Neocatechetical Spin Update

by Jimmy Akin

in Liturgy

A few days ago I published a post on an interview given to Zenit by Mr. Guiseppe Gennarini of the Neocatechumenal Way. The interview concerned a letter sent by Cardinal Arinze of the Congregation for DivineWorship and the Discipline of the Sacraments to the leaders of the Neocatechumenal Way.

In my blog post I stated that Mr. Gennarini was either grossly misinformed regarding what the letter said or that he was in denial, because the interview he gave ammounted to pure spin.

Since that time I have receive the following e-mail from Mr. Gennarini, who asked me to publish it. My response will be up soon.

Dear Mr. Akin

I have read your article and I was very surprise by your hostile attitude.

I do not know you and I do not know if you usually check out sources before printing, but you quote extensively an article of Sandro Magister which is full of lies, misrepresentation and innuendos :

1. He writes: In the Neocatechumenal Way, communion is taken while seated around a large square table, with a large loaf of bread that is divided among the participants and wine that is passes from hand to hand and is taken in large swallows.

John Paul II has presided a Eucharist with the Neocatechumenal communities twice, Benedict XVI, before becoming Pope, has also presided twice and many Cardinals have participated regularly, among them Pell from Sydney, Sandoval from Guadalajara, Schonborn from Wien and many many others. I do not know if this is of any relevance to you, but at least should make you doubt the misrepresentation of Magister. If you will have occasion to participate to a celebration of the Neocatechumenal Communities you will be able to witness the reverence and the dignity of it.

Then let us go to the details. We do not use a large loaf of bread: we use bread “made only from wheat, must be recently baked, and, according to the ancient tradition of the Latin Church, must be unleavened” [1] .Wine is not passed “from hand to hand” but it is served only by the priests, deacons or extraordinary ministers of the Eucharist..

2. Magister continues in your quotation: “For example, the readings from the liturgy of the Word are commented upon by the catechists of the group, who make lengthy “admonitions” followed by “resonances” from many of those present. The priest’s homily is hardly distinguished, or not distinguished at all, from the rest of the comments.

Again, we are dealing here with a caricature. The “admonitions” before the reading – which the letter accepts and turns an extraordinary practice into a common one – are made according to article 105 of the General Instruction of the Roman Missal. Obviously we have to keep in mind that the Neocatechumenal Way is gradual initiation and that 70% of the  people are coming back to the Church . Regarding “Echos”: no layman in the communities has ever done the homily at the place of the priests and the letter accepts as valid this new practice of the Neocatechumenal Way.

3. Magister continues: The times and places for the Mass are also unusual. The Neocatechumenals do not celebrate their Masses on Sunday, but on Saturday evening, in small groups and separate from the parish communities to which they belong.

The ignorance of Magister reaches here its peak: does he not know that Saturday Night is already a Sunday celebration? How can it  be for him a ‘unusual time” when on Sat Eve  it is possible to attend Mass on in all the parishes of the World?

“Separate”? the celebrations of the communities are open to everybody; moreover  the unity of the thousands of masses in every diocese is guaranteed by the communion with the Holy Father and the local Bishop (not just by celebrating in the same room).

4. Here Magister gives his punch-line: Until recently, the founders and directors of the Way had shielded these practices by claiming they had received verbal authorization from John Paul II. But with Benedict XVI, playtime is over.

Sorry, but he is grossly mistaken. Benedict XVI has introduced the Neocatechumenal Way in Germany and in many of his books speak glowingly of the NW. Just a few examples:

a. Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger with Vittorio Messori, The Ratzinger Report.  An Exclusive Interview on the State of the Church.  San Francisco: Ignatius Press, 1985. What is hopeful at the level of the universal Church -and that is happening right in the heart of the crisis of the Church in the Western world-is the rise of new move­ments which nobody had planned and which nobody has called into being, but which have sprung spontaneously from the inner vitality of the faith itself.  What is manifested in them-albeit subdued-is something like a Pentecostal season in the Church.  I am thinking, say, of the charismatic movement, of the Cursillos, of the movement of the Focolare, of the neo-catechumenal communities, of Communion and Liberation, etc.

b. Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger, Salt of the Earth: The Church at the End of the Millennium.  An interview with Peter Seewald. San Francisco: Ignatius Press, 1997.

