The following quotes were taken from a paper written by Krzysztof Broszkowski entitled The Unity of the Parish and the Celebration of the Eucharist in Small Parish Communities in the Light of Recent Documents of the Magisterium of the Church. It is a 20 page document, which can be found here. Below are excerpts from his article, which I enumerated due to the fact that there are some people who believe that we are celebrating the Eucharist separately from the main parish. His article shows that the Neocatechumenal Way is not celebrating separately from the parish as a parallel church but whose celebration is one with the parish. You can read the entire paper in the weblink, but the bold is mine.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1. Eucharistic celebrations by small communities in a parish, often held outside the main church building, raise concerns, whether the unity of the parish is not disturbed. The reasons for those concerns are more of theological than pastoral nature and mostly relate to the communities of the Neocatechumenal Way. In order to find out if the concerns are justified in the light of the theological criteria, we will analyze selected Church documents of the 20th and the 21st century.
2. The document Communionis notio stresses that, since unity is a gift of God bestowed on people in sacraments, every Eucharist, even if it takes place in a small community, is a Eucharist of the catholic Church: Paragraph 10 “Moreover, one’s belonging to a particular Church never conflicts with the reality that in the Church no-one is a stranger: each member of the faithful, especially in the celebration of the Eucharist, is in his or her Church, in the Church of Christ, regardless of whether or not he or she belongs, according to canon law, to the diocese, parish or other particular community where the celebration takes place.7 In this sense, without impinging on the necessary regulations regarding juridical dependence, whoever belongs to one particular Church belongs to all the Churches; since belonging to the Communion, like belonging to the Church, is never simply particular, but by its very nature is always universal.”8
3. In the light of these words no Eucharist taking place in a small parish community is separated from other parishioners, since it is the celebration of the Paschal Mystery, the source of the communion. The Encyclical Letter Ecclesia de Eucharistia, written by John Paul II 10 years later, specifies in more detail how the paschal unity of the parish should be understood.
4. Other detailed instructions of the Congregation point to the growing acceptance towards celebrations in smaller groupings. This fact proves that, in theological sense, these celebrations are not contradictory to church unity, but serve as important pastoral tools.
5. In the Paragraph 52 of the Ecclesia de Eucharistia the Pope indicates that the communion, the unity of the whole community with the universal Church is guaranteed by the priest celebrating the Eucharist. Presiding at the Eucharist, the priest is responsible for doing it in persona Christi and must “provide a witness to and a service of communion not only for the community directly taking part in the celebration, but also for the universal Church, which is a part of every Eucharist.” John Paul II reminds about this truth in order to warn against making the celebration of the Eucharist a private event, and especially against introducing unauthorised changes. However, the rule itself can also serve as proof that through the celebration of the Eucharist separately, the community does not become a parallel church.
6. The charism of Neocatechumenate in the context of parish life was highly spoken about by a Spanish Cardinal, who is the current Prefect of the Congregation for Divine Worship and the Discipline of the Sacraments, Antonio Cañizares Llovera. The cardinal wrote about it in a short article for the Spanish weekly “La Razón:” “The Word of God, the Eucharist, baptism, received or to be received, and the Christian community, are the core of the itinerary of the growth of faith, which is accompanied by not strictly liturgical celebrations on its every stage. The Sunday Eucharist, usually anticipated on a Saturday night in neocatechumenal communities, is «the soul and strength» of the whole Way. The celebration of the Eucharist, performed within the proper itinerary of these communities, celebrated with the highest dignity, with the sense of «mystery and sacrum», in the spirit of the Church and liturgy. The Word of God and the Eucharist indicate God’s priority and form the basis that gives life, strength, capacity and enthusiasm to communities to enable them to give testimony of their faith.”14
7. According to Cañizares the relation between the liturgy and catechesis in the Neocatechumenal Way may serves as a model.15
In his encyclical letter Ecclesia de Eucharistia, St. John Paul II stated:
I remember the parish church of Niegowić, where I had my first pastoral assignment, the collegiate church of Saint Florian in Krakow, Wawel Cathedral, Saint Peter's Basilica and so many basilicas and churches in Rome and throughout the world. I have been able to celebrate Holy Mass in chapels built along mountain paths, on lakeshores and seacoasts; I have celebrated it on altars built in stadiums and in city squares... This varied scenario of celebrations of the Eucharist has given me a powerful experience of its universal and, so to speak, cosmic character. Yes, cosmic! Because even when it is celebrated on the humble altar of a country church, the Eucharist is always in some way celebrated on the altar of the world. It unites heaven and earth.
Ecclesia de Eucharistia
Dear Diana,
ReplyDeleteEspecially note the capped words in the following:
Redemptionis Sacramentum:
114 "At Sunday Masses in parishes, insofar as parishes are 'Eucharistic communities', it is customary to find different groups, movements, associations, and even the smaller religious communities present in the parish." While it is permissible that Mass should be celebrated for particular groups according to the norm of law, these groups are nevertheless NOT EXCEMPT from the faithful observance of the liturgical norms.
108 "The celebration of the Eucharist is to be carried out in a sacred place, unless in a particular case NECESSITY requires otherwise.
Catechism of the Catholic Church 1383:
The altar, around which the Church is gathered in the celebration of the Eucharist, represents the two aspects of the same mystery: The altar of the SACRIFICE and the table of the Lord. This is all the more so since the Christian altar is the symbol of Christ himself...........
-----------
While the Mass, out of necessity, may be said outside of the church without the consecrated altar, one must ask? Is this out of necessity?
While Pope John II celebrated Mass on mountains, etc, this is true, never once did he deny the Sacrificial nature of the Mass. And, if there was a church on the mountain, etc., he would have used the altar inside.
With the NCW, the reason why a "table" is still used rather than the consecrated altar is because the founder never believed Mass was a "sacrifice." Because an "altar" denotes sacrifice, the founder of the NCW avoided it and issued instructions to use a table for the "banquet."
Mercifully the Pope has corrected the NCW in regard to the Mass being a sacrifice. Because, of this correction, do you not think it would be appropriate to shed the remnant of that error, by reinstating the altar in all NCW Masses? In my church they did. (Previously, they used a table, and ignored the altar which was about 50 feet away.)
In my church, many NCW members know there's still errors in their Mass, but they're waiting for instructions from Kiko to change. HUH?
Dear Anonymous at 4:41 pm,
DeletePlease re-read my entry post again. And know the difference between the Law and the Spirit of the Law. And for your information, the Early Christians used a table for their Eucharistic celebration. Does this mean that they did not believe the Mass being a sacrifice???
As the Church better understands the Eucharist, the Church makes legitimate changes to the Mass. Note: removal of the altar rail, removal of statues, removal of Latin....were not legitimate changes. - In the same vein, removal by the NCW of the prayers denoting sacrifice such as the Lamb of God, removal of Eucharistic Adoration, etc. were not legitimate changes - they were alterations that came about from a grave misunderstanding of the Eucharist not being a sacrifice but just a banquet.
