AnonymousFebruary 2, 2015 at 6:32 PM
Dear Diana at 6.14. Read the passage from Romans. I am not suggesting that Baptism prevents us from sinning personally, but clearly the author is saying that we are no longer under the dominion of sin because our Baptism changes everything. The NCW do not get this distinction and therefore treat all new members as though their baptism is meaningless without the steps of the "Way"
My response to this comment:
Dear Anonymous at 6:32 pm,
The Holy Bible says that "not everyone who says 'Lord, Lord' will enter the Kingdom of God but those who do the will of my Father in Heaven."
Baptism becomes meaningless if one does not live their baptismal promises through conversion. In other words, even a baptized person can lose their salvation. We are not like the Protestants who believe in the "once save always save" concept. We are Catholics who believe that we are in the process of being saved. A process involves "step by step".
St. Paul even described this step by step process when he told the Church in Corinth that he could not instruct them in spiritual matters yet because they were not yet ready for it.
1 Corinthians 3:1-2 Brothers and sisters, I could not address you as people who live by the Spirit but as people who are still worldly—mere infants in Christ. I gave you milk, not solid food, for you were not yet ready for it. Indeed, you are still not ready.
We are called to become like Christ, and for many of us that takes a very long process.
The Holy Bible says that "not everyone who says 'Lord, Lord' will enter the Kingdom of God but those who do the will of my Father in Heaven."
Baptism becomes meaningless if one does not live their baptismal promises through conversion. In other words, even a baptized person can lose their salvation. We are not like the Protestants who believe in the "once save always save" concept. We are Catholics who believe that we are in the process of being saved. A process involves "step by step".
St. Paul even described this step by step process when he told the Church in Corinth that he could not instruct them in spiritual matters yet because they were not yet ready for it.
1 Corinthians 3:1-2 Brothers and sisters, I could not address you as people who live by the Spirit but as people who are still worldly—mere infants in Christ. I gave you milk, not solid food, for you were not yet ready for it. Indeed, you are still not ready.
We are called to become like Christ, and for many of us that takes a very long process.
He/She then stated:
AnonymousFebruary 2, 2015 at 7:35 PM
Dear Diana at 7.03pm. Ok then. Tell me what happens to our salvation after spending 30 years in the Way, having completed all the steps. Are you saved by this? And if not, why is it then necessary to have this step by step, as you say. Are you not then in exactly the same situation as any other baptised Catholic? If not, how do you differ. What would happen if you suffered amnesia then. Would you have to start all over again? Or would you still be considered as one of the "elect"?
Apparently, this anonymous commenter did not understand that in Catholicism, living out our baptismal promise is a "step by step" process. According to the anonymous commenter, he/she stated that the NCW "treat all new members as though their baptism is meaningless without the steps of the "Way" when actually it was the Catholic Church all along that has taught that a step by step process is needed to live out one's baptismal promise. Simply check out the Catechism of the Catholic Church (the bold is mine):
CCC 1231 Where infant Baptism has become the form in which this sacrament is usually celebrated, it has become a single act encapsulating the preparatory stages of Christian initiation in a very abridged way. By its very nature infant Baptism requires a post-baptismal catechumenate. Not only is there a need for instruction after Baptism, but also for the necessary flowering of baptismal grace in personal growth. The catechism has its proper place here.
According to the Catholic Church, infant baptism requires a post-baptismal catechumenate. The Neocatechumenal Way fulfils the Catechism of the Catholic Church by providing a post-baptismal neocatechumenate as an instrument at the service of the bishops for the rediscovery of Christan initiation by baptized adults (Title II, Chapter !, Art. 5 of the Statutes).
Conversion is a step by step process (See CCC 1439). Some of our Christian brothers believe in a "once saved always saved" philosophy and can even tell you the date they were saved. Catholics, on the other hand, believe that we are in the process of being saved and understand that our salvation can be lost because we still have the free will to reject God despite that we are already baptized. Christ said: I give them eternal life, and they shall never perish; no one will snatch them out of my hand. My Father, who has given them to me, is greater than all; no one can snatch them out of my Father’s hand. (John 10:28-29).
It is true that we belong to God and no one can snatch us out of His hand; yet, what is to prevent us from walking out of His hand? God has never taken away our free will, and the moment we choose to leave His hand is the moment we lose our salvation. Salvation comes from God alone. Through His death, Christ has liberated and freed us from the sin that held us bondage. It was through Adam's disobedience that brought sin and death to all mankind, and it was through Christ's obedience that brought us eternal life. When Adam and Eve fell, their sin affected all mankind and the entire world. It brought separation from God and disharmony. The descendants of Adam and Eve were born with original sin. But Christ's death and resurrection conquered death, redeemed man, and opened the gates of Heaven so that man can enter God's kingdom whereas before these gates were once closed to man. Although our baptism took away Original Sin, we still struggle with personal sins on a daily basis. Nevertheless, we have Christ to pick us up when we fall. We have the sacrament of reconciliation to bring us back to God and His Church.
Salvation comes from God alone, and one can find salvation in the Church because Christ is the Head of the Church and present in the Sacraments. Salvation can be found in the Neocatechumenal Way as well as other organizations within the Church. God, in all His mercy and His desire to save all men, has established many ways to call His children to Him so they can live out their baptismal promises to walk like His Son Jesus Christ. This walk to imitate Christ is important for all Catholics. Why? Because being a "Catholic" will not save you. Anyone who believes that ONLY Catholics will go to Heaven are in grave error for the Catholic Church never taught that.
CCC 837 "Fully incorporated into the society of the Church are those who, possessing the Spirit of Christ, accept all the means of salvation given to the Church together with her entire organization, and who - by the bonds constituted by the profession of faith, the sacraments, ecclesiastical government, and communion - are joined in the visible structure of the Church of Christ, who rules her through the Supreme Pontiff and the bishops. Even though incorporated into the Church, one who does not however persevere in charity is not saved. He remains indeed in the bosom of the Church, but 'in body' not 'in heart.'"
Great response Diana.
