Timothy GuileMay 2, 2016 at 7:42 AM
Cardinal Cordes is not a Neo-cardinal; instead, it is claimed he is a Kiko-cardinal.But if the cardinal was appointed by the Vatican to guide the Way, then why not refer to the most recent popes as Kiko-popes? Why stop there, one of them is a saint, so I guess JPII must be a Kiko-saint if Cardinal Cordes is a Kiko-cardinal. Your thoughts, please.
Being retired has nothing to do with why St. John Paul II and Pope Benedict XVI were not called "Kiko Pope" and "Kiko Saint." Mr. Guile has a point. Cardinal Cordes was assigned by Pope John Paul II to follow and guide the NCW. He had no qualms about celebrating the Eucharist with the members of the Neocatechumenal Way; therefore, he was branded a "Kiko Cardinal" by Mr. Rohr. CCOG and LFM, on the other hand, called him a "Neo Cardinal." One wonders where they actually got the name "Neo Cardinal". Could it be from Tim Rohr who is trying to cover up his error by switching the name to "Kiko Cardinal?"
Below is a photo of Pope John Paul II celebrating the Eucharist with the members of the Neocatechmenal Way. The Pope, by the way, was never called a "Neo Pope" or "Kiko Pope" by the jungle. He never walked in the Way despite that he presided over the Eucharist in the Way. So, why did the jungle avoid calling St. John Paul II a "Kiko Saint" or a "Kiko Pope?"
Below is another photo of Pope Benedict XVI celebrating the Eucharist with members of the Way when he was Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger. As a matter of fact, it was Cardinal Ratzinger who started the Neocatechumenal Way in Germany. So, why is he not labeled a "Kiko Pope" and "Kiko Cardinal" by the jungle? Why only stop at Cardinal Cordes? Good questions. Unfortunately, these questions were never answered by Tim Rohr. He said a lot of things, but none of them has to do with the question that was asked.
Below is a photo of Pope John Paul II celebrating the Eucharist with the members of the Neocatechmenal Way. The Pope, by the way, was never called a "Neo Pope" or "Kiko Pope" by the jungle. He never walked in the Way despite that he presided over the Eucharist in the Way. So, why did the jungle avoid calling St. John Paul II a "Kiko Saint" or a "Kiko Pope?"
 |
| Pope John Paul II celebrating the Eucharist in December 1988 on the Feast of the Holy Family at the Neocatechumenal Center in Porto San Giorgio (Italy). |
Below is another photo of Pope Benedict XVI celebrating the Eucharist with members of the Way when he was Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger. As a matter of fact, it was Cardinal Ratzinger who started the Neocatechumenal Way in Germany. So, why is he not labeled a "Kiko Pope" and "Kiko Cardinal" by the jungle? Why only stop at Cardinal Cordes? Good questions. Unfortunately, these questions were never answered by Tim Rohr. He said a lot of things, but none of them has to do with the question that was asked.
 |
| Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger who later became Pope Benedict XVI celebrates the Eucharist in the Neocatechumenal Way |
In his response to my posting yesterday, Tim Rohr also mentioned Charismatic Renewal. He claimed that both the NCW and the (Catholic) Charismatic Renewal were at one point “in trouble.” Others have used the term “cautiously supported” (by the Vatican). Both organizations are instances of ecclesial movements. There are many more such organizations falling under the rubric “ecclesial movement,” such as Marriage Encounter and Cursillo.
ReplyDeleteWe live in the age of the Holy Spirit. Imagine you are the pope. On the one hand you want to be open to the moving presence of the Spirit, but on the other hand, you must be prudent and discerning to be convinced that the organization in question is being moved by the Spirit. In ages past, other movements of the Spirit have undergone some kind of trial period or scrutiny: mendicant orders, monastic orders, confraternities, sodalities, etc.
