There’s another serious unresolved problem after the delivery of the
finally approved Statute: the transformation of churches according
to a “new aesthetic” which, in the words of the founder, ‘will save
the Church of the third millennium’. Clearly, this “new aesthetic”
presupposes a “new theology” that is extraneous to the one which
springs from the Apostolic Revelation.
|
New parish in Madrid: the people dressed
in white are those who receive the baptism
in the Jordan at the end of the Way |
Looking at the available pictures of many
churches founded by the NCW or at the sacred
spaces horribly modified in other churches
entrusted to them, we can easily verify that
along the nave’s main axis the baptismal
font (that in the recently built
churches becomes an immersion pool), the
altar (transformed into an hypertrophic
table), the ambo and the
presidential seating chair are disposed
in a straight line.
This kind of disposition is not accidental or merely aesthetical:
it follows a precise symbolical criterion set by the founder, meant
to establish a strong feeling of conviviality reinforcing unity
inside the community through Neocatechumenal Eucharist. According to
Kiko, the church-parish (basically, every NC community which it is
split in) may be seen like a woman in labor: the altar
represents her stomach; on the Eucharistic table, indeed, the “holy
dinner” is celebrated without presenting to the Father, in a
bloodless way, the offer of the sacrifice of Christ, who has died
for our salvation; the bread (the breaking of the chains of the
slavery to egoism) and the wine (the new exodus for all mankind) are
considered references to the Jewish Easter more than to the Last
Supper (the Body and Blood of Christ, shed as an atonement of sins).
The ambo represents the woman’s mouth (indeed, it is from the
mouth that the Word is proclaimed); finally, the presidential
seating chair represents the woman’s head. The baptismal font
is the uterus. The presbyter is merely president of the celebration
assembly, a sort of primus inter pares whose charisma is
merely that of worship. The traditional figure of the Alter
Christus is totally absent. The priest is not celebrating in
Christ’s stead, in persona Christi: he merely symbolizes
Christ.
The community is hypostatized and anthropomorphized through
symbols that aren’t Catholic at all, since the Church identifies
itself as Christ’s Mystical Body.
|
St Toma in Venice: the kneelers
disappeared.
This is the disposition of an aligned assembly instead of
a praying Assembly celebrating the Holy Sacrifice |
The placement of the benches in a stepped
semicircle also tends to highlight the
convivial aspect of the Eucharistic liturgy
and its reduction to a meeting of the
assembly. As a matter of fact, against all
the precepts of the magisterium, Kiko
believes that it is the assembly who
celebrates the Eucharist and states that
‘without Assembly there’s no Eucharist.’ We
wish to remind John Paul II’s words in
Ecclesia de Eucharistia, n. 31: ‘We
understand, then, how important is for a
priest to pay head to the conciliar
recommendation to daily celebrate the
Eucharist—both for his spiritual life, and
for the good of the Church and the world—,
which is always an action of Christ and His
Church, even when the believers have not the
opportunity to attend it.’
Even the kneelers have been abolished because the believers ought
not kneel, not even during the Consecration. It’s an evident display
of indifference towards the Real Presence of the Lord during the
most intense, sacred and solemn moment of worship.
According to this “new aesthetic”, the presbyteries in churches
are totally transformed according to Kiko’s indisputable
instructions: the altars are replaced by enormous square tables (80
cm of height and 235 cm of width) around which the believers sit as
if they were dining. The concept of Sacrifice disappear, replaced by
the feeling to participate to a dinner, served to the diners by the
priest. On top of that, in order to emphasize this communitarian
idea every one takes the communion together with the others, not
individually after the priest. This practice is contrary to
liturgical books and Catholic praxis, that privileges the personal
relation with the Lord, that precedes and prepares the communitarian
one and may not be replaced by the latter, otherwise the spiritual
growth of the single believer is transformed into a symbiosis
between the members of a fellowship. This is also contrary to the
teachings of the Church, and to a sane psychological growth.
Symbiosis paralyzes people and fosters dependence between them. Let
alone the “fractio panis” and the care of the sacred vases entrusted
to lays as “ostiaries”—a function that is exclusively sacerdotal.
It’s another signal of the common priesthood of the believers,
belittling sacerdotal ordination, which differs from the first not
only for its importance, but in its essence (LG 10).