ReplyDeleteBut you didn't answer the Anon's questions. If one were to suffer amnesia, would he or she need to repeat all the steps?
ReplyDeleteAnd what about the NCW's tendency to forget that most of its members are already baptised? Where does the NCW speak about the "grace of Baptism". And what does that actually mean to the NCW?
Dear Anonymous at 10:52 am,
DeleteThe Catechism of the Catholic Church #1231 says that a baptized person would need some post-baptismal catechism to mature in faith.
If a person suffered from amnesia, it would be unnecessary to repeat the steps. The steps is not like a grade you receive in school. Steps has to do with changes toward conversion. which can take a lifetime. In other words, completing the entire steps does not necessarily mean that the person has already converted. It is possible that a person has completed the entire steps of the Way, but is still in the process of conversion so that one can walk more like Christ.
I'm not sure how to understand this. If an amnesiac does not need the "steps", even though presumably they are still in the "process of conversion", why does anyone else need them?
DeleteThe amnesia example is stupid. Does a person w amnesia need conversion? Or is he become sinless by virtue of memory loss!
DeleteDear Anon at 10.45. The question was does a person who forgets all the steps need to do all the steps again. Diana says no, which makes one wonder why its so necessary in the first place.
DeleteDear Anonymous at 1:57 pm,
DeleteDo you think it is right to fault a person who has an illness (amnesia)? That would be cruel if you do.
Wouldn't the amnesiac need to be re-instructed in what the sacraments are? What if he has forgotten who Jesus is? Wouldn't he need to be re-taught the story of salvation? I still think this hypothetical is silly.
DeleteDear Anonymous at 11:29 am,
DeleteThis walk in the Way is not about knowledge. When a person dies, do you actually think that God is going to ask him if he memorized the 7 Sacraments??? Our walk is based on whether we are able to 1) love God and 2) to forgive and love the enemy as well as our neighbor. The goal of our walk is to get into Heaven so we can gain eternal life. In other words, we want to follow God's will.
That is partially true. You are right, faith is not based on erudition but on experience HOWEVER conversion comes with self-knowledge. And the efficaciousness of the sacraments depends amongst other things on knowing and understanding what you are doing when you receive them, how they affect you, the conditions for receiving them etc. If you do not know the 10 commandments and capital sins, or the conditions for a good confession, what are you going to go to confession about? Knowledge supports and aids faith. we are not protestants who do not believe in the aid of reason! Even in your early stages of walking, you are learning. You are learning how to read the bible, you are learning about who you are and discovering your limitations. Which also answers that post about the kenosis: the descent into the waters of baptism is about discovering who you are and becoming simple by recognizing your need for God. You will also study the church fathers, the catechism as you progress in the way. Yes, everything is based on the experience of love of God and neighbor, but a catholic cannot expect scientia infusa. It is our duty, or better it is our need, within the confines of each persons limitations, to know what it is we believe. The Holy Spirit does not need these things to touch the spirit of a person. Obviously God does whatever he wants. Joan of Arc was an illiterate teenager and Bernadette was constantly refused communion because she didn't know her catechism. Yet God chose them and they are now saints. But it is a little arrogant of anybody to not use the gifts of knowledge and reason that God, after all, has given us.
Deleteto return to the silly hypothetical, which is actually turning into an interesting discussion, an amnesiac needs to re-learn everything, as much as he can. He needs to re-learn everything for his daily life, doesn't it follow that he needs to re-learn everything needed for the spiritual life? Does he need to repeat the steps? Well is that so tragic? Honestly i don't know.I think it would depend a lot his or her community. It might seem cruel, but if the goal is God and Heaven, and reason supports and aids faith, then it is cruel but necessary, no?
the communal aspects of this hypothetical intrigues me. but I don't know if I should launch into that discussion.
Dear Anonymous at 12:54 pm,
DeleteGod's commandments are written in our hearts, so even an atheist who does not believe in God has some capability of distinguishing between right and wrong. I do not think the person with amnesia would need to go back and start over again. That is why he has the brothers in the community to help him continue the journey. The community is there for him and to help him. In the Way, we constantly read the Bible over and over whether we are at the beginning, at the end of the first scrutiny or at the end of the second scrutiny.
I am the Anonymous poster to whom you respond in this post Diana.
ReplyDeleteI'd like to point out a couple of things if you will permit? (it will have to be in two parts, if you don't mind)
First of all, look at the context for the first of my comments to which you refer. Before I mentioned Romans 6, I stated:
"The problem is that these "communications" (ie through the testimonies during Mass), are not isolated. They occur within the context of behavior that reinforces the implications I have suggested. Think about "dry bones", the judgemental attitude of neos to anyone outside their group. Think about the false dichotomies they establish between pagan "natural religiosity" and the Christian religion. The Church has always taught that natural religion prepares one to receive the true faith - that "grace perfects nature". This is implicitly rejected by the NCW. Think about how the NCW treat those who are already baptised. Is there any distinction made, in a practical way (that is, in what is delivered in the catechesis, in what is described as necessary for a neocatechumen to believe and do) between a "member" who is baptised and one who is not? For all intents and purposes the baptism is forgotten.
Think about how Evelyn in her "testimony" stated "he knows you cannot get out from that sin". Remember she is addressing Mass-going baptised Catholics here. "
In other words, I was making the point that the NCW have a condescending attitude to Catholics that are outside of the "Way" and treat them, whether intentionally or not, as second-rate, or failed Catholics - somehow deficient because they are not apparently "walking". I then pointed out that it is as though the baptised "regular" Catholic is not considered catholic at all. In the CCC paragraph 1231 quoted above you will see the words "baptismal grace". What does this mean to the NCW?
Now, the NCW has sort of co-opted the term "walking", again as though ordinary Catholics do not "walk" with Jesus Christ. You will know that in practical terms the communities are full of people that look down on the ordinary "Sunday Catholic" - this has been attested to by members of the NCW that commented on my original post. There needs to be a change of attitude so that the NCW realise that baptised Catholics are already "walking", due to this baptismal grace, notwithstanding their own free choice and the ever present danger of falling.