ReplyDeleteJust as the Holy Spirit moved the early Church (yes, THEY BELIEVED the Mass was a sacrifice) from the breaking of bread gathered around a table to that of the consecrated Altar, would not the NCW want to change to the Altar too?
Excerpt from "the Mass of the Early Christians" Mike Aquilina
"Finally, for Irenaeus, the Mass is the earthly participation in the liturgy of heaven, which is unveiled in the Book of Revelation. The altar of the Church, and the altar of heaven are one (ibid.4.18.6: cf.Rev 8:3-4: 11:1; 14:18).
For Irenaeus, the Christian "way of thinking is attuned to the Eucharist, and the Eucharist confirms our way of thinking" (Against Heresies 4.18.5). The later Fathers would recognize that principle at work and rephrase it as "lex orandi, lex credendi" - the law of prayer is the law of belief."
Dear Anonymous at 11:02 pm,
DeleteWho says that these changes were not legitimate??? The removal of the altar rail was legitimate. The use of the vernacular in place of the Latin language was also legitimate. Surely, you did not think that God the Father only understands Latin. And the statutes were not removed.
Yes, the Early Christians believed the Mass was a sacrifice, but they ALSO believed it was a communal meal with the family of God. The altar is a table of the Mass being a sacrifice and a meal.
Hey tim what are you doing here in Diana's blog
DeleteAltar rail symbolized the royalty of God need for man kneel in humility in presence of God. God wants te altar rains to teach respect humility. Because altar rails removed it allowed disrespect in NCW to grow. By placing rails between altar and people it brings a sense of sacred. NCW should build rails around their altar protect Sacredness of God. Rails also keep out undesirables getting near the altar. NCW should have one place. For mass and build altar rails. Problem with NCW they say mass in hotels any common place so hard to build fixtures.
ReplyDeleteDear Anonymous at 9:34 am,
DeleteRespect is not found in the altar rails. It is found in people's hearts. People can kneel and still daydream of going to the beach after the Mass. To believe that altar rails bring respect is superstitious nonsense. The reason for the altar rails is to set off the sanctuary from the rest of the church and to facilitate the administration of Communion, which generally was received kneeling, while the priest moved from one communicant to the next.
Since after the reform, Communion is frequently received standing and in processional form, the people approaching the priest while he remains in one spot. Hence, the Communion rail has often lost one of its principal functions. Likewise, where Communion is often distributed under both species and by more than one minister the rail can sometimes be an obstacle.
If you feel that it was wrong of Pope Francis to celebrate Mass in a football stadium as he did, then write to him and let him know that. The Catholic Church teaches that the altar can be movable.
ReplyDeleteDiana. Altar can be movable and erected in a stadium to accomadate large numbers which cathedrals often cannot. These are special circumstances. It is not a special circumstance for NCW to move the altar every weekend to different locations for small numbers.
You are allowed to have a chapel In your residence without rails. But a main church should have altar rails and the Blessed Sacrament reserved in the tabernacle at the center of the sanctuary. This shows the Godliness of the sanctuary - holy space of the sanctuary - entrance to heaven. When you pass the rails you enter into God's space vision of eternity.
Dear Anonymous at 11:31 am,
DeleteYou stated: "Altar can be movable and erected in a stadium to accomadate large numbers which cathedrals often cannot. These are special circumstances. It is not a special circumstance for NCW to move the altar every weekend to different locations for small numbers."
This is simply YOUR rule. And why are you imposing YOUR rule upon the NCW? According to the Catholic Encyclopedia:
"In the New Law the altar is the table on which the Eucharistic Sacrifice is offered. Mass may sometimes be celebrated outside a sacred place, but never without an altar, or at least an altar-stone."
http://oce.catholic.com/index.php?title=Altar_(in_Liturgy)
You stated: "You are allowed to have a chapel In your residence without rails. But a main church should have altar rails and the Blessed Sacrament reserved in the tabernacle at the center of the sanctuary. This shows the Godliness of the sanctuary - holy space of the sanctuary - entrance to heaven. When you pass the rails you enter into God's space vision of eternity."
If you feel that Vatican II was wrong in removing the rails, then please write a letter of complaint to them and let them know that they were wrong. Do not take it up with me because I am not the Vatican.
Dear Diana,perhaps you can find a reference in the Vatican II documents to the removal of the altar rails. I can't. When you do, please post it for all to see. Thanks.
DeleteDear Anonymous at 9:03 pm,
DeleteThe fact that there is no document saying anything about the removal of altar rails is evidence that when the Church removes them, they are not in violation of it. You cannot be in violation of removing the rails when there is no such law. In other words, if there is no law on speeding, then a person is not in violation if they decide to go 60 miles an hour or 20 miles an hour or whatever speed they desire.
Dear Diana at 1.37pm. SO, now you admit that there is no reference in the Vatican II documents to removing altar rails?
DeletePlease explain this comment then"
"If you feel that Vatican II was wrong in removing the rails" etc
Dear Anonymous at 2:53 pm,
DeleteHow can it be wrong to remove the altar rails when there is no law saying that it is wrong or illegal to remove them in the first place????? If there is no law saying anything about removing the altar rails; therefore, it is NOT wrong to remove them. So, if you feel that the Vatican is wrong in removing them, then write your letter of complaint and tell them that they were wrong. All they are going to ask you is to explain to them why YOU feel it is wrong to remove them.
So, first you say that "Vatican II" removed the rails, and now you back-peddle on that to say that the "Vatican" removes or removed them?
DeleteCan we now assume that you have discovered that Vatican II did not authorise, encourage or act to remove the rails?
As to your suggestion that the "Vatican" removed or removes the altar rails, perhaps you can find some morsel of evidence to support such a claim? I think you will find it was individual bishops and pastors, not any decision of the "Vatican", but you can show me otherwise if you have evidence.
Dear Anonymous at 11:24 am,
DeleteGo back and re-read the thread. It was not me who complained about the removal of the altar rails. I have been saying all along that the rails were removed, and there was nothing illegal about removing them. Remember, I was not the one complaining about the removal of the rails.
No, you said Vatican II removed the rails. Then you said the Vatican removed the rails. These statements are either dishonest or ignorant.
DeleteDear Anonymous at 4:52 pm,
DeleteAnd how do you see the two statements as contradictory. It was the Second Vatican Council II that made the changes. One of them was removing the rails. So when the changes were made through the Council, what is wrong with saying that the Vatican removed the rails?
Dear Diana,
ReplyDeleteRe your comments and further to my entry AnonymousAugust 15, 2015 at 11:02 PM
I will post excerpts from: "Some Highlights of the Liturgical Renewal Initiated by Sacrosanctum Concilium by Francis Cardinal Arinze Prefect, Congregation for Divine Worship and the Discipline of the Sacraments 2003.
(Because of the length - I have to divide into two separate postings.)