On the other side, however, Christianity will offer models of life in new ways and will once again present itself in the wasteland of technological existence as a place of true humanity.  That is already happening now.  I mean, one can always raise objections to individual movements such as the Neo-catechumens or the Focolarini, but whatever else you may say, we can observe innovative things emerging there.  In these movements, Christianity is present as an experience of newness and is suddenly felt by people – who often come from very far outside – as a chance to live in this century.

c. Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger, God and the World.  A Conversation with Peter Seewald.  San Francisco: Ignatius Press, 2002.

Catholicism in fact can never be merely institutionally and academically planned and managed, but appears ever again as a gift, as a spiritual vitality.  And it in the process also has the gift of diversity.  There is no uniformity among Catholics.  There can be “Focolare” or Catechumenate piety, Schönstatt, Cursillo, and CL spirituality, and so on, as well as a Franciscan, Dominican, and Benedictine piety.  The treasury of faith provides many dwelling places within the one house.  And we should preserve this dynamic openness. Seen in this way, the Church always has a responsibility for society as a whole.  Missionary responsibility means in fact that, as the Pope says, we really have to try to re-evangelize.  We cannot just calmly allow everyone else to relapse into paganism, but have to find ways of bridging the gospel into the spheres of life of those who do not believe.  There are already models for this.  The Neo-Catechumenate has one model, and other groups are trying in their own various ways.  The Church will have to develop a great deal of imagination to help the gospel remain a force in public life.  So that it may shape the people and pervade their life and work among them like yeast.

d. Pope Benedict XVI Homily at the Mass at Marienfeld at the WYD: Form communities based on faith! In recent decades, movements and communities have come to birth in which the power of the Gospel is keenly felt. Seek communion in faith, like fellow travellers who continue together to follow the itinerary of the great pilgrimage that the Magi from the East first pointed out to us.

I suspect that you do not know that Sandro Magister is an italian journalist writing on "L’Espresso", the newspaper of the progressive and freethinking italian elite who embraces the ways of the world and like very much Brokeback Mountain,. but do not like Narnia. Magister has a guiding principle: to fight against every ecclesial reality that has strength to witness Christianity in today’s world. In his website you will see that he attacks the Focolarini, Communio and Liberazione, Sant’Egidio, the Charismatic renewal, etc… exactly the contrary of the vision of Benedict XVI which appears from the few excerpts quoted above. For them the Pope is good if he criticizes the war in Iraq, but not if he supports the new ecclesial realities. Magister is also close to Alberto Melloni, the Italian historian who bashed Pio XII for – supposedly- not having spoken against Nazism, and he is close to the Centro Documentazione di Bologna led by historian Giuseppe Alberigo:  Alberigo  interprets the II Vatican Council as a radical break with the past. Again, something radically opposite to the vision of John Paul II and Benedict XVI, who see the Council not as a “break” with the past but as a necessary answer to modernity .

The Pope has another program of which he spoke at the WYD addressing  the German bishops:

“We have become a mission land". This is true for large parts of Germany. I therefore believe that throughout Europe, and likewise in France, Spain and elsewhere, we should give serious thought as to how to achieve a true evangelization in this day and age, not only a new evangelization, but often a true and proper first evangelization. People do not know God, they do not know Christ. There is a new form of paganism and it is not enough for us to strive to preserve the existing flock, although this is very important: we must ask the important question: what really is life? I believe we must all try together to find new ways of bringing the Gospel to the contemporary world, of proclaiming Christ anew and of implanting the faith.

Regarding “the spin” thing of which you accuse me rather too hastily :

  1. This is a private letter whose real contents are known only by Cardinal Arinze, Kiko Arguello, Carmen Hernandez and Father Mario Pezzi. Any use of a private document to enforce a public policy is completely illegitimate and improper.
  2. If someone of the above mentioned people should confirm that the contents of this letter are authentic, this does not change its nature of a confidential and internal instrumentum laboris (working instrument). To consider this letter as having the strength of a norm would be as if we considered the Instrumentum Laboris of the Synod on the Eucharist as the final Document of the Synod.
  3. The iter established by the Holy See regarding the Neocatechumenal Way foresees that every decision must be approved conjunctly by the Inter-Dicasterial Commisssion (Pontifical Institute for the Laity, faith, Liturgy, Clergy and Catechesis, Catholic Education). This letter is just a moment of the proceedings of the Interdicasterial.
  4. The only document approved conjunctly until now are the Statutes, which are much more explicit than the contents of the letter. At the end of the ad experimentum period all the Five Congregations will issue the official decisions. What is for now the actual norm is the confirmation by the Holy Father of the liturgical praxis of the Way.