But you yourself have reiterated what I originally stated, and which you originally seemed to take exception to, namely that "Through His death, Christ has liberated and freed us from the sin that held us bondage".
Yes, this means that although we are still of a disordered sinful nature, we are not slaves to sin as we were before baptism, because in becoming united with Christ, we share in his death and resurrection.
Dear Anonymous at 11:40 am,
DeleteFirst, let us start one at a time. Let us start here and address these issues first before we get to the rest of the two comments you wrote. You said that the NCW rejects pagan "natural religiosity". That is correct. Buddhism, Hinduism, Shintoism, and even the neo-pagan religions like the Wiccans who worship nature are FALSE religions. It is not just the NCW that views these pagan religions as false, but the Catholic religion also views these religions as false. However, the Church recognizes that there is some "goodness" in these religions. The "goodness" found in these religions comes from the one true God. It is the "goodness" in these religions that will prepare them to receive the Gospels, but in now way does this make the pagan natural religion a true religion. It is still a false religion. According to the Catechism of the Catholic Church:
CCC 843 The Catholic Church recognizes in other religions that search, among shadows and images, for the God who is unknown yet near since he gives life and breath and all things and wants all men to be saved. Thus, the Church considers all goodness and truth found in these religions as "a preparation for the Gospel and given by him who enlightens all men that they may at length have life."332
As for the baptized Catholic, he/she is not automatically saved just because they are Catholic. As I mentioned in my post, Catholics believe that we are in the process of being save, and we are called to persevere in that process.
You also mentioned Evelyn's testimony. You said that you heard Evelyn say " "he knows you cannot get out from that sin". I was not there to hear Evelyn's entire testimony. However, we cannot get out from our sin by ourselves. We need Christ in our life.....and yes, even baptized Catholics need Christ in their life. Only Christ can heal us and get us out from that sin. On our own, we cannot do it ourselves. As human, we would always fall, but with God.....all things are possible.
I am certain that there are some people in the Way who are arrogant and look down on others. That is true for all people in all walks of life. The NCW is no exception. There are even people in the Church who looks down on the NCW. There are people in the Latin Mass who also look down on those who attend the non-Latin Mass. You will find all these people in all walks of life. Wouldn't you agree that this is an attitude that needs to be changed not only in the NCW, but everywhere else as well?
Dear Diana, thankyou - I trust you will post the second half of my comments.
Delete"You said that the NCW rejects pagan "natural religiosity".
This is not quite what I said. I said that the NCW sets up a false dichotomy between "natural religiosity" and Christianity. This begins in the first sessions of the initial catechesis. The Church does not do this, as you have illustrated in your comment. The Church treats "natural religiosity" as a natural good that foreshadows and prepares one for a supernatural good. Thus the true religion is superimposed over, and perfects natural religion, rather than them being necessarily at odds. It is also true that the Church does not treat natural religion as sufficient for salvation though.
You will of course know that in the NCW the term "natural religiosity" is bound up with negative connotations, and is used to put people in their places, as well as to criticise various aspects of "regular" Catholic practise and belief. It is a negative term that becomes a weapon in the hands of the catechist.
Secondly, please re-read my previous comments. At no stage have I ever said or implied that Baptism automatically saves, as you seem to suggest.
No. Please let me be clear. I have spoken about baptism only to point out that there is no practical difference made by the NCW in the delivery of the catechesis and the way people are treated, between one who is baptised and one who is not. This carries an implicit denial of baptismal grace. To cast me as somehow taking this once saved, always saved position is totally missing the point (I hope it is a case of accidentally missing the point).
Yes, I agree that in every situation there are sometimes people who take an arrogant and condescending attitude to others. Again, though, this is not what I am concerned about. It is not simply the individuals propensity to arrogance that is the problem here. Rather, it is the systemic and deliberate arrogance of a system that pits itself against the "others", defining them as deficient, ignorant, Judases, or servants of the devil.
This is structural in the NCW and absolutely rife.
Dear Anonymous at 1:08 pm,
DeletePerhaps, we are defining or understanding "natural religiosity" in a different way. When you say "pagan natural religiosity" I assume you meant non-Christian religions. How do you define "natural religiousity"? Can you give an example of "natural religiosity:?
As for the second point, the Judases are actually most of us. In Kiko's catechesis, he drew circles, representing the entire Church. The circles do not represent the NCW communities but the entire Church. From what I understand (and if there are any catechests out there who can correct me if I misunderstood it), the center of the circle is Christ. He is the center and the first circle. He is the salt. He called people into communities or assemblies.....just like he did with the Apostles. The second circle are the enlighten and salted ones. Those are the holy saints....such as Mother Teresa, St. John Paul II, and the rest living or dead who live a humble and virtuous life. In time, after these people are gone, the Catholic Church would recognize them to be saints in the future These are the ones you see doing acts of mercy like Mother Teresa and her nuns, becoming a martyr like the Christians in Syria, and sacrificing their life so that another person would live.
The third circle are the rest of us. The term "Judas" was used because it was Judas who betrayed Christ. Most of us fall in the third circle.
This catechesis of circles was not given to the NCW community. It was given to the entire Church who are not in the NCW. If it was instructed only to the community, then people would misinterpret the third circle as those not walking in the community, which is what Chuck White and Tim Rohr had done. But this catechesis was given to people who were not in an NCW community so they can understand that the brothers in the second circle are the holy saints and the few people on earth who are living virtuous lives or imitating Christ while the brothers in the third circle are the rest of us not living a virtuous life nor imitating Christ; yet, are normal baptized Catholics. Christ who is in the first circle calls all of us to be in the second circle regardless of whether one is in the Way or not.
Dear Diana. I am referring to "Natural religiosity" in the sense that it is given in the initial catechesis of the NCW, and reinforced thereafter. If you had a copy of the catechetical directory, you could read it, and there would be no confusion as to what is meant. But in the absence of that book, how about you ask your catechist what they mean in the third session of the initial catechesis?
DeleteWhat does this phrase mean to you?
