For many years the Neocatechumenal movement
has had the esteem, the favour and the praises of some
members of the Catholic hierarchy: it would be very laborious to build
a collection of all the expressions of satisfaction and benevolence
expressed the Popes, Pope Paul VI and Pope John Paul II1
Their "Way" has been presented and given high
commendation as an exemplary method for a return to the most authentic
Christianity, in the decisive elimination of all the excess waste that
throughout the years and centuries has distorted its image, betrayed
its message.
The success obtained seems clear from the multiplying of
Neocatechumenal Way "communities" in thousands of parishes, from the holding of new
seminars and conferences, from the missionary activity performed by family
units in faraway lands of primary evangelisation. All this made one think
of an extraordinary intervention of the Holy Spirit, particularly providential
in this age of apostasy as ours is.
The source of inspiration is an unseen text which
gathers together an instruction course which gathers together an instruction
course for "catechists" held in February 1972 by Kiko Arguello and Carmen
Hernandez in Madrid. It forms a typed volume of 373 pages. Photocopied,
circulated as a formative textbook for new apostles. It cannot
be called official only because it is restricted, not because it
does not express the ideas and beliefs of the authors. Until now it has never been
modified or retracted; and nobody, since June 1990 to this day, has protested
to get me to correct in part or in whole my critical judgement.
Repeatedly examined since the '80's onwards, it can be concluded
that among some positive elements, the text contains numerous seriously negative
elements, because they are irreconciliable with the fundamental truth of Christianity
as preserved by the solemn Magisterium of the Church, as I believe to have shown
in the previous editions of my essay. The latter, having been sent everywhere
in Italy, should have informed many of my accusation of heresies.
I have not been asked to explain nor have I been invited to
a critical verification to a debate. Till now my work has met indifference and
silence. A singular and worrying attitude on the part of some of those
responsible for catholic orthodoxy. How to explain it? I leave it all
in the hands of the Judgement of God and of history. But therefore this
judgement encourages me to continue the principal argument:
the basis of the N.M. is heretical; and I emphasise this especially
for those who believed the title of my essay to be exaggerated or even
calumnious.
The Neocatechumenals like to present themselves as
zealous members of the Catholic Church, faithful to the Pope; their meetings
with him - especially in certain public audiences - they are spectacular
and clamourous when they are seen. Everyone must know that they constitute
the most real Church, superior than that of the common believers, those
who do not follow Kiko's indicated "Way". "We are a Power!", they repeat
with an arrogance only worth commiserating.
They long so much to be held docile to the directives of
the Pope - and thus to be able to claim themselves and moreso impose -
that they dared make believe that they had obtained from the Holy See the
solemn approval of the Movement when, the 30th August of 1990, the Pontiff
limited himself to write to Mons. Cordes, their assitent, a paternal -
but private letter of satisfaction on their work... It, for some alterations
easily observable from the original version, makes one suppose that the document
did not pass through the usual checking of the competent department of the
Holy See2.
In Italy, some Bishops and parish priests, felt themselves
obliged to accept and favour the neocatechumenal "way", having read in the
Pontifical document: "It is therefore my wish that the Brothers in the
episcopate - together with their presbyters - value and support this work for
the new evangelization so that it may be implemented according to the lines
proposed by its initiators...".
Obviously, it went too far, because after some time, on AAS 1990, p.1513
everyone could read and meditate on the following precisation: "The Thought
of the Holy Father, in recognising the Neocatechumenal Way as a valid
itinerary of catholic formation, is not to give binding indications
to the local Ordinaries, but only to encourage them to consider with
attention the Neocatechumenal Communities, leaving all nevertheless
to the judgement of the same Ordinaries to act according to the pastoral
exigencies of the single dioceses.".
The problem I return to raise is this one: do the
presupposed bases of the neocatechumenal "way" reconcile with the catholic
doctrine? What are the relations of the Neocatechumenals with the Church?
To find that out, the only source for an objective
and complete research remains the cited document: the only really complete
and authorative one because it is faithful to the thoughts of Kiko and Carmen...;
It, having been unaltered, remains the most secure criterion of a critically
valid judgement and analysis.
It follows that:
- referring to this document, no-one can accuse me of having "invented",
or of attributing thoughts that they never thought to the authors of the
text...;
- Kiko and Carmen can reject the accusation of "heresy" only if they
are disposed to make a public profession of faith contrary to the
errors that have been attributed to them.
- the accusation of having extracted from the text what was wanted to
condemn, and thus of having "extrapolated" words
and phrases out of context and contrary to their authors' intentions, is completely
without foundation or basis and only possible to be claimed by someone who has
not read once this entire essay...; while I can declare that I have
studied it at length, comparing various sections and with the whole of the
catechesis.
In conclusion, I think I can still sustain the accusation
of heresy against the Neocatechumenals who have understood and accepted the
doctrinal content of the document by Kiko and Carmen; for whom their
influence within the Church constitutes a serious threat for catholic
orthodoxy. Good faith, if it can save them, does not dispense anyone of unmasking
their errors. This language, which can seem simple-minded, out-dated, only by
those who do not believe any more in the truth and are now
extraneous to the Church which continues to teach and defend it.
Proceed to Chapter 1 - Begins the analysis
of why their doctrine is heretical
FOOTNOTES:
1 (cf. The Neocatechumenal Way in the
speeches of Paul VI and John Paul II (pro manuscripto, published by
the Neocatechumenal Centre, p.zza S. Salvatore in Campo - Roma - Tel. (06)
6541589, 3a ediz., 1991).
2 Thus, it speaks of "an itinerary of catholic
formation, valid [ Translator note: In the original valid is used
in the female sense rather than male sense as it should in Italian ]
for society and for today...". Even the date is not correct from the
orthographic point of view: "From the Vatican, 30th August of the 1990,
XII of Pontificate". How come there is that "of the"? Perhaps the
rush made the writer leave out the word "year"? This type of ommission
does not make justice to a pontifical document, usually checked meticulously.
|