PART ONE
"Through the rich doctrine and wise directives offered by this Constitution, the road to liturgical renewal was marked out for the Church "in accordance with the conciliar principles of fidelity to tradition and openness to LEGITIMATE DEVELOPMENT."
"Vatican II did not abolish Latin. It would be good that occasionally a parish sings the more popular parts of the Mass in Latin: think of what this means in terms of preserving and respecting our patrimony, showing the Church as a community that has a memory, and facilitating international Eucharistic celebrations."
"Provided that the substantial unity of the Roman rite is respected, the liturgical books allow for LEGITIMATE adaptations to different regions and people. It is always National Bishops' Conference or its equivalent which gets the matter studied, voted on and PASSED ON TO ROME FOR THE REQUIRED RECOGNITIO. (cf SC,38; General Instruction of the Roman Missal (GIRM) nos. 386-394."
"It is therefore reasonable and indeed obvious that there must be liturgical regulations and norms. With reference to the Holy Eucharist, for example, Pope John Paul II says that "these NORMS are a concrete expression of the AUTHENTICALLY ecclesial nature of the Eucharist; this is their deepest meaning. Liturgy is never anyone's private property, be it of the celebrant or of the community." "
"They imagine that according to Vatican II the progressive, modern and enlightened thing to do in liturgical celebrations is to be creative, to be original, to introduce something new, to do it yourself. Pope John Paul writes that "it must be lamented that, especially in the years following the post-conciliar liturgical reform, as a result of a misguided sense of creativity and adaptation, there have been a number of abuses which have been a source of suffering for many."
PART II
ReplyDelete"Some people think that liturgical renewal means the removal of kneelers from Church pews, the knocking down of altar rails or the positioning of the altar in the middle of the sitting area of the people. THE CHURCH HAS NEVER SAID ANY SUCH THING. Nor does liturgical restoration mean iconoclasm or the removal of all statues and sacred images......"
"Often mistakes are not due to bad will but due to lack of knowledge. It is then that political models of power sharing and power struggle begin to smuggle themselves into the sanctuary."
"It must not be presumed that most priests, consecrated people or lay faithful are well informed on the reformed books of the liturgy these thirty years. Ongoing formation continues to be necessary."
"What is above all needed is "an ever deeper grasp of the liturgy of the Church, celebrated according to the current books and lived above all as a reality in the spiritual order (VQA, no. 14).
"It is normal for Bishops to form Diocesan or National Liturgical Commissions for the carriyng out of the liturgical apostolate. Members of such bodies should strive to absorb the genuine Catholic faith and spirit and to avoid pushing private or personal agendas through the Commissions. It is obvious that appropriate relations with the diocesan office, the Bishop's Conference or the Congregation for Divine Worship and the Discipline of the Sacraments should be fostered. Liturgical Commissions should guard against making too many regulations for the people or ignoring directives from higher authorities. When adaptations and inculturated changes by the Church in a country gets so many that the Roman rite is somewhat obscured, the fault may lie not just on the Bishops, but also on their Liturgical Commissions and other liturgical experts who advise the Bishops."
Whatever can be done to help the parish priest to rise to the height of his calling is to be encouraged.
Dear Diana,
ReplyDeleteRe your comment:
"Yes, the Early Christians believed the Mass was a sacrifice, but they ALSO believed it was a communal meal with the family of God. The altar is a table of the Mass being a sacrifice and a meal."
Dear Diana,
The big difference between the early Church and the early days of the NCW (before the Pope mercifully corrected) was the NCW believed the Mass to be JUST a convivial meal. Again, that is why everything that spoke of or denoted "sacrifice" in the Mass was eliminated in the NCW Mass. (the name "Sacrifice of the Mass," the word "Priest" who offers sacrifice, the consecrated Altar where sacrifice is celebrated, the prayers denoting sacrifice, ....)
Diana, please check this "history" of Kiko's Mass, and see that this is so. And, because the Mass belongs to Christ:
According to Redemptionis Sacramentum 183 - In an altogether particular manner, let everyone do all that is in their power to ensure that the Most Holy Sacrament of the Eucharist will be protected from any and every irreverence or DISTORTION and that all ABUSES be thoroughly corrected. This is a most serious DUTY incumbent upon EACH and EVERY ONE, and all are BOUND to carry it out without any favouritism.
(I have Capped certain words above, not because I'm shouting at you to listen, but with the intent to emphasize how important the message is. For those that do nothing, perpetuate the liturgical abuses..)
Yes, letters to Rome are appropriate, and they have been sent. But, because the NCW has failed to abide by the corrections such as those issued to them by Cardinal Arinze in 2005 on behalf of Pope Benedict XVI, and again by Pope Benedict XVI in 2006 to adhere to Arinze's letter, plus Pope Benedict's refusal to grant them the approval in January 2012, it is no wonder that Pope Francis has given directions to us in the "7th" to correct, charitably, the NCW with Statutes in hand. Pope Francis himself wants us to help in this regard.
Dear Anonymous at 6:48 am,
DeleteAs I pointed out many times....an investigation was conducted to determine whether the Way was following the liturgy or not. Nothing ever came out of that investigation and it was dismissed by Pope Francis. Last year, when Pope Francis met with the NCW, he gave three recommendations to the Way, and none of those recommendations had anything to do with the liturgy.
Dear Tim Rohr,
ReplyDeleteGo back to the jungle.
Tim Rohr in August 18, 2015 at 4:10 PM says:
Delete"At least the colonizers of old had to steal the land from the Chamorros."
According to Rohr, it is because the "new colonizers", as he frames the Neocatechumenal Way, get the land without stealing, because they GET IT FREE.
Who is this guy thinking he can deceive us with this colonizer nonsense?! Who is the mother and father of this guy that he feels free to talk for the Chamorro people? Who this guy thinks himself to be to condemn my Chamorro sisters and brothers who are flocking and walking to the Way??
I don't know who this Tim Rohr guy is, but he surely will speak as he wishes unless somebody tells him to stop. Catholics do not speak as he speaks.
DeleteI don't know who are his mother and father, but he is not a person who had ever apologized to anyone for anything. Catholics do apologize when they hurt somebody with or without reason.
I don't know whom he thinks himself to be, probably the king of jungle, so he should get a crown over his head and be sent back to the jungle to jump from one tree to the other, from one branch to the other. This is his game! Catholics do not play this kind of game.
What I know for sure is that he has no business to tell the Chamorro people what to do and what not to do. He has no business to tell Catholics either what do to and what not to do.
Diana, the reason is not for unity that is already given. As the article explains, the unity is in the Sacrament of Eucharist. As long as the Holy Sacrament is celebrated, there is Catholic unity of heart and soul. The reason is rather the beauty of the church! It is spacious, lifting your spirit. It is decorated with beautiful painting and art. You see the statues of saints, laden in gold, silver and bright colors. The awe takes your heart when you look at the Blessed Sacrament shining on you. The music is filling the open space with angelic presence. Is this beauty not sufficient reason, dear Diana?