"Not everyone is called to be salt and light"
This is a NCW phrase meant to convince a member not to leave the community, as if they do they will be abandoning this "call" to be salt and light. That's the reality. The community is considered the salt and light, and everyone else is to be "salted" and enlightened by them. You know this. I get the feeling you are playing games now.
"This catechesis of circles was not given to the NCW community. It was given to the entire Church who are not in the NCW."
What does this even mean? Of course its given to the NCW communities. It was given to all of us present at the initial catechesis. Again, read the book and you will see. In the community, a Judas is one who seeks to criticise or "bring down" the NCW. You know this. Don't play games.
Diana - You call it "Kiko's catechesis", therefore it's for the neo community and definitely not for those who are not neo. Funny, I thought you said the NCW follows the Catholic catechesis but here you now acknowledge that you do follow Kiko's.
DeleteU r both wrong. Salt light and leaven have to do with the mission of the church. Some are called to be salt light and leaven. Others are called to be salted enlightened and leavened. Finally, there is judas. Judas is the person who will only come to know the love of God by killing the christian, physically and metaphorically and seeing that the Christian allows himself to be killed. He has the most important role in the life of the church. Christ was killed unjustly, and a Christian is called to be Christ-like. For a Christian to become Christ-like he needs to have a judas in his life. That's it. No circle is better than other. Each circle has a different mission.
DeleteDear Anonymous at 4:57 pm,
DeleteWhat makes you think that I am playing games? I do not have the catechist book, but I hope that a catechist in the Way reading this blog would be able to answer your question. I remember a little about the initial catechesis, but that was about 8 years ago.
We are all called to be the light of the world and the salt of the earth. That means that ALL of us are called to be holy like Christ, That is written in the Bible. God did not call some to be holy. He called all Christians to be holy.
If everyone in the NCW community are already the salt and the light, then why are the catechists always telling us to be the salt and the light?? My catechist have never told my community that we are the salt and the light. Instead, they encourage us to be the salt and the light....meaning that we are not there yet.
To be the salt means to die for the other, and not many people want to do that. Even husbands and wives in the communities admit they do not always die for the other. If the husband wants to watch the superbowl and the wife wants her husband to cut the grass, he would ignore her and tell her he will do it tomorrow when there is no superbowl. Perhaps, there is an arrogant brother in the community saying that everyone in the Way are the salt and light while the others are not?
The catechesis is given to those who come to listen to the catechesis......that would be the people who are not walking in the Way. The book that the catechists have are instructions that they read to those not walking in the Way. The diagram of circles symbolized the entire Catholic Church. This I remember. I remember the catechist saying that in God's Church, you have some brothers who have become the salt and the light. Those would be in the second circle. The rest of the brothers are in the third circle. That is where most of us are. The catechists NEVER said that all the NCW communities are in the second circle.
If the Catechists were to actually say that, what communities would be born? However, the goal is to be in the second circle, and the Catholic Church offers her children many ways to get there. The NCW is one of those ways.
Dear Anonymous at 10:56 pm,
DeleteThe NCW follows everything the Church approves. And the Catechetical Directory written by Kiko was approved by the Vatican.
Dear Anonymous at 10:55 pm,
DeleteI remember my catechist saying that to be the salt means to die for the other. And he gave an example. When salt is placed in the soup, it dissolves but gives it taste. To be like the salt is to dissolve (die) so that the other soup (the other person) becomes great. Being the light and salt is meant to help others. God said to be the light of the world so that others who see your light would also come to glorify God. Many of us are Judas because we kill other people with our anger and pride. Our sins hurt ourselves and other people.
Dear February 3 at 9:33 pm,
Deleteyour facetiousness is delightful. From now on I will make sure to never credit any catholic author for his or her work. I will never again say St. Thomas' Summa, or Augustine's Confessions, or Jerome's Bible. Gone is the time when we said St. John's Dark night, and St. Theresa's Little Way. Never shall we say Girard's scapegoat, or Stein's scientia crucis. Need I go on?
AnonymousFebruary 3, 2015 at 9:33 PM - your the only one who has a problem. Opus Dei was founded by a priest Josemaría Escrivá in 1928 and approved by Pope Pius XII but Kiko Arguello has the backing of five Popes.
DeleteYou Jungle dwellers neglect to remember that Saint John Paul II and Pope Emeritus encourage Kiko Arguello to start the Cathecatical Directory for nearly three decades ago.
This is sealed but you dwellers continue to find every angle to discredit it.
February 4@2:15, maybe my sarcasm is not clear? I'm going to clarify it in case anybody else misreads it like you did. The post I was responding to claimed that Kiko's catechesis is not catholic because Diana called it Kiko's catechesis. If one follows that logic, then no catholic author should ever be credit for his work because that would make him un-catholic. Does that clarify? What you say is correct, but your tone is off-putting.
DeleteCont.
ReplyDeleteSo when you say:
"Apparently, this anonymous commenter did not understand that in Catholicism, living out our baptismal promise is a "step by step" process."
I would reply that at no stage did I say that I deny such a "step by step process". But life is a step-by-step process itself. Its called growing up; coming to maturity in faith. This can be guided, of course, And it ought to be. but it is not something exclusive to the philosophy of the NCW. Nor is the so-called "concrete reality" (ie the existential dimension of life) that is emphasized in the NCW. Existential moments do not need to be induced, as the NCW seems to think. Every human life is comprised of a series of "existential moments".
My original post did not challenge the Church's teaching on baptism, nor the need to develop ones personal faith and community life. It did challenge the NCW statement that "you can't get out from under your sin". With the grace of Baptism in Jesus Christ you can, and though you can't be sure of your own salvation you can certainly trust in God and hope for salvation in his name.
You should try to understand why this "you can't get out from your sin" is so important to the "Way". You should try to understand it in the context of being "disassembled" psychologically, and put back together again, because this is the aim of the NCW. It aims to violently destroy the person and remake them according to Kiko's own personal experience. Because Kiko had a particular existential moment, he thinks we all need the same one as him. If you can see this, suddenly the errors of the NCW will become visible to you.
