Fifth Archdiocesan Catechetical Liturgical Conference

I was at the Catechetical Liturgical Conference.  The format was different this year.  We did not have any break out sessions nor topics to choose from.  Everyone stayed at the Bishop Baumgartner gym. The conference opened up with a Mass presided by the Archbishop. This year, there was a time for reflection, discussion, and feedback.  This was the new format.  The reflections, discussions, and question and answers took place after each keynote speaker.  Last catechetical conference, a Filipino Dominican priest was brought in from Indonesia.  This year, we have a Bishop from the Philippines.   

Bishop Pablo Virgilio Siongco David of San Fernando, Philippines was the keynote speaker, and he did an outstanding job.  He spoke about our responsibility in taking care of the environment, the children (especially the unborn), the elderly, the poor and disadvantaged, and the family.  He spoke about the attacks of the devil through abortion and the family.  He emphasized a very important lesson.  It is the caring of the poor, the children, the disadvantaged, and those with disabilities who will have a great impact on our lives.  The way he concluded his speech by telling a true story was excellent.  Who would forget the true story of the little baby who was born in prison raised by inmates?  That baby changed an entire prison of inmates.  The Bishop was correct when he said that it was like baby Jesus was in their midst.  

The second keynote speaker was the Archbishop.  He spoke about the Jubilee year.  We also said a jubilee prayer together, which the Archbishop announced will be recited in every parish. 

Brother Edwin was also another keynote speaker at the conference. I find his personal testimony so moving and emotional that I remained attentive throughout his entire speech.  He mainly spoke about family and same sex marriage. 

Freedom Of Religion In Danger

Yes, folks this is now happening in AMERICA.  And it started happening AFTER the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in favor of same sex marriage.  In my last entry post, two Christian ministers were told by the state of Idaho to either perform same sex marriage or go to jail.  In Texas, the government has issued subpoenas demanding a group of pastors to turn over their sermons dealing with homosexuality.  The goal of the gay activists had always been to take away our freedom and force their beliefs on everyone.  It was never about equality.  Welcome to the totalitarian government of the United States of America. 

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Christian persecution in the US: Openly gay Houston mayor demands pastors turn over sermons

My friends, the persecution of Christian pastors has begun in this country. We previously warned about the efforts of the Freedom from Religion Foundation and its secretive settlement with the IRS allowing them to demand sermons to scrutinize for “political activity.” Well, it has indeed happened, in one of the reddest of red states in the reddest county in America: Houston, Harris County, Texas.

As reported by Fox News, “The city of Houston has issued subpoenas demanding a group of pastors turn over any sermons dealing with homosexuality, gender identity or Annise Parker, the city’s first openly lesbian mayor. And those ministers who fail to comply could be held in contempt of court. “The city’s subpoena of sermons and other pastoral communications is both needless and unprecedented,” Alliance Defending Freedom attorney Christina Holcomb said in a statement. “The city council and its attorneys are engaging in an inquisition designed to stifle any critique of its actions.” ADF, a nationally-known law firm specializing in religious liberty cases, is representing five Houston pastors. They filed a motion in Harris County court to stop the subpoenas arguing they are “overbroad, unduly burdensome, harassing, and vexatious.”

If there is anything that should unify Americans, it should be an assault on Christian ministers. It is absolutely amazing that the Obama administration sends a personal congratulatory note to the Islamic center in Oklahoma that spawned Alton Nolen who beheaded a 54-year-old American grandmother — and we have this openly lesbian progressive socialist tyrant allowing a subpoena against Christian pastors.

This is the test case (and as it happens I was just in Houston last week and will be back next Monday) and this is unconscionable! However, if this case is successful, it will be replicated elsewhere — and where is the Left screaming out about First Amendment rights of these pastors: “Freedom of religion and the free exercise thereof?” Where is the ACLU? After all, they care so much about the rights of unlawful enemy combatants aka Islamic jihadists and terrorists.