A very helpful article published in 2012 by the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops and authored by H. Richard McCord is “Ecclesial Movements as Agents of a New Evangelization.” Among other things, the article addresses the conflicts that arise when ecclesial movements emerge within the Church. It turns out that our experience on Guam with the advent of the NCW is not all that unusual. Traditional Catholics may feel alienated by the unfamiliar while the emerging new movement may make mistakes while still finding its feet. When conflicts arise between a movement and local parishes, all parties should be open to dialogue to reach some accommodation, some modicum of cooperation or even a kind of integration where the two human hands of the one Spirit meet.
Dear Timothy,
DeleteI agree that all parties should be open to dialogue. That is how things can be resolved. However, there can be no resolution if one side is closed off and unwilling to listen to what the other has to say as in the case of the RMS ownership. Would going to court even resolve the issue? Someone brought up the possibility that if the NCW wins in the court, Tim Rohr would only say that the NCW has infiltrated the court system. Therefore, I cannot help but think that there may be something more at play here.
For the most part, those in the NCW and those who are not walking are able to work together side by side. I see that in my Church. Those who vehemently oppose the NCW are very few in number. It will take some time for them to come around to accept the NCW.
May I add one more comment to this thread? Below is a posting which I submitted to Junglewatch, but I am not sure it will be accepted for publication. I addressed the comment to Tim Rohr, and so the "you" and "your" in the text refer to him, not to you, Diana. Here follows the comment:
DeleteIn your recent posting you have mentioned Mr. Gennarini in connection with a series of crimes whose definitions appear below. (You do not mention others by name although I suspect you could have.) I take written, public words very seriously. If you do too, it seems you are under some obligation to act on what evidence you have for these crimes. I have indicated, for each crime, where you might submit your evidence.
Money laundering is the transfer of money obtained from criminal activity into “legitimate” channels to disguise its illegal origins. If you have evidence of this, you should submit it to Federal Prosecutor Limtiaco.
Land grabbing is the seizing of land, often unfairly, illegally, or deceptively, by a nation, state, or organization. It is the acquisition of valuable or strategic territory for much less than its actual worth. If you have evidence of illegal, unfair or deceptive acquisition of the RMS property, then this evidence should be submitted to Attorney General Barrett-Anderson.
Usurping of power is the encroachment or assumption of the use power properly belonging to another; or the interruption or disturbance of an individual in his or her right or possession. If you have evidence of such usurpation, you should submit it to the proper authority, possibly Attorney General Barrett-Anderson.
Human-trafficking is the recruitment, harboring, transportation, provision, or obtaining of a person for labor or services through the use of force, fraud, or coercion for the purpose of subjection to involuntary servitude, peonage, debt bondage, or slavery. If you have evidence of this crime being of having been committed on Guam, you should submit it to Federal Prosecutor Limtiaco.
Immigrant-scamming (or immigration fraud) is generally grouped into two types: immigration-related document fraud and immigration benefit fraud (i.e., benefit fraud involves misrepresentation of a material fact to qualify for a specific immigration status or benefit). Should you have evidence for either type of immigration fraud, you should report it and submit evidence thereof to the Consumer Protection Unit under Attorney General Barrett-Anderson.
However, if you do not have evidence for Mr. Gennarini (or others in the NCW) having committed any of these crimes, then I understand all the accusations in another light. They are mischaracterizations of Mr. Gennarini’s (and/or others’) behavior, and they indicate the level of your anger and indignation. I know anger, indignation and frustration too. But if your accusations come not from evidence, but rather from raw emotion, you may be liable for libel, and it is not Mr. Gennarini who will need legal counsel, but rather you. Also since calumny is regarded as a sin (cf. Catechism of the Catholic Church, 2 ed., paragr. 2477: remarks contrary to the truth, harm[ing] the reputation of others and giv[ing] occasion for false judgments concerning them.), and if you have sinned against charity and justice, you will be in need of a priest as well.
I don't understand the jungle. Seriously.
ReplyDeleteDiana, how can I get a video to you to post? I caught beautiful footage of our mass with the Cardinal. It's short.