In summary then, no-one is arguing with you about the need for what is sometimes called "post-baptismal catechesis". But the question is - should "post-baptismal catechesis" be identical to "pre-baptismal catechesis", or , to put it another way, is it right to treat Catholics as though they are not baptised?
Thankyou Diana for engaging in a civil discussion about this, Thankyou also to the two anonymous NCW members that seemed to agree with my sentiments, stating that the NCW needs to address this elitist attitude from within.
Now, it is my turn to agree with you.
Cont.
ReplyDeleteSo when you say:
"Apparently, this anonymous commenter did not understand that in Catholicism, living out our baptismal promise is a "step by step" process."
I would reply that at no stage did I say that I deny such a "step by step process". But life is a step-by-step process itself. Its called growing up; coming to maturity in faith. This can be guided, of course, And it ought to be. but it is not something exclusive to the philosophy of the NCW. Nor is the so-called "concrete reality" (ie the existential dimension of life) that is emphasized in the NCW. Existential moments do not need to be induced, as the NCW seems to think. Every human life is comprised of a series of "existential moments".
My original post did not challenge the Church's teaching on baptism, nor the need to develop ones personal faith and community life. It did challenge the NCW statement that "you can't get out from under your sin". With the grace of Baptism in Jesus Christ you can, and though you can't be sure of your own salvation you can certainly trust in God and hope for salvation in his name.
You should try to understand why this "you can't get out from your sin" is so important to the "Way". You should try to understand it in the context of being "disassembled" psychologically, and put back together again, because this is the aim of the NCW. It aims to violently destroy the person and remake them according to Kiko's own personal experience. Because Kiko had a particular existential moment, he thinks we all need the same one as him. If you can see this, suddenly the errors of the NCW will become visible to you.
In summary then, no-one is arguing with you about the need for what is sometimes called "post-baptismal catechesis". But the question is - should "post-baptismal catechesis" be identical to "pre-baptismal catechesis", or , to put it another way, is it right to treat Catholics as though they are not baptised?
Thankyou Diana for engaging in a civil discussion about this, Thankyou also to the two anonymous NCW members that seemed to agree with my sentiments, stating that the NCW needs to address this elitist attitude from within.
Now, it is my turn to agree with you.
The aim of the way is not to violently do anything. That is ur personal interpretation based on hearsay. Kiko did not invent the need of a post-baptismal catechumenate, v2 did and the popes have encouraged it.
DeleteAnd finally natural religiosity as the NCW uses this term and explains it in the third Catechises is the desire to ingratiate the deity to do ones own will. In the past, people would sacrifice animals to the deity in oder to ensure health wealth and love. Today many Christians have the same relationship with God as pagans do. Yes. "God cure my cancer and I'll make a pilgrimage" "God let me get this job" "god help me get married". "I am a good person, why did God allow my son to die?" "Why did I get sick? "Why did I lose my job?" "Why did my husband cheat on me?" Or "We r more fortunate than others" and "God has blessed us with good fortune"
I do not mean it is wrong to pray and ask God for health wealth and love. But that many Christians only think of God when calamity strikes and that many have a mercantile relationship with him instead of one of love. Should we not consider ourselves blessed with illness poverty and solitude? Are people who experience these cursed? This is natural religiosity as the NCW means: using God to avoid suffering. The aim of the NCW is to experience that God is love during calamities and to establish a different relationship with him.
I am sorry u perceive people in the way as being elitist. I do not agree,but that is a personal perception which I think comes from ur own experience. It has not been mine. I do not think u should generalize though. As I said in a previous post, many times a different lifestyle puts other people on the spot and bothers them. A couple with 10 kids does not need to say anything to an every Sunday communicant couple who is on the pill. Just their existence questions the others lifestyle. I think a lot of people who think the way elitist have experienced this. Their lifestyle is questioned by the very existence of people choosing to live a different lifestyle such as being open to life. In any case, it is ur personal experience not mine so please don't generalize.
How r catholics treated as non-baptized?
DeleteExcuse me. Could you point out to me the essential difference of the treatment of baptized and non-baptized persons in your parish (not NCW setting)?
DeleteYou charge the NCW with "violently destroying" persons, because there is a strong call to conversion and recognition of sin through preaching that partly comes from Mr. Arguello. So what you are saying is that this sort of preaching should only be addressed to non-baptized persons? Am I understanding you correctly?
Are you saying that baptized and non-baptized persons (who, by the way, have just about the same amount of knowledge of the faith and the same kinds of sins) need different preaching by virtue of the rite of baptism being a past occurrence or future event?
We have made Christianity as an excuse for an attitude of entitlement. The way the Gospel has been presented by the NCW has left many outside of the Church feeling coerced and manipulated and rejected. It’s like we’re saying that, rather than us meet others where they are, they must change to become like us. Rather than touch and heal the sick and demonized, we have told them that they have no place among us, while we have refused to acknowledge our own demons. Rather than become “all things to all people” we have tried to make all people become like us.
ReplyDeleteAnonymousFebruary 3, 2015 at 12:48 PM
DeleteNot about what we do for God anonymous.....it is about what God has done for us.
I don't know anyone in the NCW who presents the Gospel however I know many that proclaim it and many more who struggle to live it.
JSB
Dear Anonymous at 12:48 pm,
DeleteAnd how would a Catholic feel when they read the Catechism of the Catholic Church that states: "Even though incorporated into the Church, one who does not however persevere in charity is not saved. He remains indeed in the bosom of the Church, but 'in body' not 'in heart.'" It was also last year when Pope Francis identified three types of what he calls "Half-hearted Catholics". Pope Francis has also drawn himself a diagram of circles on who is a "Full-hearted Catholic" and a "Half-hearted Catholic." The diagram of circles in the NCW catechesis is pretty much the same thing.
Well said Diana.
ReplyDeleteDoes the NCW make difference between baptized neo-catechumens and non-babptized catechumens?