“Political and social commentary is not a crime,” attorney Holcomb said. “It is protected by the First Amendment.” Fox says, “the subpoenas are just the latest twist in an ongoing saga over Houston’s new non-discrimination ordinance. The law, among other things, would allow men to use the ladies room and vice versa. The city council approved the law in June.”

This is just how upside down Mayor Parker is and reflects her intent to establish a radical far left, gender-blind agenda and through coercion and intimidation, destroy any opposition – including church leaders. This is the tyranny of the Left and the radical gay agenda in full display. And I just have to ask, how does this bring anyone into alignment with the gay community if they are fully supportive of these initiatives?

http://allenbwest.com/2014/10/christian-persecution-us-openly-gay-houston-mayor-demands-pastors-turn-sermons/

It Is Already Starting......

Two Christian ministers who own an Idaho wedding chapel were told they had to either perform same-sex weddings or face jail time and up to a $1,000 fine, according to a lawsuit filed Friday in federal court.

Alliance Defending Freedom is representing Donald and Evelyn Knapp, ordained ministers who own the Hitching Post Wedding Chapel in Coeur d’Alene.

“Right now they are at risk of being prosecuted,” their ADF attorney, Jeremy Tedesco, told me. “The threat of enforcement is more than just credible.”

[pullquote]

According to the lawsuit, the wedding chapel is registered with the state as a “religious corporation” limited to performing “one-man-one-woman marriages as defined by the Holy Bible.”

But the chapel is also registered as a for-profit business – not as a church or place of worship – and city officials said that means the owners must comply with a local nondiscrimination ordinance.

That ordinance, passed last year, prohibits discrimination based on sexual orientation, and it applies to housing, employment and public accommodation.

CLICK HERE TO JOIN TODD ON FACEBOOK FOR CONSERVATIVE CONVERSATION! 

City Attorney Warren Wilson told The Spokesman-Review in May that the Hitching Post Wedding Chapel likely would be required to follow the ordinance.

“I would think that the Hitching Post would probably be considered a place of public accommodation that would be subject to the ordinance,” he said.

He also told television station KXLY that any wedding chapel that turns away a gay couple would in theory be violating the law, “and you’re looking at a potential misdemeanor citation.” 

Wilson confirmed to Knapp my worst fear -- that even ordained ministers would be required to perform same-sex weddings.

“Wilson also responded that Mr. Knapp was not exempt from the ordinance because the Hitching Post was a business and not a church,” the lawsuit states.

And if he refused to perform the ceremonies, Wilson reportedly told the minister that he could be fined up to $1,000 and sentenced to up to 180 days in jail.

Now all of that was a moot point because, until last week, gay marriage was not legal in Idaho.
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit issued an order on May 13 allowing same-sex marriages to commence in Idaho on Oct. 15. Two days later, the folks at the Hitching Post received a telephone call.

A man had called to inquire about a same-sex wedding ceremony. The Hitching Post declined, putting it in violation of the law.

City officials did not respond to my requests for an interview, nor did they respond to requests from local news outlets.

“The government should not force ordained ministers to act contrary to their faith under threat of jail time and criminal fines,” Tedesco said.

“The city is on seriously flawed legal ground, and our lawsuit intends to ensure that this couple’s freedom to adhere to their own faith as pastors is protected, just as the First Amendment intended.”
Alliance Defending Freedom also filed a temporary restraining order to stop the city from enforcing the ordinance.

“The Knapps are in fear that if they exercise their First Amendment rights they will be cited, prosecuted and sent to jail,” Tedesco told me.

It’s hard to believe this could happen in the United States. But as the lawsuit states, the Knapps are in a “constant state of fear that they may have to go to jail, pay substantial fines, or both, resulting in them losing the business that God has called them to operate and which they have faithfully operated for 25 years.”

The lawsuit came the same week that the city of Houston issued subpoenas demanding that five Christian pastors turn over sermons dealing with homosexuality and gender identity.

What in heaven’s name is happening to our country, folks? I was under the assumption that churches and pastors would not be impacted by same-sex marriage.

“The other side insisted this would never happen – that pastors would not have to perform same-sex marriages,” Tedesco told me. “The reality is – it’s already happening.”

