es communidad, liturgia, palabra” one could think that leaving Neocatechumenal Way is betray God … Maybe Kiko could explain himself better? Why we need to interpret Kiko’s words all the times?
Third: The only Founder, the unique foundation of Catholic Church is Christ, the true Chief of Church, the Head of Mystic Body. Liturgy, word and community are the ways we meet with Him, the places where He, with all His eternal and infinite love, permits us to make a true personal experience of Him and hear Him speak. The “tripod”, as teached in NCW is foundation for NCW practices, not Church in all his extent: is YOUR way of living the faith, not the only, not the best way. God is IN Neocatechumenal Way only insofar the NCW do what Church desires. One can live Liturgy in a normal church, listen to Word of God at Mass (or in a Lectio Divina, everywhere he needs), and live parish fully, being part of the whole Christian community. We all know, like all your catechesis say everywhere, that for you WORD is the liturgy of word made during the week, COMMUNITY is your NC community, with your brothers, and LITURGY is your Liturgy, not else.
Fourth The word "neocatechumenate" never existed before Kiko. There was a catechumenate (and there is still today) for those pagans converted to christianity, to bring them to Baptism. Not else. If you insist continuously of "NEOcatechumenate" one should think that you want to convert christians to kikians.
Taking its inspiration from the catechumenate of the early Catholic Church, by which converts from paganism were prepared for baptism, it provides post-baptismal formation to adults who are already members of the Church
DeleteIn ecclesiology, a catechumen (/ˌkætɨˈkjuːmən, -mɛn/; via Latin catechumenus from Greek κατηχούμενος katēkhoumenos, "one being instructed", from κατά kata, "down" and ἦχος ēkhos, "sound") is one receiving instruction from a catechist in the principles of the Christian religion with a view to baptism. The title and practice is most often used by Orthodox Christians and by Roman Catholics.
Dear Anonymous at 7:16 pm,
DeleteThank you for correcting me. It is catechumen. The word "neo" means new. According to the APPROVED Statutes by the Vatican, the Neocatechumenate is a post-baptismal catechumenate.
Dear Sandavi at 7:33 am,
DeleteFirst of all, Kiko's paintings are now part of the Catholic Church and can be seen in many Catholic Churches today. A crucifix is a crucifix regardless of who constructed it. The paintings of Leonardo da Vinci is also the same everywhere. You are only making a petty argument of icons and statues. A cult has nothing to do with icons and statues otherwise the entire Catholic Church would be guilty of being a cult.
Second, the Catechism of the Catholic Church does say this (Capitalization is mine):
CCC 134 All sacred Scripture is but one book, and this one book IS Christ, "because all divine Scripture speaks of Christ, and all divine Scripture is fulfilled in Christ"
The Catechism clearly explains why this one book (Scripture) is Christ. It is because scripture speaks of Christ and all divine Scripture is fulfilled in Christ. Are you going to tell me that the Catechism is incorrect in saying that "this one book IS Christ?" For the same reason, the phrase, "God is community, liturgy, and word" is also true.
One, God is community. Why? Because the community is His Body. If you separate the head from the body, you have a dead body. The Head and Body of the Church is one. Some Traditional Latin Catholics disagree with Vatican II for having the priest face the congregation. They felt that the Novus Ordo Mass has become people-centered rather than God-centered. They do not understand that God is in the people. Christ has always been one with His people. Any persecution of His community (Church) is also a persecution on Him. In fact, Christ told His Apostles that if they reject them, they reject Him. When St. Paul persecuted Christians, Christ appeared to St. Paul and said, "Saul, Saul, why are you persecuting ME?" Mother Teresa of Calcutta also stated that every time she tends to a poor person, she sees Jesus Christ. Apparently, Kiko (like all the saints) see that God is the community because he saw Him there. Furthermore, we NEVER call ourselves "neo community." We call ourselves "The first community of Barrigada Church", "the second community of Asan Church" or "the third community of Agana". That is how we address ourselves. The only ones who say "neo community" are those who oppose the Way and the Archbishop of Guam.
Two, God is the liturgy. The Liturgy is the word and through the liturgy (especially the Eucharist) one can recognize Christ. The Apostles never recognized that Jesus was with them until they broke bread.
Three. God is the word. God is the Word made flesh. And the Catechism explains why scripture is also Christ.
In the third place, you stated: "The “tripod”, as teached in NCW is foundation for NCW practices, not Church in all his extent: is YOUR way of living the faith, not the only, not the best way."
WHERE in any of my comments did I ever say that the NCW is the ONLY and BEST way to live the faith???????? It was YOU who interpreted Kiko's simple phrase to mean "neo community, neo liturgy, and neo word." YOU were the one who put "neo" in the phrase. Kiko never did that. Where in any of Kiko's words or my words was it said that the NCW is the ONLY and BEST way to live the faith??? YOU were the one who said that. It was never Kiko or me who formed those words.