ReplyDeleteABSOLUTELY! Why the anonymous commenter drew his or her conclusion ("For all intents and purposes the baptism is forgotten.") otherwise? Is it for lack of information? Yes, probably, but I suspect that a tendency of trying to find fault with the NCW, for obviously SENTIMENTAL reasons, induces premature judgment in some people. For all intents and purposes, would the commenter actually care to know if there is a difference made between baptized and non-baptized? Then he or she could've asked without closing the argument. Then we could have compared the differences made in and outside of the NCW between baptized and non-baptized persons in the Church.
Regarding natural religiosity: if someone listens to the catechesis that draws out the distinction between natural religiosity and Christian faith, they can understand that what is referred to as "natural religiosity" is not merely the religious dimension of the human being (his "capax Dei" as Augustine had put it), but the selfish and corrupt religiosity which is the result of fear, which in turn is the result of sin. Now sin is not "natural" to man as religiosity is, but it is "original" in that all human beings inherited it, with the exception of the Blessed Mother and our Lord.
Perhaps it would be a luckier phrase to use "original religiosity" instead of "natural". However, I again suspect an attempt to find fault not because someone is interested in listening and then disagrees, but because someone is interested only in condemning and so listens through that filter.
I usually find that the motivation for this desire to condemn is sentimental. Why one of the usual charges is that NCW recipients think themselves to be greater Christians than others. No matter how many times you repeat that NCW recipients find help in the NCW because they feel a need, which means they are weaker than others, this argument always pops up. It makes me wonder if this comes from a projected feeling that "if you don't do it as we are doing it, you must think that what we do is bad". While I never thought that Catholicism without the NCW was bad, but for me (because I am weak and need special help) it wasn't sufficient. For others who are much better than I am, it is sufficient. God bless them.
We who are at the NCW see how far that loving, gracious service goes, as Christ meets both individuals and our communities at the point of need. However. today’s challenge to the NCW who had begun following Christ in the ways of faith and loving service, but had then begun to allow ourselves to be led back into a life of law and judgement.
DeleteIt is all too easy to allow our faith and practice in the communities to become a religion of law (too much quoting of CCC, we never even talk about it in the catechesis) and judgement (the Jungle people) denouncing those who don’t live up to our standards, and closing ourselves off from the world.
Shalom...
Dear Anonymous at 9:24 am,
DeleteThe reason I quote the Catechism is only to show that the NCW follows the doctrines of the Catholic Church.
Dear nagyszakall and brothers,
ReplyDeleteThank you for giving your input. It was well-presented. :) It is unfortunate that the Anonymous commenter was more interested in condemning the NCW rather than having an honest dialogue.
Dear Diana at 11.24pm. How is it possible to have an honest dialogue if you don't allow comments to be published? What specifically do you find to be "condemning"?
DeleteDear Anonymous at 10:42 am,
DeleteI find it condemning when you put down a person for answering the question.
Dear Diana, can you please point out where I put a person down for answering a question? nagyszakall's post argued that the NCW does not treat the baptised as though they are not baptised. I responded to that by pointing out that the first "steps" of the NCW are figured as the descent into the waters of baptism; however, for the baptised person this has already occurred and the catechetical emphasis should be on living a life of grace. What did you find objectionable about that? Perhaps you could allow the original post through and ask others whether I was "condemning"?
DeleteDear Anonymous at 11:48 am,
DeleteI read your post, and what was said there was different than what you are saying here. You accuse the NCW of treating baptized Catholics as though they are not baptized, when in actuality, this is what even the CCD teaches instructs in the CCD classes. Are the CCD teachers treating these baptized youths as "unbaptized?" Catholicism teaches the 7 sacraments otherwise the Catholic faithful would be ignorant of all 7 sacraments.
To live a life of grace starts with our baptism because that is where we became the sons and daughters of God. It was the waters of baptism that cleansed us so that we now become a son and daughter of God. However, many of us do not live like sons and daughters of God. We are more into the world.
Please clarify what is your understanding and meaning of "living a life of grace".
DeleteDear Anonymous at 12:56 pm,
DeleteIt means to live a life of virtue with Christ at the center.
Dear Diana at 12.37, yes I agree with you that many people are stuck in the world. It was in the post that you did not allow that I made this point. It was in response to Nagyszakall that I pointed out that the first of the NCW are the "descent" into the waters of baptism. Even Kiko in the directory says that we shouldn't call ourselves Christian. This is where the denial of baptismal grace occurs. By baptism one is already incoroporated into the Body of Christ, albeit as imperfect members. My point is that for the NCW it is as though baptism hasn't occurred at all, and that only at the stage of election can one be considered Christian. This is false, and I pointed this out in response to Nagyszakall's unevidenced assertion that of course the NCW treats baptised and unbaptised people differently.
DeleteWhile I'm at it, I want to point out that your reason for not posting my comments was that I was "condemning rather than having an honest dialogue".
Well, look at Nagyszakall's comments above (February 3, 2015 at 8:51 PM), His first paragraph basically says 'the anonymous poster is ignorant and pre-judges'. The second paragraph says 'the anonymous poster is ignorant of what natural religiosity actually is'. The third paragraph says 'the anonymous poster is motivated by emotion, and has a desire to condemn'.
So there was no attempt to answer the concerns raised in my original post. Merely calling me 'ignorant, prone to pre-judging, and motivated by emotional desire to condemn'
What did you do in response to his condemnation of me? Accuse me of having a desire to condemn!!
Well that's ur definition. What's the anonymous poster's? cant discuss what he means unless he defines the terms
DeleteDear Anonymous at 2:04 pm,
DeleteIf I misjudged your previous comments, then I apologize. You constantly kept saying that the NCW treats baptize as though they are not baptize.....and how do we do that? By telling them what baptism is?? In baptism, the old man (person) is gone and in place is a new creature in Christ. How many of us are actually "new creatures in Christ??" The new creatures in Christ are those who have become the light and the salt of the earth.
Ghandi once said, "I like your Christ, but I don't like your Christians." Why did he say that? Because he saw that these Christians are in name only. A TRUE Christian is one who is a new creature in Christ....the one who is the light and salt of the earth.....the one who lives a life of virtue like the holy saints. Which one of us is that??