ReplyDeleteDear grow up in faith,
DeletePlease re-read my entry post again. It stated: "In the Paragraph 52 of the Ecclesia de Eucharistia the Pope indicates that the communion, the unity of the whole community with the universal Church is guaranteed by the priest celebrating the Eucharist.:" It never had anything to do with the PLACE of the celebration.
Yes, I was saying the same thing, did you notice? So why is then, dear Diana, that you give up all this beauty of the church?
DeleteDear grow up in faith?
DeleteWhich church are you referring to? The stone building or the people?
Dear Diana, I was referring to the beauty of the church! It is spacious, lifting your spirit, decorated with beautiful paintings, art, statues of saints, laden in gold, silver and bright colors... What else would you need to feel Jesus close to you? The awe takes your heart and soul when you look at the Blessed Sacrament. It is shining on you! The music fills the chambers with angelic presence. Is this not beautiful, dear Diana?
DeleteDear grow up in faith,
DeleteYes, the church buildings and everything inside is beautiful.....but so is everything that God created in the universe. I find the falling stars, the sunset, the sunrise, and everything else in God's creation even more awe-inspiring. And this is why Pope John Paul II stated (in my entry above):
"I have been able to celebrate Holy Mass in chapels built along mountain paths, on lakeshores and seacoasts; I have celebrated it on altars built in stadiums and in city squares... This varied scenario of celebrations of the Eucharist has given me a powerful experience of its universal and, so to speak, cosmic character."
Re Anon 12:05
ReplyDeleteI am not Rohr. But, I sypathize with him for there appears to be many injustices happening in Guam; however, I would hope the dialogue between these two sites was more respectful and that problems would be resolved with human dignity intact.
Re Diana 1:30
The NCW entered my church a few years ago. Although the Eucharist unites us as One Body of Christ, the NCW Mass has neither Recognitio, Indult, or Proof in their Statutes of 2008 permitting the many additions and deletions not found in the approved Liturgical Books.
Dear Anonymous at 2:37 pm,
DeleteIf you feel that the NCW is in violation, then write your letter of complaint to the Pope and tell him to correct the NCW. We will then wait for the Pope. In the meantime, go about your business and allow us to go about ours. No one is forcing you to join the Way anyway.
Stop lying Timmy we know it's you Timmy because look @ what you say in the jungle and now your getting defensive because you been caught here in dianas blog so stop lying and come clean Timmy
DeleteRE:DianaAugust 17, 2015 at 1:33 PM
ReplyDeleteYou stated:
"Last year, when Pope Francis met with the NCW, he gave three recommendations to the Way, and none of those recommendations had anything to do with the liturgy.
On the contrary, the three recommendations MUST INCLUDE the Liturgy.
From that speech, Pope Francis mentions "all the details that your itinerary demands."
Seeing that the Eucharist is a big part of your itinerary, then it cannot be dismissed.
In the second recommendation, the Pope says "The Lord always precedes us! ... Even in the most faraway places, even in the most diverse CULTURES, God scatters everywhere the seeds of his Word. From here, flows the necessity to give special attention to the CULTURAL context in which you, families, will go to work: it consists of an environment often very different from the one from which you come. Many of you will have to work hard to learn the local language, sometimes it will be difficult, and this effort is appreciated. Even more important will be your commitment to “learn” the CULTURE you will encounter, knowing how to recognize the need of the Gospel, which is present wherever, but also THAT ACTION THAT THE HOLY SPIRIT HAS ACCOMPLISHED IN THE LIFE AND IN THE HISTORY OF EVERY PEOPLE."
Please refer to the article "Some Highlights of the Liturgical Renewal Initiated by Sacrosanctum Concilium" 2003, under 4.Translation. Adaptation. Inculturation, wherein THE LITURGY IS LINKED WITH CULTURE. So, when Pope Francis spoke of Culture, he, no doubt, was linking it to Liturgy also.
The Article states "The carrying out of these directives will engage the Church for generations, especially in the countries of recent evangelization. To assist in this task the Holy See has issued extensive guidelines which explain the Council's intention and lay down detailed steps to be followed (cfVL).Provided that the substantial unity of the Roman rite is respected, the liturgical books allow for legitimate adaptations to different regions and people. It is always the National Bishops' Conference or its equivalent which gets the matter studies, voted on AND PASSED ON TO ROME FOR THE REQUIRED RECOGNITIO.
When deeper inculturation is considered necessary, then many more demands are made: interdisciplinary study by theologians, and by experts in liturgy........AND RATIFICATION BY THE ROMAN SEE.
It is clear that whether in adaptation or inculturation, great care is needed to respect the mysteries of Christ which are celebrated in the liturgy. Writing on the Holy Eucharist, Pope John Paul II says that "the treasure is too important and precious to risk impoverishment or compromise through forms of experimentation or practices introduced without a careful review on the part of the competent ecclesiastical authorities (and) because the sacred liturgy expresses and celebrates the faith professed by all, and being the heritage of the whole Church, CANNOT BE DETERMINED BY LOCAL CHURCHES IN ISOLATION FROM THE UNIVERSAL CHURCH.
It is therefore reasonable and indeed obvious that there must be liturgical regulations and norms. With reference to the Holy Eucharist, for example, Pope John Paul II says that "these norms are a concrete expression of the AUTHENTICALLY ECCLESIAL NATURE of the Eucharist; this is their deepest meaning. Liturgy is never anyone's private property, be it of the celebrant or of the community......................."
In the third recommendation, Pope Francis says "The freedom of each person must not be forced, and even the eventual choice of someone who decides to seek, outside of the Way, other forms of Christian life that help him to grow in the response to the call of the Lord must be respected."
This would also mean that any members that leave the NCW for various reasons, INCLUDING the way they celebrate the Eucharist, are not to be ostracized or threatened with "being lost unless they come back into the community."
Dear Anonymous at 3:44 pm,
DeleteYou stated: "On the contrary, the three recommendations MUST INCLUDE the Liturgy."
MUST INCLUDE???? Says who?? YOU?? Are you the Pope? As I said, nothing in those three recommendations mentions the liturgy.
Dear Diana,
ReplyDeleteRe yours of 3:44
True,I am not the Pope, and this is how I interpret what Pope Francis has said in the context of many previous speeches and documents of the past Popes. You are not understanding one key point - one should not dismiss the fact that Culture and Liturgy are linked (refer to my previous post again). According to the document, one CANNOT EXCLUDE Culture from Liturgy; therefore, the statement "the three recommendations MUST INCLUDE the Liturgy" is valid.
So, without the REQUIRED recognitio (written permission) for the additions and deletions in Kiko's Mass from Pope Francis, the NCW has NO permission. Recognitio protects and guards what is most precious to our Catholic Faith - would the NCW not wish to have this to prove to its members the alterations are legitimate? Of course they would! That is why members were excited when told they would be receiving the "approval" when the NCW went to Rome in 2012. They NEVER got it. (refer to article "the Mass that the Pope doesn't like"). JUST BECAUSE the NCW founders say they have this permission and/or because the Pope may be happy with other aspects of the Way, permission still doesn't exist. Recognitio. Recognitio. Recognitio.
