Open letter to the Neocatechumenales communities. . .
Dear Sisters and Brothers in The Christ,
I write you with concern on what I saw and entendu(témoignages) concerning your meetings and liturgies. Know by advance that it is not easy for me to write this letter and I also suppose that it won't be easy for you of the lira. Let's accept the mutually. I am not even convinced that 'The Path' of which you speak is made of it against the church and his/her/its teachers, but I am sadly on that your approach and a lot of your messages are contrary to the mind of the church and have the gospel of Jesus Christ. I have the firm hope that it occurred without mischief or bad intentions of your part, nevertheless, I counsel you briskly to consider the harmful consequences of your actions in, and outside, of the communities. I don't wait that you are convinced easily by the reality of my subjects, however, because of the seriousness of these accusations, I ask that you pray about these matters, and maybe to reconsider the sources of your interpretation of the of holy writings, the Dogmas and the Doctrine.
He/it is on that it is difficult to debate against 'The Path', and this for at least two obvious reasons. The first is that there is the good in your communities - I believe that you had the intention to make well, and that you also make well a little makes to some. Again that we should not confound our intentions to really make with our actions that cannot be good, especially when it is so easy to lose view the individuals in the immediate situation because of the distractions of the big goals for the future. It is an old tension, however what is not in game here is anything else that the lives of people, the faith, l' espoir,l' love, and the eternal life. To make some accusations about the preparations and the people-support for these is a serious responsibility and it is not to say that there is not no (true) alternatives, or that the good (of your goals) compensates the pain one way or the other. If we think to be useful to the gospel - our goal, our 'ends, could they justify themselves one way or the other, some are our methods, or our 'means?- We must look at the goodness of our actions as well as the goals to which us inhale.
Maybe you will wonder why I mention intention, action, thin and middle. It is because it is a field of mines state of mind for everybody, and because I think that a lot of people join your communities, or are encouraged to join them, not so much for their inherent goodness that to have something of them - what is rather utilitarian and center on oneself - or because people are persuaded not to be able to criticize the communities because, you know a lot of them.'Can this approach undermine the individual and the community really rather that to develop them, because it concentrates on a kind of consomation, or "that you can make for me"? It is different, and can be subtler when Jesus recommends that we looked at the fruits to judge quelquechose. Subtle, maybe, but indisputably different because of the interest in the general increase and the goodness of the whole person (community, or other) - and, again, because of this person's inherent goodness (community, or other). The pictures of the fruit trees and the trailing plants begin with something that is generally accepted as good and that has need of care, that one takes care of them to be encouraged to continue to grow and to produce abundant fruits (for the good of each and all). I didn't hear such things coming of you on the inherent goodness of people in your communities and in the society, but rather the opposite. This, as me the developerais in one moment, is a vital point of division.
The second reason it is difficult to discuss against your 'movement' bus has my knowledge, you didn't write anything over (of the less I have anything seen never, or maybe not in English). It makes difficult to know what you preach precisely, or that that is your approach to the Truth and life that we affirm all in The Christ. Again that he/it would appear that your teachings are somewhat obvious in your meetings, in your messages, in your methods and in your liturgies. Certainly, whatever some either what you believe, a considerable part has been expressed in these. Although there are a lot more things that could be bills of that that I remember your meetings and liturgies, I will only approach three important and recurrent themes that are especially noteworthy: the sin, l 'individual, and God.
I am sure you had news of a lot of people that saw extreme things about your understanding of sin and our nature, and of God's way. How many times I heard several of your members and chiefs to say has what point they had been bad, that they could not make anything without God's help -.' People are encouraged to reveal their bad lives, depraved, also. Why do you make this? Are not you informed that the history of the church is filled of controversies and heresies who concerns such things? The Jansenists, for example, believed in such things as the corruption radical of the human nature, that people didn't have any capacity to resist temptation, and that The Christ didn't die for all people but only for predestined some saints. It is horrible, made not it, however the Jansenisme was very popular for the time elders. With recognition, the church found the opposition favorable to the Jansenists of some persuasive Jesuit theologians:
The two views had important implications for the morality. Because of their view optimistic of the human nature, the Jesuits supported the morality that in many respects looked like the merely naturalistic morality of the illuminated and rationalistic Deists. As them they preached the dignity of the human nature, and as them they made of the "nature" the norm of morality, although they didn't consist of the nature in precisely the same path. The Jesuits affirmed that even without grace the person could observe the moral rectitude to the natural level and by his/her/its own free will could make the acts that were morally good.