I write I wrote all of all this in the hope that, if you were surprised by truth once, you may love truth and you will have the fairness to publish my answer.

Giuseppe T.Gennarini


[1] GIRM 2003, the new General Instructions of  the Roman Missal

Art. 320: The bread for celebrating the Eucharist must be made only from wheat, must be recently baked, and, according to the ancient tradition of the Latin Church, must be unleavened.

Art. 321. The meaning of the sign demands that the material for the Eucharistic celebration truly have the appearance of food. It is therefore expedient that the Eucharistic bread, even though  unleavened and baked in the traditional shape, be made in such a way that the priest at Mass with a congregation is able in practice to break it into parts for distribution to at least some of the faithful. Small hosts are, however, in no way ruled out when the number of those receiving Holy Communion or other pastoral needs require it. The action of the fraction or breaking of bread, which gave its name to the Eucharist in apostolic times, will bring out more clearly the force and  importance of the sign of unity of all in the one bread, and of the sign of charity by the fact that  the one bread is distributed among the brothers and sisters.

If you liked this post, you should join Jimmy's Secret Information Club to get more great info!

What is the Secret Information Club?I value your email privacy


mark j January 8, 2006 at 1:43 pm

Can anyone comments on the paragraph that begins “I suspect that you do not know that Sandro Magister is an italian journalist writing …”?
I don’t know much about Sandro Magister personally, but after reading his columns on http://www.chiesa for a few years, my impression of him was pretty much the exact opposite of what Gennarini states in this parapgraph.
I understand that L’Espresso is a left-leaning paper, and perhaps much of this paragraph would apply to most of the editorial board. But I always read Magister as being supportive of John Paull II and Benedict XVI, opposing the “Bologna school”, etc. ?

atom ant January 11, 2006 at 5:46 am

You may already read on Magister’s blog (in Italian only: sorry) his answer, citing this site and this page, in his entry “Il papa ha chiesto obbedienza ai neocatecumenali. Ma loro fanno i sordi” (the Pope asks oboedience, but they seem deaf):
Yes, L’Espresso is an Italian left-leaning magazine but Magister is actually as you described and published interesting articles about excesses in some Church movements (but not all the ones listed by Gennarini, as you already know), which could explain why L’Espresso doesn’t get rid of him.
Alas, maybe Gennarini considers Magister a “Pharaoh” (the “enemy” word in the Neochatecumenal-speak). This said, we would all want to know why in the interview there is a Gennarini quite different than the one who wrote the letter to Jimmy. Let’s hear how Magister explains this in the above linked post; I’ll try to make an abstract:

Gennarini… is altering the meaning of the papal statements; on Gennarini’s speech, it seems that instead of prohibiting some actions in the Neochatecumenal mass, the Holy See approved them.
But there is more: Gennarini not only was on, but also wrote a letter [link to this page] to, who also published in his site that public Vatican document, in which Gennarini seems to expect some confirmation about the authenticity of the letter, which would be anyways referred as a confidential “instrumentum laboris” only (thus not an enforcing norm)…

Many things will appear brighter if you remember that most of the common “Church movements” do not actually interfere with liturgy (except for chants and secondary issues) and sacraments.

Georg January 21, 2006 at 1:17 am

Gennarini is a priest, isn’t he? Isn’t he ashamed to post such terrible lies and halft -truth’s? It’s not the kind of testiony one can exspect from christians, I think

Peter January 22, 2006 at 11:17 am

Mark calls for comments on Gennarini’s sentence about Sandro Magister.
I am in the NC way myself and I have read many articles by Magister on L’Espresso.
Many of the things that Magister says about the NC way depend on his view of the Church and are legitimate. The liturgy as it is lived in the NC way, on the other hand, is misrepresented (on purpose, I believe) as anybody who likes checking into facts is invited to find out by him/herself by joining in once. The bread is indeed the unleavened bread of the Missal and the wine is not passed around.
It is quite likely that at the end of the “ad experimentum” period some modifications to the way the neocatechumenates are living their liturgy are going to change, probably in the direction stated by the letter of Arinze. As usual, the NC way will follow the Pope’s indications, as it has always done, knowing that the communion with the Pope is far more important than any liturgical innovation, no matter how well-motivated.

berenike January 23, 2006 at 1:04 pm

So the NC girls that were baking bread “for the Eucharist” or whatever they called it in the kitchen of a Benedictine guest house where I happened to be staying were baking unleavened bread? Genuine question, I had finished the washing-up before they got started, and they had finished before I returned.