Dear Diana,
ReplyDeletere No. 5 of your posting.
------------------
5. In the Paragraph 52 of the Ecclesia de Eucharistia the Pope indicates that the communion, the unity of the whole community with the universal Church is guaranteed by the priest celebrating the Eucharist. Presiding at the Eucharist, the priest is responsible for doing it in persona Christi and must “provide a witness to and a service of communion not only for the community directly taking part in the celebration, but also for the universal Church, which is a part of every Eucharist.” JOHN PAUL II REMINDS ABOUT THIS TRUTH IN ORDER TO WARN AGAINST MAKING THE CELEBRATION OF THE EUCHARIST A PRIVATE EVENT, AND ESPECIALLY AGAINST INTRODUCING UNAUTHORIZED CHANGES. However, the rule itself can also serve as proof that through the celebration of the Eucharist separately, the community does not become a parallel church.
Because of what Pope John Paul II said, l am wondering where the NCW received authorization for their changes to the Mass. No recognitio, no indult, and no mention in the approved Statutes of 2008 - therefore "no authorization."
Did Saint John Paul II envision the difficulty in having the NCW Mass corrected? Knowing that the members had personally given up much because of their tremendous love for the Lord, I think he would have felt confident that obedience to what the Church deems permissible in the Mass would come easy. (I say this because to be faithful to Humanae Vitae is more difficult. I say this because to give up all and go on mission is more difficult. I say this because to confess your sins publicly, knowing that any person can use the information against you, is more difficult...)
In regards to the celebration of the NCW not to be a private event - In my church the Mass is not even advertised in the Church Bulletin with the listing of other Masses. No one who wishes to receive the Eucharist on the tongue (according to the norms - according to the approved Liturgical Books of the Roman Rite/GIRM) is welcome including our seminarian who is a deacon. This goes against unity - this is divisive. This contradicts #5 - the unity of the whole community with the universal Church is GUARANTEED by the priest celebrating the Eucharist.
May the Holy Spirit shower us all with wisdom and knowledge, and the strength to do what is right. I also pray my concerns voiced on these entries will always to taken as done with true charity for my brothers and sisters in Christ in the NCW.
Dear Anonymous at 1:14 am,
DeleteWho said the NCW was a private Mass? There are many Sunday Mass services in all the church. You can attend the one in the 6:00 am Mass, the 9:00 am. Mass or the 10:00 am Mass. You can even attend the 5:30 pm Saturday Mass (which is counted as Sunday Mass). Do not complain about the 7:30 pm NCW Mass, which you would not care to attend anyway.
Hey Diana guess what Tim is now poking at he is poking at the renovation at the cathedral now how low that this man could go he hasn't seen the cathedral before the renovations it was leaking and their was cracks
ReplyDeleteDear Anonymous at 7:30 am,
DeleteTim Rohr is actually frustrated and angry seeing the renovations at the Cathedral.
It is truly fascinating how Tim Rohr's people gang up on folks whom they hate, especially if they know her or his name. Tim is like a conductor of an orchestra and his trolls are playing the music he is dictating for them. It is too straightforward that people with opposing opinion choose to remain anonymous! Who needs these jackals to gang up on me trying to intimidate me out of my sense, my faith and consciousness?
ReplyDeleteIt is frightening to see how desperately they want to destroy one's livelihood and the ability to support one's family. What if they succeed? What if they know me and succeed in destroying me and my family? It is a scary prospect that would not worth the price! I have to admit, the jungle has the upper hand, the man power and very shrewd intimidators who go after and systematically beat people with real names into submission and fear. Who pays them to keep people in fear and trembling?
Dear Anonymous at 8:04 am,
DeleteThis is why many of us remain anonymous. We have jobs and families. We are being persecuted, and the persecution is worse once they know your identity and where you work.
I agree with gi hagat August 18, 2015 at 12:31 PM who wrote this at Junglewatch to Tim Rohr:
Delete"PEOPLE... Zoltan wrote: ZOLTAN: "Mr. Taitano's simplistic opinion piece..." and Tim Rohr wrote: "ME: There he goes again. Chamorros are "gullible," "simplistic," easily "incited." According to Zoltan, Chamorros are unable to think for themselves, discern for themselves, find the truth for themselves:
As I read this, Rohr insulted me (not speaking for the whole Chamorro) by referring to "Chamorros". Don't you see how he (Rohr) can twists words around to make us look stupid?. Come on people read carefully and see how Rohr tries to manipulate our minds. I don't defend that guy Zoltan, I am defending myself - from Rohr's remarks."
Bravo dear gi hagat, you exactly hit the nail on the head! I checked what Mr. Zoltan exactly wrote to Tim Rohr in the PDN comment section. Here:
"After the meeting I made a personal appeal to you, based on our previous friendship, that you cut back flaming words and inflammatory language in you rhetoric. You flat out rejected my appeal, thus aligning yourself with the most radical voices of your blog that you own, maintain and polish every day in order to feed, nourish and incite the gullible with gossip, hearsay and superstition for your own entertainment."
http://www.guampdn.com/story/opinion/2015/08/14/push-back--radical-voices--both-concerned-catholics--way/31686503/
As I understand. Mr. Zoltan made a friendly gesture to Tim who rejected him in a very unfriendly manner. Mr. Zoltan is calling the readers of Junglewatch gullible and easily manipulated and not the Chamorros! It is Tim Rohr who is talking about Chamorros this way when he says: "CHAMORROS ARE UNABLE TO THINK FOR THEMSELVES, DISCERN FOR THEMSELVES, FIND THE TRUTH FOR THEMSELVES". These are NOT the words of Mr. Zoltan, based on his comment quoted above. I made a search and could not find any words like these from Mr. Zoltan! It is coming straight from a frustrated Tim Rohr, who is uttering these unjustifiable charges against Chamorros by his own words!
By the way, this is the trouble with Junglewatch and the reason I stopped writing there. There is no speculation or opinion there anymore, only pure and clear slander coming from frustration that is unleashed against unsuspecting victims, in this case against Mr. Zoltan. It is a classic example from the book for radicals that we had discussed in another topic: use vituperation freely as long as it causes measurable damage to anyone! The price you pay, in this case the scourging up of nationalistic fury and violence against those who are considered of different national origin, does not matter. Actually, this is exactly that makes the whole thing even better for Tim Rohr: he revels in nationalistic fury and violent language as long as it brings his much desired rebellion, revolt and revolution closer.
Be it far from me to defend Mr. Zoltan. I had called NCW members repeatedly for gestures of mutual peace and good will. He had never answered me. He seems to be one of those NCW members who think that true Catholic faith exists solely in NCW. I do not like this attitude, but it should not be a reason that I try to manipulate the Chamorro people to commit violence against Mr. Zoltan, who was invited to Guam to live and teach here, as I understand. There are limitations of what a Catholic faithful can and cannot do to a fellow Catholic faithful in good conscience.