Tony Perkins, president of the Family Research Council, told me it’s “open season on Americans who refuse to bow to the government’s redefinition of marriage.”

“Americans are witnesses to the reality that redefining marriage is less about the marriage altar and more about fundamentally altering the freedoms of the other 98 percent of Americans,” Perkins said.
Why should evangelical Christian ministers be forced to perform and celebrate any marriage that conflicts with their beliefs?

“This is the brave new world of government-sanctioned same-sex unions – where Americans are forced to celebrate these unions regardless of their religious beliefs,” Perkins told me.

As I write in my new book, “God Less America,” we are living in a day when those who support traditional marriage are coming under fierce attack. 

The incidents in Houston and now in Coeur d’Alene are the just the latest examples of a disturbing trend in the culture war – direct attacks on clergy.

“Government officials are making clear they will use their government power to punish those who oppose the advances of homosexual activists,” Perkins said.

I’m afraid Mr. Perkins is absolutely right.

No one should be discriminated against but have you noticed that any time a city passes a “nondiscrimination” ordinance, it’s the Christians who wind up being discriminated against?

http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2014/10/20/city-threatens-to-arrest-ministers-who-refuse-to-perform-same-sex-weddings.html

Archbishop Apuron On Same Sex Marriage, Past And Present

It was on April of this year when two Chamorro women tried to apply for a marriage license on Guam.  They were refused; therefore, they sued the health department and the Governor.  Before that, Archbishop Apuron spoke out against same sex marriage.  According to news report: 

"In two statements, a February AP interview published April 13 by the Archdiocese of Agana,  and a diocesan statement published April 20, the archbishop spoke out on Church teaching on homosexual “marriage” while differing opinions from Guam leaders has left the island in conflict on the issue."

https://www.lifesitenews.com/news/the-church-must-oppose-homosexuality-even-though-were-hated-for-it-guam-arc

You can also find the Archbishop's statement published in the Marianas Variety dated April 22nd here.

As anyone can see, the Archbishop has spoken out against same sex marriage even before the two Chamorro women decided to take their lawsuit to court.  Archbishop Apuron has been known to stand against same sex unions, and he has made his stand known through the public media.  About 3 or 4 years ago, Bill 185 was proposed.  If passed, it would legalize same sex union on Guam.  During that time, the Archdiocese of Agana gathered nearly 8000 signatures in a petition against Bill 185.  According to news report: 

"The Archdiocese of Agana has urged parishioners to sign a petition to senators, urging them to oppose Bill 185 and other similar legislation.  Apuron is hoping to gather more than 10,000 signatures.
 
The Guam Alternative Lifestyles Association meanwhile has been gathering signatures of their own.  Guam Youth Congress Speaker Derrick Hills, who initiated the same-sex civil union legislation, was appalled by the Archbishop's comments, telling KUAM News, "I think it's so ridiculous to say that homosexuality can be a conversion, it can be done through the church.  I think that's absolutely false.  It's not even proven through any association that you can convert homosexuals to living a straight lifestyle."

Hills added, "I don't see where the religious church is coming from when they say we can go to their masses and seek religious advice when we're talking about political issues."

For the time being, the Archbishop is scheduled to meet with members of the Guam Legislature tomorrow morning to discuss his concerns."

http://www.kuam.com/story/11335854/shocking-twist-in-same-sex-unions-debate?clienttype=mobile&redirected=true

Again, as anyone can see from news report, the Archbishop has been vocal against same sex marriage. As a matter of fact, Senator B.J. Cruz even went so far as to meet with the Archbishop in order that Bill 185 would be revised more to the Church's liking, but the Archbishop did not budge from his stand with Catholic teaching.  According to news report (the bold is mine):

"After several controversial town hall meetings were held on legislation that would allow for same-sex civil unions on Guam, Acting Speaker of the 30th Guam Legislature B.J. Cruz has introduced an amended version of Bill 138.  But the question remains where the changes in the bill will be enough to garner support from the Catholic Church, which staunchly opposes any union involving same-sex couples.