Susan February 23, 2006 at 9:34 pm

I too was in the Neocatechumenal Way and know for a fact that the items brought before the Way by Cardinal Arinze and then the Holy Father are indeed valid. They have not been obedient but rather secretive and deceptive.
They have only been approved as a catechesis ad experimentum for five years which was granted in June of 2002. As far as their liturgy is concerned they were allowed to move the handshake of peace to the offertory and were given permission to receive communion under both species. However, they took it upon themselves to change the whole liturgy!
Why must a Way community use only “kiko chalices” and “kiko patens” and have “kiko icons” in the “santuary”? All of these mandatory essential elements being purchased by the money taken in at the “secret bag” collection. Which by the way, does not have to be reported to the diocese.
Maybe that’s because many of the bishops are not even aware of the presence of this group within parishes of their diocese! This being the case in my parish. Blessings from the Holy Father and Bishops – rubbish!

Anna February 25, 2006 at 4:03 pm

I don’t understand why people are so adamant in the pursuit of contesting-with petty accusations, might I add-the very honest, truthful and documented response by Mr. Gennarini. Accusation: the Neocatechumenal Way is elitist—>I personally am not from the Way, but I have attended Neocatechumenal masses, and was received warmly. The Neocatechumenal Way is open to anyone! It can open in a parish ONLY with the approval of the pastor, and ONLY with the approval of the bishop of the diocese. The masses I have attended were truthful to what Mr. Gennarini said, no loafs, etc. Why is it that people naturally will be against something that they don’t know of? And those who think they know about it: so what that the statutes were approved by Pope John Paul II and that numerous times he had expressed his approval and admiration? So what that on January 12th Ratzinger actually met with the initiators of the Way and 200 families to be sent in all parts of the world as missionary families and did indeed give numerous blessings? So what that the Neocatechumenal Way has brought thousands upon thousands of people back into the Church? To those of you who are trying to contest Mr. Gennarini’s letter: why don’t you argue against everything that he says in it point by point as he has done and not just few tidbits mostly argued in an insunuating manner rather than a rational one? It seems as if I, who am not even a part of the Neocatechumenal Way, am more informed than some who claim to have been a part of it…

Cell phones: Cell phone reviews, Mobile phone reviews, Wireless ... February 27, 2006 at 1:30 pm

Popular Cell Phone Search

Search by part number, product, keyword or manufacturer … As for the most popular cell phone form factor, the flip phone was the clear winner, …

pleng March 5, 2006 at 1:52 am

peace to all the catechumens walking in the way also to Mr. Gennarini.
“Happy are you when men hate you on account of the Son of Man.”