"There is no speculation or opinion there anymore, only pure and clear slander coming from frustration that is unleashed against unsuspecting victims."
DeleteThis is true word from you, dear grow up in faith, that I am glad to read. You see we are not so far away from each other, after all. Timmy is using the very same mechanism over and over again, it does not matter if he is after the Archbishop, after Diana, after Fr. Pius, after Fr. Adrian, after Fr. Edivaldo, after Fr. Harold, after Mr. Zoltan or after anybody else.
Lies, intimidation and verbal abuse. This is him, Tim Rohr standing in front of us. Then comes the attempts of humiliation, extortion and blackmailing. A true criminal mind is he saying in his blog August 17, 2015 at 9:39 AM:
"Quit the neo crap and be a true Catholic Zoltan and all these problems will go away. Then you can start promoting the truth and donate to the CCOG from your UOG salary. The grass is much greener on the Catholic side and not on the dirt and scam of the Neo."
Now you see, this is why jungle people commit all their indecency: they simply fear the "Neo"! Lol!
In response to "I had called NCW members repeatedly for gestures of mutual peace and good will. He had never answered me."
Deleteput your trust on God; call on Jesus Christ and the Holy Spirit will answer.
Zolton is just a messenger
JSB
Messenger of hope of messenger of despair?
DeleteWhere is he after the Archbishop, after Diana, after Fr. Pius, after Fr. Adrian, after Fr. Edivaldo, after Fr. Harold, after Mr. Zoltan or after anybody else? Where?! He is only producing evidence for truth. Have you ever refuted any of his evidence?? If you hate truth then you hate the jungle, because it is a place of pure, incorrupted truth. Yes, truth is radical by its very nature. Does is cause pain for you? I am so sorry, but this radicalism is the name of the truth.
DeleteDear Anonymous at 5:13 pm,
DeleteTruth does not persecute other people.....plain and simple. The fact that the jungle persecuted other people and use intimidation shows that they do not stand for truth.
AnonymousAugust 19, 2015 at 5:04 PM
DeleteMessenger of hope of messenger of despair?
remember how the messenger Jesus Christ was received by his people?
Rocked their world huh? Must be rocking your's
JSB
ReplyDeleteRE:DianaAugust 18, 2015 at 9:21 AM addressing Anonymous at 1:14 am which said:
" Who said the NCW was a private Mass? There are many Sunday Mass services in all the church. You can attend the one in the 6:00 am Mass, the 9:00 am. Mass or the 10:00 am Mass. You can even attend the 5:30 pm Saturday Mass (which is counted as Sunday Mass). Do not complain about the 7:30 pm NCW Mass, which you would not care to attend anyway. "
Look at the following again:
"5. In the Paragraph 52 of the Ecclesia de Eucharistia the Pope indicates that the communion, the unity of the whole community with the universal Church is guaranteed by the priest celebrating the Eucharist. Presiding at the Eucharist, the priest is responsible for doing it in persona Christi and must “provide a witness to and a service of communion not only for the community directly taking part in the celebration, but also for the universal Church, which is a part of every Eucharist.” JOHN PAUL II REMINDS ABOUT THIS TRUTH IN ORDER TO WARN AGAINST MAKING THE CELEBRATION OF THE EUCHARIST A PRIVATE EVENT, AND ESPECIALLY AGAINST INTRODUCING UNAUTHORIZED CHANGES. However, the rule itself can also serve as proof that through the celebration of the Eucharist separately, the community does not become a parallel church."
John Paul II is warning small communities against making the Eucharist a private event - Yes the Neocatechumenal Way frowned upon outsiders attending their Mass - it was ONLY for the neos until the Pope told them that the NCW Mass had to be "open to all."
The NCW was in violation. They had made the Eucharist a private event (They now claim to have corrected this, but those obedient to the approved Roman Rite Liturgical Books,who wish to receive Communion on the tongue, still are not welcome.)
Now the second part of that sentence "and especially against introducing unauthorized changes" in regards to the Eucharist. Pope John Paul II saw there was a problem and was warning them in regards to this.
So, "who implied the NCW was a private Mass?" ANSWER: Pope John Paul II (SAINT)
Private Mass - a Mass that is not open to all.
So, when a person, whether that be a non-concelebrating priest, a seminarian, a deacon, a nun, a layperson, etc. is not welcome to attend a NCW Mass because they wish to receive Jesus on the tongue according to the approved Roman Rite Liturgical Books, that makes the NCW Mass still Private.
Dear Anonymous at 3:46 pm,
DeleteHow many times do I have to tell you that the NCW Mass is not private. We have non-NCW members attend the NCW Mass. Of course, we do not see many of them returning because it is a two hour Mass. The Mass is open. If you really want to attend, go to any Church that has the NCW and ask the priest that you would like to attend. You will not be refused.
Why should a Catholic have to "ask (sic) the priest that you would like to attend"?
DeleteIf it is truly "open to other faithful", then there should be no need to ask the priest at all. Your statement just shows us what is really going on.
Dear Anonymous at 4:42 pm,
DeleteYou ask BECAUSE there are many celebrating in small communities, and you can choose which one you want to attend. Do you want to attend 1st community Eucharist, 2nd community Eucharist, etc. It is open. But WHICH one do you want to attend at 7:30 pm??????
I want to attend the one where I can receive the Eucharist on the tongue. Is it the 1st, 2nd , etc?
ReplyDeleteDear Anonymous at 11:15 am,
DeleteI want to receive the Eucharist on the hand. Which Latin Mass can do that?
Dear Diana, that is a silly comment. You have no absolute right as a Catholic to choose to receive communion on the hand, but only where that permission is specially given. You do, however, have the right to choose to receive on the tongue. How about you do some homework, and not make comments in deliberate ignorance.
DeleteDear Anonymous at 1:00 pm,
DeleteOn the contrary. If I attend an Eastern Catholic Mass where they receive the Blood of Christ in a spoon, can I choose to receive it without the spoon? We have permission from the Pope to celebrate the Mass the way we do. You, on the other hand, are here to celebrate Mass, not to dictate to the NCW what you want.
What do you mean "on the contrary"? You haven't proven anything by your example of the Eastern Catholics, becuase they receive on the tongue as well, whether by "spoon" or not. Once again, I urge you to educate yourself about what the Church actually teahces, not simply entertain your own prejudices.
DeleteDear Anonymous at 5:34 pm,
DeleteThe Church teaches to respect all people and all Catholics regardless of whether they are from the Latin Mass, Novus Ordo Mass, Eastern rite, Opus Dei, NCW, etc. the Church does not teach any Catholic to attend Mass for the sole purpose of FORCING others to follow you.