 

After a series of town meetings were held to allow the public to provide comments on legislation that would allow for same-sex civil unions on Guam, Cruz has introduced a substitute version of his proposed legislation, which was prompted by, as he says, "Considerable debate in the community about the bill."

 

The acting speaker introduced the original version of Bill 138 on behalf of the Guam Youth Congress, but as a result of several concerns raised in the community and discussions with the Catholic Church he decided to keep the bill the same number, but with revisions.  "I met with the archbishop and he asked that we not use the word 'marriage', and we not use the word 'union'," Cruz recalled.  "There was some concern about solemnization the ceremonies that were conducted we've taken out the ceremony and its just going to be a registration where you go in and before a notary public you would attest to the fact that you' re in this committed relationship with this other person"

 

The revised measure essentially allows for domestic partnerships between heterosexual and same-sex couples without going through any sort of official ceremony. All the couples will have to do is fill out a license application on a form prescribed by Public Health and pay a fee of $30.  "You get a document back that you can present back to your health insurance company that you can present to the Retirement Fund that you can show in the event you want to show because the person got killed in a car accident or something.  Take it to the hospital and say, 'Let me in the room, I may have a different last name, but this is my life partner.'  And this allows me into the room and into ICU."

 

https://www.facebook.com/notes/kuam-news/cruz-revises-same-sex-civil-union-bill/101597857551

 

The Parker Controversy

David Parker was a father in Massachusetts whose 6 year old son was being taught in the school that homosexual relationships are acceptable and normal. He and his wife requested the school to notify them if homosexuality would be taught in their son's class. They wanted their son to be opted out from the class because they believe that homosexuality is wrong.

 Now that the Supreme Court has ruled that same sex marriage is legal, it is not enough for the gay activists that they had won this round. They wanted same sex marriage, and they got it. But it was not enough. They want to force their belief on everyone. They want everyone to accept homosexuality as normal. After same sex marriage was passed in Massachusetts, they targeted very young children in the kindergarten and first grade class where they indoctrinate this generation to accept homosexuality as normal. By the second grade, they introduce books such as "King and King", which portray homosexual romance.

Announcement

Dear commenters

I have received a few comments, but I have not published them because they are not in the English language.  All comments must be written in English.  If you are unable to write in English, please get someone who can help you.

Thank you,
Diana

Guam Marriage Equality Act

Guam Marriage Equality Act: A “Defeat for Our Island and for Humanity.”
 

Sisters and Brothers: In the face of recent events undertaken by the U.S. District Court of Guam, the U.S. Supreme Court and the 33rd Guam Legislature in redefining marriage, the Church stands firm on her teaching that marriage is between one man, and one woman. While the Church does not agree with the decisions taken by the courts, or those taken by our local legislators, disagreement is not discrimination. These recent laws force the People of Guam, and of the United States, to either agree with a particular political position, or face ridicule and sanction for discrimination. These types of laws not only undermine the precepts of the United States Constitution to Freedom of Speech, but also undermines and attempts to eradicate the Constitutional Right to Freedom of Religion – we are living in dangerous times, under the law of man, where Catholics, and Christians alike, are commanded to forfeit our religious beliefs.

These times compel the Church to expose the intentions of those who have deceivingly disguised same-sex unions, as an issue of equality and anti-discrimination. It is important to understand that the political pressure to push the agenda for same sex “marriage” has never been about gay rights; the true intention behind this agenda has always been about the destruction of the family, and the imposition of a totalitarian system. The approval of same-sex “marriage” has now thrown open the doors of Guam to implement in our community a very clever and systematic theory, which has as its aim the destruction of marriage and family through the annihilation of any sexual differences among persons, this theory is known as the “Theory of Gender.”

At the political level, in order to avoid “discrimination” among the genders, a principle of “equality,” or more specifically, a “radical equality” has been imposed upon society, demanding and forcing society to have a neutral response to gender; any objection is considered not only discriminatory, and intolerant, but bigotry.
 

