Saturday, May 7, 2016

A Misconception Of The Way

An anonymous commenter made the following comment, which can be found here:
The trouble is that the NCW do not treat the mass as a sacrifice at all, but only as a banquet. Hence the table not the altar. Hence the sitting to consume like an ordinary meal. And as is demonstrated by the comments above.

In the catechesis Kiko actually speajs against the mass as a sacrifice, teaching that there is no altar in Christianity, for example.

From this error the NCW is prone to more and more errors. If only people such as yourself could recognize this and speak against it. But instead you are incapable of seeing that Kiko might just be wrong about it.
If one were to attend the Mass in the Way, he/she would hear the word "sacrifice" as we celebrate the Eucharist.   If the NCW really does not believe in the Mass as a sacrifice, then why do we say "sacrifice" in the Mass?  If the NCW really does not believe in the Holy Trinity, then why do we make the sign of the cross and say the Nicene Creed? 

One can only find information like the above only in anti-Neo websites that have been frozen in time.  Does the NCW believe in the sacrifice of the Mass?  Of course they do.  Does the NCW believe that the Eucharist is a meal.  Yes, it does.  When Christ said, "Those who eat my body and drink my blood will have eternal life, and I will abide in him and he will abide in Me," it is clear that he was speaking of the Eucharist here as a meal. Christ was literally speaking of eating His Body, which is why many of His disciples left Him.  And at the Last Supper when he said, "Do this in memory of me" he was speaking of the Eucharist as a sacrifice.  As Catholics, we take everything in the Bible as truth.  We do not see one part as truth and ignore the rest. 

The Catechism of the Catholic Church speaks of the Mass as a sacrifice and as a banquet.  It also speaks of the altar as a table.  The eyes of faith sees both rather than only one.    

26 comments:

  1. If someone wants to know about the Way, just ask those who are walking but don't attack the person by starting out with accusations. Anti-Neo websites are never the place to start 'cuz all your hearing is what the opposition has to say. That would be like a Protestant going to an anti-Catholic website to learn about Catholicism.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Dear Anonymous at 1:17 am,

      I agree. To learn about Catholicism, one needs to speak to a Catholic or read up on Catholicism. To learn about the NCW is the same thing.

      Delete
  2. diana;

    please recommend websites to learn more about the ncw...

    thank you

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Dear Anonymous at 9:00 am,

      The official website of the NCW is :

      http://www.camminoneocatecumenale.it/

      It comes in Different languages. I will look around for other websites.

      Delete
    2. It's difficult to "learn" about the Way from any websites. I will encourage you to go and listen the catechesis. One thing is to read about a cake and another thing is to try it.

      Delete
    3. Dear may, i have been to the catechesis and it was given precisely as it is written in the directory

      Delete
    4. Dear Anonymous at 3:17 pm,

      Does the jungle think I am someone name May? Sorry, I am not May, Susanna, Jackie, Father Edivaldo, or even Father Adrian.

      Delete
    5. I don't think you are any of these people. I do believe you do come ftom the Uncangco clan, since you never denied it, but denied all other names.

      Delete
    6. Its amazing that all this time you claim that others are liars, and yet, when it comes to it, you are prepared to flat out lie, aren't you Miss Hope? How's Chase going?

      Delete
    7. Dear Anonymous at 9:55 pm,

      The fact that yo do not believe me is not my problem and never was my problem. My son's name is not even Chase.

      Delete
    8. Anon. 9:55, JW always makes guesses on Diana's identity and Rohr keeps changing. First, he says Diana's a priest. He says it's fr. Adrian, then fr. Edivado. Then he says it's Jackie. Then he says it's Susana 'cuz Susana knows he's a plumber. Then he says it's more than one person. Don't know why you keep believing him.

      Delete
    9. Except in this case there is proof

      Delete
    10. Dear Anonymous at 11:59 am,

      Based from what I heard in the jungle, they are basing this evidence on something Zoltan said in my blog? Zoltan is not even in my community, and that is the truth.

      Do you not know that Tim Rohr twists documents around just like he did with Ed Terlaje's email. He made everyone believe that the email was addressing the Archbishop, when actually the email was sent to Richard Untalan. Ed Terlaje said he read the Archbishop's letter and Richard Untalan's letter. What makes you think that Terlaje was referring to Untalan's letter to Father Pablo? Is it not possible that both the Archbishop and Untalan wrote a letter to Terlaje?

      Delete
    11. Father Pablo was one of my favorite priests. Where is he now??

      Delete
    12. Not May but Mae?

      The Zoltán evidence is not the words he posted. Rather, it would appear you and he used a computer with the same or similar IP addresses.

      If you are deposed in a lawsuit, avoid the temptation to lie (commit perjury. You do not know what electronic evidence is out there.

      Delete
    13. Dear Anonymous at 6:29 am,

      As I said, it was never my problem what you believe. You can believe whatever you want. Next month, the jungle will be calling me another person.

      Delete
  3. Not much to see very outdated.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Dear Anonymous at 10:20 am,

      Outdated? The news events go from 2006 to 2015. It is only 10 months behind.

      Delete
  4. Carefully read the approved Statutes of 2008; if you can find it.- This is what the NCW should be following. You'll have a difficult time finding it on their official website though. The NCW Website STILL makes readily and conveniently available their own UNAPPROVED 2002 Statutes which perpetuates the many errors in their man-designed Mass.
    Pope Francis has said the NCW can be corrected with the 2008 approved Statutes. These Statutes do NOT give permission/approval for the many additions and deletions in their Mass. These alterations make their Mass not welcoming to ALL. This is very divisive. This is not what the Popes wanted. Go and enjoy the catechesis; it will do your heart and soul good. But celebrate the Mass with all the parishioners at a regular Sunday Mass.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Dear Anonymous at 4:51 pm,

      Yes, Pope Francis said that we can be corrected with the 2008 Statutes. Last year, there was a NCW member from the U.S. who said that their Easter Vigil was only 2 hours. That is not what how we celebrate the Easter Vigil. It appears that a lot of things have been cut. The Easter Vigil has a line up, which you will not find in the Statutes. So, the documents you are searching for are not in the Statutes. Mr. Gennarini said that the Statutes are the first thing we follow. He also mention a secondary instruction. I suppose the line up for the Easter Vigil is part of the secondary instruction.

      Delete
    2. Pope francis did not mention any secondary instruction. What is it exactly that you mean when you say that?

      Delete
    3. Dear Anonymous at 7:10 pm,

      Did you not hear what Mr. Gennarini said in the talk show?

      Delete
    4. No, i didn't. Please explain

      Delete
    5. Dear Anonymous at 9:42 pm,

      The interview with Mr. Gennarini can still be heard in PNC news. Why not listen to it? Below is the weblink:

      http://www.pacificnewscenter.com/pnc-k57-interviews/9178

      Delete
  5. Pope Francis gave a seconday instruction in 2014. In this instruction he writes "2008 statutes require liturgical amendments in particular in liturgical communion practices in order to aligin with church liturgical norma and functions."
    Martin.
    St.Patrick's seminary
    San Francisco.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Dear Martin.

    Please reference academic quotes.

    ReplyDelete