Dear Diana
DeleteYour viewers should read the entire Ecclesia de Eucharistia, St. John Paul II wrote and the entire "followup" Redemptionis Sacramentum on Liturgical Abuses he mandated Cardinal Arinze to write, and which he approved before release. When one sees the heart this Saint had for the Sacrifice of the Mass, and his desire to protect it from illegitimate changes which amount to liturgical abuses, the members of the NCW would question their additions and deletions in "their" Mass which has no recognitio (written permission) which is the reguirement before changes can be implemented.
Anonymous August 21, 2015 at 3:36 AM
DeleteYour claim of liturgical abuses reeks of a self righteous all knowing liturgical knowledge that must....MUST be followed.
You do not represent any authority to make such a statement.
It is a personal opinion based on your own interpretations....human at best.
You also claim to see the heart of a Saint and his desire but I see; as many others who read the true context of your statement above; it is just another clever ploy to discredit the NCW.
And you have the audacity to make to make these statements as "anonymous".
Show yourself anonymous; step out of the shadows and show me who you are.
Dear Anonymous 830 am
DeleteI have no wish to ruin the NCW, but only to see it being made better as was the wish of Pope Benedict XVI when he reiterated the need for the NCW to follow the corrections that Cardinal Arinze presented to them.
Yes, I am human and capable of mistakes. That is why what I present to you and the NCW is what the Popes, Saints, etc. have said in their speeches, books, encyclicals, etc.in regards to the Eucharist. If you would take the time to read at least the two that I mentioned in 3:36, you, too, would see the heart of a Saint.
The wisdom in these two documents is not "my" wisdom - but wisdom written by Pope/Saint and Cardinal through the guidance of the Holy Spirit, and which have been addressed to ALL. So please take time to read them.
Addressing myself as "anonymous" hopefully keeps me from pride. Again, that what I share are not my ideas, but a "duty." Keeping the truth to myself keeps others in the dark, and makes me responsible for their continued errors.
Another serious look at what Saint John Paul II thought about the Eucharist can be found in the letters he wrote to all priests every Holy Thursday.
Why do I prefer the title anonymous. Then I can take no credit to the wisdom and knowledge that is given to us by those far more important than I (or you) could ever be. I am a nobody who just sees the need to "pass" to others the truths written by Popes, etc. Hopefully, they will be interested enough to check it out.
Why do you hide under the secrecy of anonymous?
I read Ecclesia de Eucharistia? Where would I find its relativity to the NCW?
DeleteIf your issue is pride; if it is your duty then present the truth in its entirety.
Why don't you acknowledge the Saints comments and support of the NCW?
Saint John Paul II and two subsequent Popes have attended the NCW Eucharist; why don't you acknowledge this fact. They didn't have a problem.....what is yours?
wisdom give to us by those far more important than I or you could ever be?
Wisdom you say? open you eyes to the issues of suicide; abortions, family violence, drugs, CPS, DOC, court system, etc and show me the "wisdom" of these wise men that you follow.
Wisdom 1; 11
So beware of uttering frivolous complaints, restrain your tongue from finding fault; even what is said in secret has repercussions and a lying mouth deals death to the soul.
THIS IS WISDOM my un-prideful brother.
"Saint John Paul II and two subsequent Popes have attended the NCW Eucharist; why don't you acknowledge this fact. They didn't have a problem"
DeleteThis is funny.
Pope John Paull II in his long pontificate only celebrated Mass with the NCW once. Once. And that was reportedly by stealth. He then set about having the NCW form Statutes, depsite the protestations of Kiko et al.
Pope Benedict and Pope Francis have never attended the NCW Mass as pope.
And Pope Benedict issued corrections to the way Mass was conducted in the NCW. Again in 2012 shortly before he resigned he appealed to the NCW to amend the way it treated the liturgy. Finally he referred the NCW to investigations by the Cong for the Divien Worship (which is concerned with the liturgy) and to the Cong for the Doctrine of the Faith (which is concerned with the orthodoxy of belief and teaching)
And you, wise one, have the gall to say, they "didn't have a problem"!
What is funny is that you still fail to acknowledge the support of the Popes to the NCW.
Deletethis is your problem which confounds your simplistic; comfortable reasoning of worship.
Pope Benedict imposed an investigation into the NCW but it was later revoked by Pope Francis.....I wonder why Pope Francis instructed the investigations to cease?
Delete-Jokers Wild
Yes, it is curious that the Pope that Diana claims gave "verbal" approval to the NCW to celebrate Mass with its particular differences was the same Pope that initiated the investigations. Something is fishy about the claim that verbal approval was given.
DeleteDear Anonymous at 10:20 am,
DeleteThen write your letter of complaint to the Vatican.
Dear Anon 8:56
ReplyDeleteIF you read Ecclesia de Eucharistia, you would have seen the following paragraph by Saint John Paul II dealing with liturgical norms:
"I consider it my duty, therefore to appeal urgently that the liturgical norms for the celebration of the Eucharist be observed with great fidelity. These norms are a concrete expression of the authentically ecclesial nature of the Eucharist; this is their deepest meaning. Liturgy is never anyone's private property, be it of the celebrant or of the community in which the mysteries are celebrated. The Apostle Paul had to address fiery words to the community of Corinth because of grave shortcomings in their celebration of the Eucharist resulting in divisions (schismata) and the emergence of factions (haireseis) (cf. 1 Cor 11:17-34). Our time, too, calls for a renewed awareness and appreciation of liturgical norms as a reflection of, and a witness to, the one universal Church made present in every celebration of the Eucharist. Priests who faithfully celebrate Mass according to the liturgical norms, and communities which conform to those norms, quietly but eloquently demonstrate their love for the Church. Precisely to bring out more clearly this deeper meaning of liturgical norms, I have asked the competent offices of the Roman Curia to prepare a more specific document, including prescriptions of a juridical nature, on this very important subject. No one is permitted to undervalue the mystery entrusted to our hands: it is too great for anyone to feel free to treat it lightly and with disregard for its sacredness and its universality."
Note, the future document Saint John Paul II is talking about is "Redemptionis Sacramentum" which states:
"In order that especially in the celebration of the Sacred Liturgy the Church might duly safeguard so great a mystery in our own time as well, the Supreme Pontiff has mandated that this Congregation for Divine Worship and Discipline of the Sacraments, in collaboration with the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, should prepare this Instruction treating of certain matters pertaining to the discipline of the Sacrament of the Eucharist. Those things found in this Instruction are therefore to be read in the continuity with the above-mentioned Encyclical Letter, Ecclesia de Eucharistia."
Note: We have Saint John Paul II, Cardinal Ratzinger (Pope Benedict XVI), and Cardinal Arinze ALL agreeing to the texts of these two documents.
Re your Comment: "Where would I find its relativity to the NCW?"
If you do not think the document applies to the NCW, why does Diana in this blog have articles referencing portions of that very same document trying to back up the NCW practices??? She must feel the articles refer to her/NCW too. That being said, picking and choosing, taking things out of context, can lead to misinterpretation.