The next step will be to implement this theory in the educational system of Guam. This means that our children, your children, will be forced to assimilate to this pattern of non-gender; that there is no-such-thing as “male” or “female”; they will be encouraged to explore their sexuality earlier, and parents will have no voice in the education of their children. The natural family will be seen as a threat for the “new age.” These ideas are already part of an international agenda promoted especially by the United Nations. The laws just passed on our beautiful island, which were disguised to fight against discrimination, will now work to subvert our human sexuality from the most tender age with the goal to abolish the natural family and create new “models” of a family.
 

I truly believe we are being led astray like lambs to a slaughter. In my view, these recent laws are not a sign of human progress, but are dangerous steps toward annihilation of our fundamental religious beliefs. As Shepherd of the local Church of Guam, I urge every person to be mindful that each of us is answerable to the Supreme Judge for what we do, and do not do. I invite all the Faithful, including those in every branch of our local government, not to deny your faith, but to have the courage to be a witness to the truth: the truth about life, about man, about marriage and about family. Do not be afraid! Christ is the truth, and the truth will set us free.

Servus tuus,

Most Rev. Anthony Sablan Apuron, OFM Cap., D.D.,

Archbishop of Agana

August 19, 2015

Errors Of An Opposing Catholic

Those who oppose the Way often cite us of teaching errors of the Catholic faith.  Yet, these are the kinds of Catholic teachings one opposing Catholic embraced.  According to an anonymous commenter who is not walking in the Way (the bold is mine):

AnonymousAugust 20, 2015 at 6:40 PM

Dear Diana, even St. Paul can be not right some time. Yes, it is possible. The only source of grace is the suffering and death of Jesus. Or, as Joane said, the "blood of the Lamb". Without Jesus dying on the cross, nothing would have been accomplished. But with His suffering and blood soaking death everything has been already accomplished, because of His blood. The voluntary shedding of His blood that He did brought us infinite amount of grace sufficient for saving the wide world!

It is not true that without resurrection there is no salvation. The opposite is the truth: resurrection is only possible because of salvation accomplished on the cross. The cross is everything, the empty tomb is only a bonus for the weak. Whatever St. Paul teaches and became part of the one and true Catholic teaching, would remain valid even if Jesus had never been risen! Why do you think resurrection was necessary if not by the mercy of God for the mankind? 

This same anonymous poster continued to say (the bold is mine): 

AnonymousAugust 21, 2015 at 12:03 AM

And now we get to one of the major problems with the errant teaching of the NCW. It is the death of Christ on the cross that brought us the grace to be saved. The resurrection is thew fruit of that death on the cross, and while it is true as St Paul said that our preaching would be in vain if there was no resurrection, it is not through the resurrection that we are saved. The resurrection is rather the sign of our salvatoin and our hope of eternal life in Christ.

The NCW teaches something different about the economy of salvation and the merits of Christ's death, emphasizing the resurrection to the detriment of the memory of the passion and death of Our Lord. This is why the Mass has become a banquet in the NCW, rather than the re-presentation of the sacrifice of Calvary. All of the NCW errors stem from this misjudgement.

This is my response: 

Dear Anonymous, YOU are the one who is in error.  I do not know where you got the idea that the resurrection of Jesus Christ should be downgraded and de-emphasized to the point where you can even say that His resurrection is not needed for our redemption.  You stated:  Dear Diana, even St. Paul can be not right some time. Yes, it is possible. 

St. Paul wrote to the Corinthians saying that his preaching and their faith would be in vain if there were no resurrection.  Every article of faith taught by St. Paul and the Apostles in the Holy Bible are INFALLIBLE because it came from the infallible Holy Spirit.  Therefore, St. Paul cannot make an error in regards to the teaching of faith because he and the Apostles are infallible.   

Easter is the most important event in Christianity because it signifies His resurrection.  You stated that it is not through the resurrection that we are saved?   It is through His death AND resurrection that we are saved.   The resurrection is just as important to our salvation as His death on the cross. After all, in order for Christ to rise from the dead, He had to die first.  But His resurrection is not to be underscored. This is why Sunday has become the Lord's Day for us, not Saturday the Sabbath.
   