MP3 April 15, 2006 at 5:39 am

Advanced MP3 Catalog

Download advanced mp3 catalog pro Advanced MP3 Catalog is designed for anyone …

A.Williams February 14, 2007 at 12:04 pm

“I don’t understand why people are so adamant in the pursuit of contesting-with petty accusations, might I add-the very honest, truthful and documented response by Mr. Gennarini.”
Anna, I know its very late for a response to you, and I think, by now you have already read Jimmy Akins response to this Mr. Gennarini E-Mail.
I don’t want to be to redundant, also, but feel the need to address a few thoughts about your post.
I can tell you that I have alot of experience with the NCW. I’ve been to about 135 NCW parish masses, 15-20 Redemptoris Mater Seminary masses, a couple or more, retreat masses, have had NCW meetings in my house about 20 times, and have read some of their catequetical directory that they teach. Also, my wife belongs to the NCW, and I associate almost continually with her community and friends. So, I do have some background knowledge with this group!
Just for peoples info., I don’t hate the NCW, but find, as the Church does, that they highly abuse the Liturgy of the Mass, and to this I am deeply concerned!
About the masses, and abuses, I think I need to clarify some possibly confusing items that we’ve read about above, and in other posts. One item is that the NCW celebrates the Mass in many different ways, (not only One and the same way),depending both on the location of the mass and who might the celebrating priest be.
In the seminary, for instance, it is usually the Rector, and he has a liturgy adapted to the requirements of the Cardinal in charge of it’s oversite. Therefore, in this Mass there are much fewer abuses than the normal parish NCW mass.One great thing about the seminary is that it doesn’t include ‘echoes’ at all. It is on a Sunday morning too. It also doesn’t have the congregation receiving Communion seated, but in the regular or ‘normal’ Catholic way. The music is also more respectful than at the NCW parish mass, and really, everything is a bit more orthodox!
In other words, get rid of all the NCW abuses and you might even end up with a pretty normal Catholic Mass. And this is what I think Pope B16 really is looking for!..if they can do it in the seminaries, why not EVERYWHERE?
However, this isn’t to say that this mass is perfect. There are still many abuses, but just smaller ones…like the Priests/Rector always preaching while seated, and the Eucharistic prayer being sung to the accompaniment of guitars. Also the gifts not being brought up by the congregation, flowers are on the altar, etc..
And in the NCW parish mass, there is basically a hybrid of liturgical errors, depending on whether the regular diocesan pastor is presiding, or a visting NCW ordained priest. This ‘hybrid’ would be something between a normal parrochial NCW Mass and a more complete or ‘pure’ NCW mass. What I consider a pure NCW mass might be found at one of their many retreat houses, and in which the presiding priests are, I assume, almost always from the NCW. In these, I think, and have experienced many more liturgical abuses.
Speaking of some abuses found in the regular Mass there are ….no presentation of the gifts, ie.bread and wine, in the normal way, but rather, the gifts are brought by the altar servers from the sanctuary. There is likewise no collection, because most members in communities ‘tithe’, as does my wife. The priests are sometimes from the NCW in the parish masses, and in this case, the Eucharistic Prayer is sung to the accompaniment of guitars. The altars (tables) are always decorated with flowers. The priests never consume the Communion at the altar, but return to their seat to wait for all the rest of the community to recieve their Communion. The Deacon and altar servers do not recieve before giving to the community (as is instructed to do so in the GIRM), but somehow recieve by themselves after everyone else has been served, I think with some of the ‘left overs’.
In the parrochial mass the admonitions are fairly concise and I don’t have much of a problem with them. They are only a little longer than what you find in a ‘regular’ mass, for instance. However, after the Gospel, the celebrating priest always invites the ‘echo’s’. And to me, this is one of the worst and most abuseive parts of the mass. There are usually about 7 or more people who comment on one item, or another, for about 4-7 minutes each.
Usually these are emotional expressions having very little to do with the readings, more along the lines of how thankful they are and how they ‘feel’ about the readings, the present liturgy or belonging to the WAY. These are really quite useless, for the most part, and highly interrupt the Mass. However, sometimes a sad personal story is told, about a husband or family member, and such stories can be quite touching, or even very sad.
At the retreat house everything seemed to be amplified and extended, with pretty much double the number of ‘echoes’, and also numerous prayer petitions which seemed to last upwards to 20 or more minutes.. with long, emotional and almost pentacostal or ‘charismatic’ type prayers to our “Heavenly Father”. These types of prayers are definately not allowed, as they are really ‘prayers’ and not ‘petitions’, and are in NO WAY…”SUCCINCT”…as demanded of such lay petitions.
Communion is received seated, the altar, if you can call it one, (in their largest retreat house in my area) is at the lowest part of the building, almost like a square ampitheater of about 4 or 5 levels (including the presiding celebrants elevated chair.)
My experience with one such recent mass was that it was very much more like a ‘convention’ than a ‘mass’. I even asked my wife, during the mass…”Is this a convention or is it a mass?”
The length of the mass was very long, I think 2 1/2 to possible 3 1/2 hrs. It’s kind of hard to tell when the actual mass began because there was a lengthy introduction by a Catequist, possible 20 or more minutes, and I don’t know if this was part of the mass or not?? So too, there were 2 homilies by the priest, the first being about 7 minutes and the second, about 20 mins. In between there were about 14-16 ‘lengthy’ echos. Again, most of these were emotionally based, filled with thanksgiving, mostly for belonging to the “Way”, or for being given the gift of being at the retreat. I view all of this as a subtle way of reinforcing or conditioning the community members along certain patterns of thinking desired by the NCW leadership.
I can also attest that my wife is often VERY STRANGE when she participates in NCW special events, and reminds me somewhat of “the Stepford Wives” movie…sad to say. It takes her about 3 days to get back to normal, too.
Now, I have been very inspired and ‘high’ by various NORMAL retreats in my life, but somehow not like she appears. Really it seems more cultish, and less joyful than my ‘orthodox’ retreat experiences. Really, for this reason, I don’t like the retreats at all, because they have a negative effect on her personality.. and basically, she’s just a little weird afterwards! She is also HIGHLY influenced to promote the ‘WAY’ at these times, and I think she veiws me as someone more or less pagan or non-inspired…even though I am spending hours each day reading, studying and commenting on orthodox Catholic topics and apologetics.