Lastly, you are correct that it was the word "catechumen" that existed in the Early Christianity. The word "neocatechumenate" is a post-baptismal catechumen because we are already baptized. Furthermore, we are NOT Kikans. That is insulting. We are Catholics. The Pope recognize us as Catholics. It is only YOU who do not recognize us as Catholics, which is why you call us "Kikans." But it does not matter. The fact that the Pope recognize us as Catholics and given us his full support is what matters because he is the Vicar of Christ.
Who's is Chuck white is he a priest ? or a relative of Tim
ReplyDeleteKiko's painting says, "Dios ES Comunidad, Liturgia, Palabra" in Spanish, or "God IS Community, Liturgy, Word"
ReplyDeleteWell, I know that God IS love [I John 4:8], and I know that God IS truth [John 14:6], but I'm trying to find out where the bible says "God is liturgy." Can you help me, Diana?
Dear Anonymous at 12:07 pm,
DeleteThe Holy Spirit is also God. He is the third person in the Holy Trinity, and according to the Catechism of the Catholic Church (capitalization is mine):
CCC 691 ............By joining the two terms, Scripture, LITURGY, and theological language DESIGNATE THE INEXPRESSIBLE PERSON OF THE HOLY SPIRIT,.............
LOL, you are completely misinterpreting the Catechism! CCC 691 says that scripture, liturgy and theological language all "designate", i.e. name, the Third Person of the Holy Trinity by joining the two words, "holy" and "spirit", so that that there is no possibility of equivocation or ambiguity. It is NOT saying that "liturgy" is another name for the Holy Spirit!
DeleteHere, you must quote all of the words of CCC 691:
691 "Holy Spirit" is the proper name of the one whom we adore and glorify with the Father and the Son. The Church has received this name from the Lord and professes it in the Baptism of her new children.16
The term "Spirit" translates the Hebrew word ruah, which, in its primary sense, means breath, air, wind. Jesus indeed uses the sensory image of the wind to suggest to Nicodemus the transcendent newness of him who is personally God's breath, the divine Spirit.17 On the other hand, "Spirit" and "Holy" are divine attributes common to the three divine persons. By joining the two terms, Scripture, liturgy, and theological language designate the inexpressible person of the Holy Spirit, without any possible equivocation with other uses of the terms "spirit" and "holy."
AmosMay 8, 2015 at 5:31 PM
DeleteLOL, you are completely misinterpreting the Catechism!
I believe that the HOLY SPIRIT or the presence of the HOLY SPIRIT can only be felt or experienced first hand.
Bibles and dictionaries are useless in heaven. Good luck
Dear Anonymous at 5:31 pm,
DeleteActually, the Catechism specifies that the Holy Spirit is present in the scriptures and liturgy. According to the Catechism:
CCC 134 All sacred Scripture is but one book, and this one book is Christ, "because all divine Scripture speaks of Christ, and all divine Scripture is fulfilled in Christ" (Hugh of St. Victor, De arca Noe 2, 8: PL 176, 642: cf. ibid. 2, 9: PL 176, 642-643).
If this one book is Christ due to the fact that all scripture speaks of Christ and is fulfilled in Christ, how much more the liturgy.....especially the Eucharist where Christ's Body and Blood is actually there? In every liturgical sacrament, it is Christ who absolves the sinner during the Sacrament of Reconciliation, it is Christ who speaks in the liturgy, and it is Christ whose body and blood we eat and drink. It is through the liturgy, especially the breaking of bread that we recognize Christ.
Please explain: all these people who have a problem with the icon of the Madonna that says God is word liturgy communion are saying that God is NOT in the word of God, that he is NOT communion and that he is NOT in the liturgy?
Delete@ Anonymous May 7, 2015 at 10:08 AM said: "... but in reality his knowledge of apologetics and theology is less than zero. At least, when it comes to his pseudo-criticism of the theology underlining Kiko’s catechesis".
ReplyDeleteDear Anonymous, Can you prove you to be able to discuss about theology underlying the Kiko's iconographic catechesis? I need an explanation of this:
http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-JLkQ84ryA-M/UEpNxyQJndI/AAAAAAAAAeI/Rz07NFzSdHw/s400/cuadroprimera.jpg Can you help me? :-)
http://www.romagiornale.it/incontro-internazionale-di-rabbini-organizzato-dal-cammino-neocatecumenale/
ReplyDeletehttp://www.news.va/en/news/pope-to-interfaith-gathering-god-hears-cry-of-inno
ReplyDeletehttp://www.news.va/en/news/cardinal-pell-christians-jews-together-to-bear-wit
Dear Anonymous at 3:50 am,
DeleteThank you for this news. I will put them as an entry post.
“Alas, how many have been persecuted for the wrong of having been right?”
ReplyDeleteI suggest that you contact the iconographer Chady him self if you need more explanation about his icons . Here is his website www.HolyBrush.com
ReplyDeleteArt can be interpreted in many different ways just like words. The 3 rays can be interpreted as God in three persons and the single ray can be interpreted as there being only one God. Both interpretations are right on spot. What's wrong is making unfounded accusations.
ReplyDelete