Dear Anon at 2.13, please refer to the following:
Deletehttp://www.catholic.com/tracts/grace-what-it-is-and-what-it-does
Note that sanctifying grace is received in baptism, and this is the problem I have been trying to point out. For a baptised person to assert constantly that "you can't get out from your sin", or for catechesis to suggest that the baptised person is still "in Egypt" and a slave to sin, is a denial of baptismal grace.
The NCW makes confusing and ambiguous what the Church teaches clearly. Ask yourself whether the NCW treats the baptised person as though they have received this supernatural grace, or whether one is regarded as still in that poor state prior to baptism. This is my objection. Those members of the NCW that are honest with themselves will understand what I mean here. Remember all those phrases and teachings that put down your ability to rise above sin with the aid of this grace. That is what is meant by "living in grace" and it is at least implicitly, and perhaps explicitly denied by the NCW.
Dear Diana at 2.44pm. I accept your apology, thankyou. IN relation to your wondering "How many of us are actually "new creatures in Christ??""
Deletemay I offer the same link to you: http://www.catholic.com/tracts/grace-what-it-is-and-what-it-does
And highlight this paragraph.
"But that isn’t the Catholic view. We believe souls really are cleansed by an infusion of the supernatural life. Paul speaks of us as "a new creation" (2 Cor. 5:17), "created after the likeness of God in true righteousness and holiness" (Eph. 4:24). Of course, we’re still subject to temptations to sin; we still suffer the effects of Adam’s Fall in that sense (what theologians call "concupiscence"); but God removes the guilt from our souls. We may still have a tendency to sin, but God has removed the sins we have, much like a mother might wash the dirt off of a child who has a tendency to get dirty again. "
Dear Anonymous at 3:48 pm,
DeleteThe NCW is not confused because when they were referring to "not get out of YOUR sin", they were referring to personal sins. The ONLY sin that was removed at our baptism as a baby was the ORIGINAL SIN....... A sin that is not ours, but came from Adam and Eve. So, when the NCW says you cannot get out of YOUR sin, they are referring to the PERSONAL sins that we commit almost on a daily basis. That is the sin you cannot get out of no matter how much you try. You need Christ to help you get out of your personal sins. The Original sin was NEVER YOUR sin. The fact the we are still sinners means that we need Christ in our life.
Dear Diana, the grace of baptism suffused into our soul defeats the domination of sin in our lives. Not just inherited sin but personal sin as well. This is why the Creed speaks of "one baptism for the forgiveness of sins". Not "sin". The Grace of baptism defeats personal sin as well, but does not do away with the disordered nature.
DeleteWhen the NCW says "can't get out form your sins", it reflects the treatment of the baptised member of the neocatechumenal Way. That you must hold your sin always before you. That you are hopeless sinners, even as Jesus loves you just the way you are etc. This is not said in relation to freedom from original sin, but is said to convince you of your need for this re-baptism in the "Way", and to make you stay in the misery if sin until they (catechists et al) say you've overcome it.
Incidentally, another proof of the problem in the NCW is the withholding of the Creed until a certain step. In the early Church the catechumen would be required to know, recite and believe the articles of the Creed prior to baptism. In the NCW, even after baptism, a member is not ready for the Creed.
Dear Anonymous on February 5, 2015 at 2:04 PM,
DeleteLet me clarify what I meant in my post, because you obviously misunderstood it. In the first part of my post I stated that you didn't ask whether there is a difference of treatment between baptized and non-baptized, only stated that there is none. I think I was clear that it was only a suspicion on my part that you are prejudiced and I allowed for the fact that you made that statement out of ignorance. As for the difference of treatment being "unevidenced": a non-baptized person who begins to walk in the community is dismissed from the Mass after the liturgy of the Word and is given lessons from the CCC until he is ready to be baptized. He or she will make a profession of faith and be baptized at the easter vigil when ready (usually in about 4 years), and not when, at the end of the itinerary, all neocatechumens solemnly renew their baptismal promises. We don't dismiss baptized persons from the Mass. One is a catechumen the other is a post baptismal neocatechumen. The distinction is very clear and I bet you didn't know about it. What I wonder is whether you actually care to know about it... This could be now compared to what happens outside of the NCW when a non-baptized walks into a church. Maybe you could help me with that...
In the second part of my post I explained how the catechesis by Mr. Arguello uses the phrase "natural religiosity." You accuse me of stating that you're ignorant of what natural religiosity actually is. All I said was that if one listens to the catechesis, this person can easily understand that it is not talking about "natural religiosity" merely in the sense that a human being is naturally searching God, but in the sense that fallen man corrupts religion and because of the fear he has of death (which is the result of sin and not nature, as evidenced in Scripture and also explained in NCW catecheses) his relationship with God is one of trying to get God do his will. So I was not saying that you are ignorant of what natural religiosity actually is, but explained what the NCW catechesis means by it, even adding that perhaps the phrase is not the best. What I did say, was that I SUSPECTED you weren't really interested in what the catechesis was trying to say, having been already convinced by someone or something prior to our discussion.
In the third part of my post I shared my general experience of trying to argue reasonably with people who are ANGRY (clearly an emotion) at the NCW. I did not say you were one of them (although your reaction does fit the bill), I just gave a general experience of mine. If not because of sentimental reasons, please tell me why you misunderstood all three of my points. I don't think reasoning should have led you there.
Dear Anonymous on February 5, 2015 at 4:34 PM,
DeleteI don't think anyone in the NCW would want you to acknowledge any sins you haven't committed. The strong preaching is a help for people to acknowledge and repent from their actual sins. This is not a denial of baptismal grace but the contrary of it. If I didn't believe that the grace of baptism can get me out of my sins, it wouldn't make sense to acknowledge them... just let's act as if our sins didn't exist.
"Withholding" the creed: do you teach the creed to every baptized person? Of course not, because if they are baptized as babies they can't understand anything. Later they can memorize it. Much later they can begin to understand it gradually. That is exactly what is being done in the NCW: a certain step of the itinerary is dedicated to the creed, to its deeper understanding. Even before that step the creed is being recited (and not withheld, as you have stated) on each Mass where the instructions of the missal require it.