Anyway, I’ve strayed off course here, but have given a little glimps ‘somewhat’, of the inside workings of NCW liturgy, in various settings.
Now, to continue on another topic, I really, don’t want to venture too far, the INSIDE workings of catequises meetings…because from what I witnessed by just listening them give Catequises to others, their words were harsh and forceful and of such words and oratory I complained to my wife afterwards.
“Is this type of bad attitude and forceful speech, while speaking to Catholic ‘new comers’ really ‘Christian’? I thought to myself. But since it wasn’t directed to me, and I was only waiting to drive my wife home, I just let them..”do their thing”. However, I always comment my disapproval when I see or hear these types of dialogues, and my wife usually gets a little upset at my ‘honest’ commentary. However, sometimes she agrees with me, if the teachings were ‘patently’ agressive and uncourteous.
To some everything up. I think that the Holy Church has made it perfectly clear that the Vatican Congregations, with the approval of the Pope, in line with all the synods, congresses, constitutions and councils of Bishops, are the ones to both ‘DEFINE’ what the Catholic liturgy is, and also DEMAND strict compliance to all the ‘norms’ required.
No matter what the personal preferences of the NCW are, nor for any reason that they give (like being more in line with the early Christian way of doing things)are they given the ability to create the ‘meaning’, symbolism or any other teaching or ritual of the Catholic Liturgy, and this according to both canon law and multiple church liturgical documents. Simply speaking… the Church JUST DOESN’T ALLOW THIS!
Therefore, all of the ‘norms’ and instructions are what need to be studied and followed by ALL CATHOLICS and not just he NCW!
And this is EXACTLY what the Church did with this letter. Really they introduced nothing new…no matter how the NCW and their followers interpret it. Even if there was NO LETTER, the NCW would still be bound by GIRM, REDEMPTIONIS SACRAMENTUM, CANON LAW and all the other legal documents and norms of the Church. What Cardinal Arinze/Pope Benedict did, was just highlight these.
Remember Cardinal Arinze’s summation pretty much says it all…”They are to “accept and follow the liturgical books approved by the Church without omitting or adding anything”.
If they think they can take the examples given,and turn them into ‘indults’, this is an extremely flawed understanding of both the letter and general Church teachings. The only indult given was the moving of the time for the ‘peace’..all the other items are already in effect for all other Catholics. It’s very clear and very simple!
So even without the letter, they still are bound to follow all of these cited documents! To read permission into any of this is rediculous!..if not outright ‘willfully and sinfully’ intended.
And this is what is so strange about the group…the desire to have things their own way.
They seem to be more interested in Church power and manipulation, than even teaching the Gospel. And this is the frightening thing. Why such a lust for authority and acceptance by Rome? Why so much rejoicing over minor indults and Vatican recognition? If they are obeying the Church at present, as the Church wishes, do they really need such approval and legal protection? Or is all of this craze about having objectively bad rituals and teachings accepted into the heart of Church liturgy and ritual? Or worse yet, they’re invented litugical symbolism accepted, in one way or another, as authoritative Church Doctrine and Teaching?
And this is what I think everyone is afraid of!
When we read on the internet of Kiko calling 2-300 bishops from all over the world, to a convention to learn more about ‘The Way’…When we see him send almost numberless youth of the NCW to Church functions like the World Youth Day…when we see 10,000+ NCW groups formed in Italy alone, and especially in Rome….we can smell a desire for power and political influence over the Church, cooking!
But this is on the large scale. On the small scale we can see how the NCW can enter a parish like mine, and, sooner or later, convince the Pastor to redesign it to look like a NCW parish Church.(Square table, albo in front of the priest’s chair, NCW art, crucifixes…everything.
Really, it’s like hijacking a parish!… It’s the same thing that the liberals do when they ‘redo’ Traditional Catholic Churches…which in some cases having fine statuary thrown in garbage bins! (I have a friend who had a number of such statuary from such a bin..two of which were over 5-6 ft. tall!)
So this is the REAL danger of the NCW!
Then there is the hiding, the purposeful confusion of facts, the secrecy. Just examine the official NCW websites and you will find that they are really some of the worst websites on the internet! Just check them out…almost NO information.
And after all of this time, they don’t even provide an english translation, if any translation at all, of Cardinal Arinzes letter, to either their own members or to anyone else interested! Why?? What are they afraid of…it just repeats current Catholic regulations that they must follow??
And why do their leaders, like Mr. Gennarini, make things so confusing? To be a devout Catholic we need to be open to the truth and simple and pure of heart! Why such obscuring and misrepresentation of all these matters?
And for the last item, why do they INSIST that they can continue to have their ‘beloved’ “echoes”…when Cardinal Arinze’s letter clearly states, and reminds them, of the current Church norm, emphatically stating:
“Careful attention must also be paid to the Instruction Redemptionis Sacramentum no.
…the same document, when examined, clearly and unambiguosly states:
“RS[74.] If the need arises for the gathered faithful to be given instruction or testimony by a layperson in a Church concerning the Christian life, it is altogether preferable that this be done outside Mass. Nevertheless, for serious reasons it is permissible that this type of instruction or testimony be given after the Priest has proclaimed the Prayer after Communion. This should not become a regular practice, however. Furthermore, these instructions and testimony should not be of such a nature that they could be confused with the homily,[156] nor is it permissible to dispense with the homily on their account. ”
What’s so darn hard about understanding this.. when the letter clearly states: CAREFUL ATTENTION MUST ALSO BE PAID TO..”
Doesn’t Mr Gennarini know how to understand such a simple statement, emphasised to be studied CAREFULLY?
Or does he want to pay some fancy freelance canon lawyer to interpret something different from RS74? What is the reason for making something so simple to understand…so completely complicated?
So, if in 10 months the NCW still has some of these HIGHLY ABUSIVE personal testimonies, directly against the teachings of ‘norm’ RS#74,…it will be time for some real Catholic liturgical ‘protesting’!
This is really going to be interesting!
I am hoping and praying now,that Kiko and the rest in the NCW, including my wife, are obedient with their whole heart, to the teachings of all the Catholic Church norms, regulations and canon laws!
And then maybe we can all get behind this devisive and scandalous mess, and get on with the bringing of the Gospel of Our Lord to the ends of the earth, even as Our Lord, and His Servant, Pope Benedict XVI, surely desire!