ReplyDeleteDear Anonymous at 8:16 am,
DeleteI am sorry, but it cannot be done through me. Perhaps, you can post it on Youtube and provide a weblink to it.
To my dear old friend, Joe San Agustin. Why would God send a message if you pray to Him? Through prayer God is talking and does not need a messenger. God is saying that all power and glory belongs to Him. By any human standard, Jesus was a failure: he died abandoned, his disciples scattered, some betrayed, some denied him. Not so victorious! But God raised him by His great power and might, turning defeat and failure into glory and victory.
ReplyDeleteThe problem, dear Joe, is that at JW everything is turned into a game of lose or win. There is no middle ground. Whatever happens it must placed into a lose or win situation, forcing a dichotomy that is not helping anyone. Failure or victory: this is the universe of JW and this is also the logic you follow. For what? How could a mass celebrated by a cardinal be called a failure or victory? It is neither, it is a Catholic event that is quite rare on Guam and therefore should be appreciated.
1. You ask your JW pals to name themselves. They won't. It is the driving force of JW to allow anonymous comments that dictate the mood of JW readers. Nobody at JW dares to challenge these anonymous commenters because they are protected.
2. If your solution is humble prayer then I can support that endeavor.
3. Spreading the lose or win mentality at the villages does great damage to our parishioners. We need to integrate everyone who stands for Christ, not dividing them. You and I will be long gone when the NCW will still play their guitar and flute to sing their songs at the Cathedral of Agana packed with flocks of Chamorro and other Guamanian Catholics.
4. The snares and wickedness of the devil may find a way right into your heart when you abuse your prayer in an attempt to bring down others.
5. Starving the parishes from donations won't work. It only hurts the faithful. The NCW has a separate network of access to donations that you cannot make any impact on.
My friend, when you force a lose or win strategy you'll always end up being a loser. It is like gambling, eventually you'll lose everything. That is why I propose an approach different from the JW's. You should embrace church groups that invigorate parishes, including NCW, and with the same embrace you tie them to the church. Sooner or later they will return to our churches. What else would you like to see to happen, dear Joe?
GET RID OF TIM ROHR, STOP LISTENING, THE MAN HAS A LOT HATE IF YOU CALL HIM A MAN,TIM GOES AGAINST ''GOD'' AND HIS CHURCH. HE CALLS IT A JUNGLE? IT'S GOD'S ISLAND.HE SAYS HE WORKS HARD SITTING THERE WRITING BAD THING ABOUT THE BISHOP AND MY PEOPLE. JUST A KID.
ReplyDeleteDear Diana, (I'm not from the jungle)
ReplyDeleteHaving the Popes celebrate the "NCW" Mass, gives the Popes 1st-hand knowledge as to what guidance the NCW needs in regards to their Liturgy. In no way does celebrating Mass give approval to their alterations.
Pope John Paul II celebrated Mass for the NCW, BUT, he also mandated Cardinal Arinze to write on liturgical abuses, to be read with his own Eucharistic Encyclical. "Redemptionis Sacramentum" 2004, states that any additions or deletions to the Mass MUST have "recognitio" - written permission from the Pope. The many alterations in the NCW Mass does not have recognitio.
Cardinal Ratzinger celebrated the Mass with the NCW, BUT, as Pope Benedict XVI, he also called upon Cardinal Arinze. This time to write to the NCW on behalf of the Pope,instructing that changes were necessary in their Mass. One change involved the way the NCW receives Communion. The NCW was given 2 years to change to the way the Church receives Communion on Sunday mornings. That was 2005. This was never done. In 2006, Pope Benedict XVI reiterated that these changes were to be made. It still wasn't done.
In 2008, the NCW Statutes were approved. However, almost all of the NCW alterations to the Mass are not there - therefore no permission was granted.
In January 2012, the NCW met Pope Benedict XVI in Rome fully expecting the written permission to be obtained for all the alterations in their Mass. Please note that the NCW was just going to get this permission in 2012 when the NCW already had been saying that the permission existed. (Remember, it wasn't in the approved Statutes. Interesting to note the approved Statutes of 2008 is not readily available on the official NCW website.)