Those adults who are not baptized, are dismissed from Mass before the creed, and they make a public profession of faith before their baptism.
Finally, if anyone told you that there is a re-baptism in the NCW, you should know it was a lie.
So many misconceptions, so many misunderstandings. This battle will never end because even when we share the truth, they tell us we're liars.
ReplyDeleteTruth 1: The Initial Catechesis is given to all those in the church. It is not until the initial sessions are complete that those who have attended are given the choice to continue the itinerary, form a community. They are not asked to leave the church, but are encouraged to continue celebration at a time.
Truth 2: Elitists exist in all walks of life. There are radicals that feel they represent the majority. There are those who have received many graces from their experiences/involvement, lives have been saved through the NCW, it is not wrong for them to present/share/encourage this grace onto others.
Truth 3: We are all called to be Salt and Light. It is an ongoing process. Imagine if we were all simultaneously salted, there would be no need for this salt. Imagine if we all lived in the light, there would be no sense/meaning of darkness.
Truth 4: Although we all have a chance to be saved, there is this "free will" that has also been given to us. I remember my college professor, at the start of the semester he gave us all a 100%, he then told us, the hard part is keeping this 100%. Do the work, complete it, you will be fine.
Truth 5: Although the Catechetical Directory has been composed by Kiko Arguello. It belongs to the church. This directory is only an instruction guide to help outline the steps of the NCW, which is done so in a manner similar to the RCIA. If you want to know what is in this Directory, just get a copy of the CCC and also be familiar with most of encyclicals and exhortations of the Popes.
Truth 6: Our Baptism is not disregarded in the NCW. The Statutes of the NCW also include an opppurtunity for the non-baptized. The Trinitarian Formula of Baptism is what is recognized by the church. As long as the prescriptions are followed, there is no need for a New Baptism.
Truth 7: Natural Religiosity is not condemned. Catechumens are encouraged to go beyond this Religious Man who runs to God ONLY in times of suffering and petition. Is God not only our Father but also our friend, is Jesus not only master and savior but Brother? Is it not right to begin a dialogue with our God?
WHO IS GOD FOR YOU? WHAT ARE YOU LIVING FOR?
Dear Diana, yes, Nagyszakall did present it in a rather pleasant way by saying "for others who are better than I am, it is sufficient. God bless them.". why is it then, when I pesented the very same argument a few months ago, you sarcastically replied "well you must be a saint then.." to not judge my brothers and sisters. this is why some folks feel you are selectively charitable as opposed to charitable to all.
ReplyDeleteDear Anonymous at 5:24 am,
DeleteDid I ever tell you that I am perfect like a saint? I am a sinner. If you feel that you are better, then you are a saint.
Using the NCW books and teachings- Did Jesus sin? Did Mary sin? Does the NCW believe in transubstantiation?
ReplyDeleteDear Anonymous at 9:44 am,
DeleteCan you quote from the NCW books where it says that Jesus and Mary sinned??? Yes, the NCW believes in transubstantiation.
I'm asking you or what is your knowledge from your catechists or responsibles.
ReplyDeleteDear Anonymous at 10:18 am,
DeleteYou want to know about what from the Catechists or Responsibles? If you want to know about natural religiosity, some of the commenters have already answered it.
Nevermind. Your answer is exactly what the problem is. I wanted to know if Jesus sinned. I googled it and it gives different perspectives from different religions and movements and I wanted to know the NCWs perspective and if it differs but I get no answer. To the commenter below- NCW books- catechism books, music books, you know books that are made available to a few. Those books.
DeleteDear Anonymous at 1:27 pm,
DeleteThe fact that you have not given us the quotes from those books showed exactly where the problem is . Those NCW books with the quotes does not exist. You simply came here with an accusation and are not interested in the truth of what we say.
What NCW books?
ReplyDeleteHave the level of disinformation about the NCW reached the depths of the Marianas Trench?
I am glad Diana that you have the patience and love for the brother to even provide an answer.
I am astounded by the ignorance.
anon@1054am... the fact that you are astounded by the ignorance is precisely why the ncw folks are seriously misunderstood and despised. i walk in the way and would never consider expressing an arrogant statement such as yours. your statement implies those not walking in the way are stupid. as a fellow brother walking in the way, i beg you to remove the beam in your eye . ignorant indeed. HLG
ReplyDeletehlg....you are quite comfortable in your walk...and probably remain silent as the ignorant pass you by without saying a word.
ReplyDeleteour God is a God of action........we are called to evangelize with body and soul.......can't do that if we're just standing by in silence.
Anon@2:13.....WHOAAAA there cowboy! Quick to attack/insult aren't we. No one said anything about being silent, only about your arrogance, which apparently you can't reign in to some degree of humility. I forgive you brother/sister, let's walk together IN HUMILITY. I'll bet you anything your responsibles and catechists remain silent while you spew out your venom.
ReplyDeletecowboy....lets walk together in humility?..........while you spew out venom?
ReplyDeleteyou are not in the way anonymous feb 6 2015.....nice try
anon@906pm...while you may want to wish it away I am walking in the way and have been walking for seven years. you just proved my point that when ever you hear the truth you try to justify it w/your denial. open your eyes brother. you must not like to hear the truth from a fellow brother. nice try on your part. i haven't finished first scrutiny yet but i know that when a brother or two tries to tell me something I dont run from it, i embrace and welcome it. but you are who you are and where you are in your walk. Peace be with you.
ReplyDeleteNot my problem why "folks" in the NCW are misunderstood anonymous. We proclaim the Gospel as Jesus instructs us to do.
ReplyDeleteHow people chose to receive the Gospel...the word of Jesus Christ is not my concern. After years of our families talking negatively about the Way, I chose to tell my family....my wife's family that they are very comfortable Catholics. They were talking about the NCW as though they knew it something. For years, we were the black sheep of both our families but by the grace of God, they are now calling us....talking to us about the Way.
I do not defend NCW...the Arch Bishop or the church but I am not afraid to tell someone who thinks they know something......that in reality...they don't know anything.