I. Arrosto May 10, 2007 at 2:03 pm

Many seminaries… many vocations… faithful to Rome… rebuild marriages… plenty of fruits of a tree that uses a slightly modified (yet still NOT condemned) liturgy… all I see is the Vatican’s wish for the Way to conform but NO WAY DO I SEE A CONDEMNATION, or that the liturgy is degrading, or anti-theological, or anti-christian… just different (or any “teeth” as it has done to groups like lifeteen, or as many claim that is as fact) … Gennarini’s point are clear and well displayed, everyone else is attacking the movement itself and moving away from the issue at hand which is ONLY THE EXPRESSION OF THE LITURGY OF THE MASS… all the rest, secretive, abusive, elitist, etc… Only an objective and a sincere heart looking for the truth would ask oneself that if the NCW liturgies were such an abuse, why does nobody asks why did the VATICAN DIDN’T CONDEMNED IT AND DEMANDED AN IMMEDIATE STOP OF IT???? unless… yes… unless it is still considering (ad experimentum) or better said, still understanding the benefits of such a liturgy in the life of the modern faithful and the life of a modern church, with a holy dose of prudence lest you kill a charism genuinly raised by the spirit and you find yourself fighting the Lord. In light of the EVIDENT EVILS that face the church and its faithful in this brand new century, it is highly scandalizing to see people within the church trying to stiffle a charism that has so many good fruits, has been obedient to the church up until today and who will continue to be obedient. This phenomenae can only be accurately described by the words of Jacques Maritain: “piously intended errors”

Previous post:

Next post: