| |
|
 |
| |
|
Statutes of the Neocatechumenal Way
The serious consequences of an anomalous ratification
A reader writes:
“Object: Informations about the Neocatechumenal Way”
In the opening catechesis I had several negative sensations, which were
amplified by the final sharing.
Reading these pages, I noticed that many people shared my feelings, that
were so grim as to make me believe that the Antichrist will enter the Church
by this way.
After reading that the Vatican ratified the Statutes of the Neocathecumenal
Way, I would like to ask you: How is it possible that nobody seems to notice
something that is easily perceivable, not even the Holy Father?
Greetings,
(Signature)
-----------------------
Between many recent e-mails concerning the NCW we received, we decided to
publish this one, removing the reader’s personal data for privacy reasons,
but taking it into account because it is emblematic of the relations between
the NCW and the Church, especially in its final question, that focuses on
the deeply anomalous punctum dolens of the present situation. This anomaly
makes our position an inconvenient one, because our steady commitment—that
is parallel to the unvaried danger which threatens the integrity of the
Church itself—opposes the NCW despite the ratification of its Statutes by
the Pontifical Council for the Laity.
No matter how anomalous(1) this ratification was: it conferred to the NCW a
role inside the Church—played with aggressiveness and strong leverages—that
permits it to continue the work of penetration into the vital core of the
Church itself in order to transform it at all levels: Parishes, Hierarchies,
Curial and Press Organisms and Cultural Organizations. We cannot
underestimate either the huge income originated by the production of sacred
furnishings, symbols, icons, para-religious gift items (whose production has
some standards that permit to all the communities to work independently and
to give job to many people, stimulating their participation). We have also
to add the parallel income—managed as a lobby—originated by the construction
of Churches, Centers, Seminars belonging to the NCW or to other religious
institutions, all of which are marked with the style of Kiko’s “New
Aesthetic” that introduced and continues introducing a new theology, a new
syncretistic symbology, taking advantage of the silence or even the
connivence of some bishops, who should instead be the ‘guardians‘ of the
Catholic faith.
Let’s come back to the punctum dolens mentioned in the last part of the
e-mail: it is clear that the ratification and the following attitude of the
Pope (despite the corrections he did) allows many people who nurture strong
doubts about the NCW—between them, the reader who wrote us—to remain in it
or even to begin participating to it.
Since we mentioned the Pope, we limit ourselves to say that, when he’s not
proclaiming dogmas of faith, his infallibility is not guaranteed: that
permits us to dissent from him, whit the highest respect and with
well-founded reasons based on the perennial Magisterium of Holy Mother
Church, without losing communion with him nor with the Lord Jesus Christ. We
cannot even rule out the hypothesis that he is not correctly informed by
those who have the interest to make him believe that the irregularities of
the NCW have been amended. This is what his Vicar Monsignor Vallini—according
to our fonts—constantly repeats to all those who express critics and
complaints about the diocesan pastoral, that is deeply rooted in the NCW’s
doctrines. On the other hand, paradoxically, Monsignor Vallini thunders with
utter blame against the groups and priests who ask him for permission to
celebrate the Mass according with the papal directions of the Motu Proprio
Summorum Pontificorum: So he disobeys them and shapes more and more the
Pope’s Diocese on the model of the “New Church” which moves forward, being
completely closed to the motions of restoration promoted by the very same
Pontiff and supported by many Catholics.
In the present situation, many Christians feel as prisoners in what should
be and is no more their own home, while the Pope asserts that “the Church is
everybody’s home.” We wonder if in the word ‘everybody’ we must include the
heretics. The disappointed Christians are forced to undertake an endless
diaspora to find Parishes that are not contaminated by Kiko’s new doctrine—artfully
camouflaged as ‘Catholic Church’—or even by the modernistic doctrine which
dominates the hegemonic culture depending on the ‘spirit of the Council’.
The oases of sane doctrine and spirituality are rare and most of them are
not easy to reach. If we didn’t trust the Grace and the Power of the Lord,
we would say that they risk to disappear. This is the present situation of
the Catholic Church.
Being proven and recognized that nothing has changed nor will it change in
the NCW—at least until it is ruled by by such powerful initiators—our duty
to correct the mistakes of many naive believers who pay heed to
authoritative ‘pastoral choices’ arises strong and clear, and it is
encouraged by the following statement, that we cite without comments:
«In the treasure of Revelation there are essential doctrines which all
Christians, by the very fact of their title as such, are bound to know and
defend. [...] The true children of Holy Church at such times [of heresy] are
those who walk in the light of their baptism, not the cowardly souls that,
under the specious pretext of submission to the powers that be, delay their
opposition to the enemy in the hope of receiving instructions that are
neither necessary nor desirable». (Dom Prosper Guéranger, OSB, The
Liturgical Year, Volume 4: Septuagesima, reading for feast of St. Cyril of
Alexandria, February 9, pp.379-80)
(1) The anomaly is double:
- It lacks of the contextual or preemptive approval of the texts which the
Statutes make reference to in the Second Article: «The Neocatechumenal Way
is implemented in the dioceses [...] “according with the lines proposed by
the initiators,” contained in the present Statute and in the Orientations
for the Teams of Catechists», that form the contents of the so-called
‘Neocathecumenal evangelization’ and its relative practices, which are
merely initiatic steps covered by secrecy. Is it admissible the presence of
an ‘initiatic’ secrecy of Gnostic matrix inside the Catholic Church, whose
revelation is in the full light of day and within everyone’s grasp?
January 17, 2010.
Today - nigro notanda lapillo (1), as our Fathers defined
the most ominous days -, we had news about the Vatican
release of the "Direttorio Catechetico" (Catechetical
directory) of the Neocatechumenal Way that now include
corrections by the Congregation for the Doctrine of the
Faith (the Neocatechumenal Way Statutes largely referred to
the unpublished "Direttorio"). This event is the actual confirmation of at least two
important facts: first, "corrections" means that for more
than 40 years people in the Way were instructed on the basis
of wrong, incomplete or ambiguous doctrines; second, that
the doctrines of the Way have now to be published to make
the formal statement an actual one, wiping out that cult-styled aura of secrecy that has no meaning in the Roman
Catholic Church.
________________________
(1) A "black-stone markable" day - i.e., ominous.
- The Thirteenth Article modifies—without holding the authority to do it,
since the ratification of the Statutes falls within the competences of the
Pontifical Council for the Laity, whereas Liturgy is ruled by the
Congregation of the Divine Cult—a prescription already ratified by the
Congregation of the Divine Cult on December 1st, 2005, mentioned by the Pope
in a public audience as “rules ordained in my name.” This is the only
cryptical reference to the letter written by the Cardinal Arinze, of which
we have no more notices—even if it is cited in the note number 49 to the
third comma of the article—so that it remains nullified by the ratification
of the Statutes according with the terms of the mentioned article, that is
the fruit of nerve-racking and exasperating negotiations and the consequent
compromise—as
|
|
| |
 | |