Anonymous, you stated:  Whatever St. Paul teaches and became part of the one and true Catholic teaching, would remain valid even if Jesus had never been risen!  Without the resurrection, Christianity would not exist.  If Christ only died and did not resurrect from the dead, there would be no salvation for man because it is through His death AND resurrection that we are saved.  According to the Catechism of the Catholic Church (bold is mine): 

CCC 991   Belief in the resurrection of the dead has been an essential element of the Christian faith from its beginnings. "The confidence of Christians is the resurrection of the dead; believing this we live." 

How can some of you say that there is no resurrection of the dead? But if there is no resurrection of the dead, then Christ has not been raised; if Christ has not been raised, then our preaching is in vain and your faith is in vain. . . . But in fact Christ has been raised from the dead, the first fruits of those who have fallen asleep.

CCC 1167   Sunday is the pre-eminent day for the liturgical assembly, when the faithful gather "to listen to the word of God and take part in the Eucharist, thus calling to mind the Passion, Resurrection, and glory of the Lord Jesus, and giving thanks to God who 'has begotten them again, by the resurrection of Jesus Christ from the dead' unto a living hope":

When we ponder, O Christ, the marvels accomplished on this day, the Sunday of your holy resurrection, we say: "Blessed is Sunday, for on it began creation . . . the world's salvation . . . the renewal of the human race. . . . On Sunday heaven and earth rejoiced and the whole universe was filled with light. Blessed is Sunday, for on it were opened the gates of paradise so that Adam and all the exiles might enter it without fear.

You said that the NCW emphasized the resurrection to the detriment of the memory of His passion and death, which is why the Mass has become a banquet.  Anonymous, the NCW claims that the Mass is a sacrifice AND a banquet.  It is not one or the other.  It is BOTH, and we recognize it as both a sacrifice and a banquet.  I think the problem here is that you see it ONLY as a sacrifice, which is not what the Church teaches.  The Catholic Church never taught that the Mass is ONLY a sacrifice.  According to the Catechism of the Catholic Church (bold is mine):  

CCC 1382   The Mass is at the same time, and inseparably, the sacrificial memorial in which the sacrifice of the cross is perpetuated and the sacred banquet of communion with the Lord's body and blood. But the celebration of the Eucharistic sacrifice is wholly directed toward the intimate union of the faithful with Christ through communion. To receive communion is to receive Christ himself who has offered himself for us.

Do you see what the Catechism says about the Mass?  It is both a sacrificial memorial and a sacred banquet.  Apparently, you have emphasized the death of our Lord to the point that His resurrection is no longer valid nor needed.   

 

Jungle Manipulations

An anonymous commenter who goes by the name "grow up in faith" made the following comment, which can be found here.  The bold is mine. 

grow up in faithAugust 18, 2015 at 5:37 PM

I agree with gi hagat August 18, 2015 at 12:31 PM who wrote this at Junglewatch to Tim Rohr:

"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.

Gi hagat was correct.  Zoltan only mentioned Mr. Taitano's opinion as being simplistic.  Tim Rohr twisted it around and misleads his readers into believing that Zoltan was referring to all Chamorros.  It was actually Tim who said "Chamorros."  The majority of people who post in the jungle are hardcore extremists, which is why I do not post any comments there.  I cannot stress enough to Zoltan and other NCW members that trying to reason with hardcore radicals is useless.  Even the U.S. will not negotiate with terrorists so why would anyone want to try and reason with a radical?  They are getting more and more frustrated because Rome remains silent and they have accomplished absolutely nothing. 

In September, the Pope will be visiting the United States.  In October, there will be more good news for the NCW.  :-) 

 

Eucharistic Celebrations In Small Communities

One of the concerns brought up by those who are not in the NCW is that the NCW does not celebrate the Mass inside the church building.  They believe that by holding the Eucharistic celebrations outside the church building, the NCW has become a parallel church.  Nothing could not be further from the truth.  Our Catholic brothers who do not walk in the Way do not understand that we are all united by one faith, one baptism, and in union with the Holy See as the Body of Christ. To put it in simple terms, a physical place does not unite Christians.   

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