ReplyDeleteRE:AnonymousAugust 23, 2015 at 8:56 AM
re:
"Why don't you acknowledge the Saints comments and support of the NCW?"
I have always backed up the good of the NCW on this site. I have always said that the popes commended them on the obedience to Humanae Vitae, the zeal for Scripture, their desire for missions, etc. The only thing that I objected to was the "additions and deletions" in "their" Liturgy.
re:
"Saint John Paul II and two subsequent Popes have attended the NCW Eucharist; why don't you acknowledge this fact. They didn't have a problem.....what is yours?"
I know both Saint John Paul II and Pope Benedict XVI celebrated the NCW Eucharist when "they visited them," and I have commented on that in the past on this site. However, Pope Francis? Could you tell me when he celebrated the NCW Eucharist for them?
To say "they didn't have a problem" ....... If they didn't have a problem with the NCW Mass, why did they not celebrate the NCW Mass at the Vatican when visited by NCW members on various occasions throughout the years. They wouldn't and couldn't, at least not with all the additions and deletions that the NCW Mass requires. The popes had made it known that ALL must be able to attend. So outsiders, who would have come, would not have been able to receive the Eucharist on the tongue - the NORM - and something that both Saint John Paul II and Pope Benedict XVI promoted.
re:
"Wisdom you say? open you eyes to the issues of suicide; abortions, family violence, drugs, CPS, DOC, court system, etc and show me the "wisdom" of these wise men that you follow."
That comment doesn't even deserve a rebuttal.
re:
"Wisdom 1; 11
So beware of uttering frivolous complaints, restrain your tongue from finding fault; even what is said in secret has repercussions and a lying mouth deals death to the soul."
Yes, Scripture is for me, but, it is also for you.
re:
"THIS IS WISDOM my un-prideful brother."
Sorry, I disagree. Signed, your Anonymous SISTER in Christ.
re:
Delete"Wisdom you say? open you eyes to the issues of suicide; abortions, family violence, drugs, CPS, DOC, court system, etc and show me the "wisdom" of these wise men that you follow."
That comment doesn't even deserve a rebuttal.
of course it doesn't......easier to run away and not be burdened.
Signed...your brother in Christ
Dear Diana,
ReplyDeleteFrom the NCW 2002 statutes (not mentioned in the APPROVED Statutes of 2008):
"The Neocatechumens celebrate the Eucharist in the small community in order to be gradually initiated into full, conscious and active participation in the divine mysteries, according also to the example of Christ, who, in the multiplication of the loaves, made the people sit down "in groups of fifty" (Luke 9:14). This custom, consolidated in the more than thirty-year old praxis of the Way, has born rich fruit."
Question: If Jesus wanted us to celebrate the Eucharist in groups of fifty sitting down, what Scripture passage justifies the NCW celebrating the Eucharist sitting down in the larger groups of hundreds? Of thousands?
Question: Why does the above from the Statutes of 2002 not appear in the Approved Statutes of 2008?
Dear Anonymous at 5:13 pm,
DeleteSomething that has been in praxis for more than 30 years does not need to be there. What has been in praxis continues to be in praxis. Only the changes need to be mentioned.
Dear Diana,
ReplyDeleteThen, if what you say is true, the very fact the approved 2008 Statutes state that the NCW Mass must follow the approved Liturgical Books, is because THAT CHANGE was a NEED.
Also, I'm still waiting for an answer to the first question "If Jesus wanted us to celebrate the Eucharist in groups of fifty sitting down, what Scripture passage justifies the NCW celebrating the Eucharist sitting down in the larger groups of hundreds? Of thousands? Would not the NCW have to separate their larger groups into groups of fifty to mimic what Jesus did in Scripture?
Dear Anonymous at 11:11 pm,
DeleteIs it not enough that the approved Statutes already stated that we can celebrate the Eucharist in small communities? This was passed by the Vatican. So, if the Vatican says it is okay.....then it is okay.
Isn't the celebration in small communities praxis for over thirty years? Didn't you say of the Statutes that "Something that has been in praxis for more than 30 years does not need to be there. What has been in praxis continues to be in praxis. Only the changes need to be mentioned"?
DeleteDear Diana, re yours 713 am
ReplyDeleteNo, it is not enough that the approved Statutes already state that you can celebrate the Eucharist in small communities. The Pope does not want you to exclude the Mass - that would not be Catholic. However, the Statutes gave you the guidelines - that you follow what is in the approved Liturgical Books. If the Statutes gave permission for change of position of the Sign of Peace, one should see the more drastic "additions and deletions" listed also. But, they are not there. The NCW has no written permission in the Statutes, no recognitio, no indult....
In addition, if you assume that every addition and deletion is OK'd by the Vatican just because the approved Statutes say that you can celebrate the Eucharist in small communities, then the NCW would be free to add or delete even more. Again, the Popes safeguarded the Eucharist by requiring that ALL deletions and additions need written permission - Recognitio.
Again, I'm still waiting for an answer to the first question "If Jesus wanted us to celebrate the Eucharist in groups of fifty sitting down, what Scripture passage justifies the NCW celebrating the Eucharist sitting down in the larger groups of hundreds? Of thousands? Would not the NCW have to separate their larger groups into groups of fifty to mimic what Jesus did in Scripture?
Come to think of it, even this does correspond to what the approved Statutes say - that the NCW has permission to celebrate the Eucharist in SMALL communities.
Re: Jokers Wild 12:52 AM who says:
ReplyDelete"Pope Benedict imposed an investigation into the NCW but it was later revoked by Pope Francis.....I wonder why Pope Francis instructed the investigations to cease?"
Pope Francis is not a man of excesses. He would not have needed anymore information than that which was already accumulated.
RE: 849 AM
ReplyDeleteCome to think of it, even this does correspond to what the approved Statutes say - that the NCW has permission to celebrate the Eucharist in SMALL communities.
Should read: Come to think of it, even this DOESN'T correspond to what the approved Statutes say - that the NCW Has permission to celebrate the Eucharist in SMALL communities.
Dear Diana,
ReplyDeleteI refer to an excerpt of a previous post of yours:
Friday, February 14, 2014
The 13 Volumes of the "Catechetical Directory of the Way."
"Arguello added later that the announcement is "marvelous" because the decree approves the teachings for official proclamation. "It has been revised by the Holy See and completed. It's correct."
This is from the Church!" he exclaimed.
But the Way still encounters bumps in the road when it comes to its relationships with local pastors, a fact that Arguello alluded to in HIS next statement.
The directory, HE said, "will be very important because now a parish priest who says something, we can say, "LOOK father WHAT IT SAYS HERE ON PAGE 427," THIS WAS APPROVED BY THE CHURCH." "
____________
So, dear Diana, according to KIKO, HIMSELF, we no long should be told to go to Rome and talk to the Pope when we ask "where is the written permission for the "additions and deletions" in the NCW Mass?" The NCW, according to Kiko, must be able to "SHOW US THE PAGE" where this permission has been granted.