Most importantly, Pope Benedict XVI was upset that this approval/permission was expected, and he quickly put a stop to it. Hence, no approval came with that 2012 audience with the Pope.
Remember, Pope Francis also says to correct the NCW with the approved Statutes of 2008(which holds no permission or approval for the NCW Mass's many additions and deletions.) But the NCW refuses correction. It remains obedient to the leaders of the Way.
It is not sufficient to say "we have permission," when no Pope was/is willing to give the NCW the written permission that they hope for.
The NCW must ask - is the "unapproved" man-designed Mass an idol?
May God's will be done.
Dear Anonymous at 2:48 pm,
DeleteThe correction on how to receive Holy Communion was already done in 2008. Before 2008, the NCW received the Body of Christ sitting down. In 2008, that has changed. The NCW receives the Body of Christ standing up aligned with the universal Church.
Your real problem is the fact that you think consuming His Body sitting down is wrong. In the Catholic Church, everyone must stand to receive His Body. Whether one receives it by hand or tongue is irrelevant because both ways are acceptable to the universal church. How one consumes the Body of Christ is also irrelevant because the Early Christians used to consume His Body sitting down. What is more important is that the Catholic faithful consume His Body. Whether they consume His Body sitting down or standing is acceptable to the Church.
"In 2008, that has changed. The NCW receives the Body of Christ standing up aligned with the universal Church."
DeleteAnd yet, we see able bodied people sit to receive during the distribution of communion at the Cathedral this weekend.
"Whether one receives it by hand or tongue is irrelevant because both ways are acceptable to the universal church."
This is partially true. The rule is to receive on the tongue, however in some jurisdictions and indult (ie permission to break the rule) has been granted to allow for communion in the hand. Importantly, the Church mandates that communion on the tongue is ALWAYS licit, and MUST be permitted if the faithful desire it. It is impossible to licitly receive communion on the tongue during NCW mass, as you have pointed out yourself.
"How one consumes the Body of Christ is also irrelevant because the Early Christians used to consume His Body sitting down."
What is allowed and what is licit is not determined by what people did in the past. It is determined by the lawful authority of the Church ONLY. Your comment declares your unwillingness to acknowledge that lawful authority.
"Whether they consume His Body sitting down or standing is acceptable to the Church. "
Please show one document of the Church, or one official statement of the Church that supports this assertion, or otherwise retract it.
Dear Anonymous at 3:49 pm,
DeleteWere you at the Mass? How do you know the person was not disabled?
The rule is to receive by hand; however, if one desires to receive it kneeling on the tongue, that is okay.
We have already said that we have the permission to celebrate the Mass the way we do. If you feel that the NCW is in violation, simply write a letter of complaint to the Vatican.
anon 3:39, if you feel uncomfortable with our mass, please do not come and just forget us. period. can we ask this little thing from you? we feel comfortable with our mass so we do it this way. it is not your business. do you have any problem with that?
Deleteplease keep in mind that you might be right or might be wrong just like anyone else. you are not perfect in what you judge against others just like nobody is perfect except God.
2:48PM Not from the (Jungle) Hahahahaha
ReplyDeletenot FROM the jungle but IS the jungle. lol.
DeleteHi there. This is Monica Ashour from TOBET, the Theology of the Body Evangelization Team based in Irving, Texas. We are finishing the 18th of 18 books of a series called The Body Matters. We are looking for a picture of St. John Paul elevating the Eucharist. I like your picture. Do you own the picture/do you know who owns it? I sure would appreciate a response, in case you would let us use the image. Thank you. Monica Ashour, TOBET. P.S. I am a fan of the Neocatechumal Way.
ReplyDeleteDear Monica,
DeleteThe photos were taken from Father Neil's blog. You can find his blog on the following weblink:
https://www.praytellblog.com/index.php/2012/01/25/response-to-magister/