The theology pessimistic of the Jansenists reflected itself in their moral rigorism; the man non key by the grace remained depraved completely, all his/her/its actions were bad and same his/her/its supposed virtues were vices. The grace has only been given to predestined to them; the other have been condemned inexorably to the eternal punishment for their sins through no their clean mistake, but parceque they didn't receive the necessary grace.
In the beginning the church leaned toward the Jesuit theology and finally decided to remain on this position. It was undoubtedly more appropriate for the church that had the intention to kiss all men and that, offered the saving grace traditionally in his/her/its sacraments that were available to all, and that learned always that the effort of the human being counted for something in his/her/its salute.
Thomas Bokenkotter
THE CONCISE HISTORY OF THE CATHOLIC CHURCH
I can understand that you wanted that people are informed of their sin and their guilty nature, but the sin is not everything that in our nature has. Is it that guilt, the blame, the pain, and does the recrimination finish, and the forgiveness, the pitié,l' acceptance and does the increase begin? Where do you find especially in the New Will, all support for the demand in holy Writing, that God tests us, do abandon us, or 'takes our head in his/her/its hand?' I would suggest that it is not the Christian belief 'kosher.' Same Job that is the best example known of the idea of God's tests and that, after all, was indeed virtuous (in God's eyes), felt that he/it was treated unjustly and has been prepared to recall God of the matter injustice:
Eliphaz of Teman took the floor and says:
Can a man be useful has God, when a man supposed is only useful has one? Is Shaddai interresse by your justice, do pull t him profit of your honest conduct? would this Be because of your piety that he corrects you and that he enters in judgment with you? This is not not rather for your big spitefulness, for your unlimited mistakes?Let's go! Reconcile you with him and make the peace: so your happiness you will be returned.
Job took the floor and says :
Again my complaint is today a revolt; my hand compresses my moan. Oh if I knew how to reach it, to arrive until his/her/its home, I would open a suit before him, my mouth would be full of grievances. I would know the terms of his/her/its answer, attentive has what he/it would tell to me. Would he/it throw all his/her/its strength in this debate with me? No, he/it would be sufficient to him to pay me attention. He/it would recognize in his/its adversary a right man, and I would triumph over my judge.
Job22:1,4-5,21, 23:1-7 (NBJ)
Of course, Yahweh answers Job, in him while learning more about God, however he reprimands Eliphazes and the two other "not to have spoken correctly of Me (God) as my servant Job made it" (42:7; doesn't make reference however probably to the complaints of job). Later, we get the clear refusal of the idea in James' Letter, that God tests us:
Ever, when you are put to the test, say, 'God tempts me'; God cannot be tempted by the pain, and He doesn't put person to the test.
James 1:13 (NJB)
Of the general confession, how to reconcile job and James can be a little complicated, but I think that the answer can be found in the treatment of the two authors of their beliefs and actions. Again, such centennial problems are as the nature of the pain, the reward and the punishment, among the elevated questions here and of the love and God's Justice -. Generally, us the Christian says that the love of God and the Justice don't contradict themselves one the other, but that the two work against the pain, however when we choose between the two us make it in favor of the merciful and indulgent aspects of this Love.
Nevertheless, while accentuating the nature guilty of people, appear yourselves to minimize (or to deny) the creative and good nature of us all. We believe that we are, after all, makes has God's picture, and what is a more, endowed with an important free will - capable to make well as well as pain. With the account of the genesis original, the author of the big Medieval mystical work, IGNORAMUS'S CLOUD, noted it well:
God's simple approach of which I speak grows of free will and is founded on a true faith.
He/it is your existence and you are what you are some Him, not only because he/it is your reason to be, but because he/it is in you as your reason to be and your existence.
Besides, Saint Augustin told to some :
He/it created us without our help and didn't save us without our consent.
Of the same way, that the one concerning the question of sin and God, there is a centennial concern about the nature of the me - about that and of what we add. Because we add such creations rich of God, he/it doesn't appear to have one end there to what we can contemplate or to discover about ourselves. Nevertheless, one of the beliefs more fundamental and old about the me, and of the reports with the other, is known like 'only and numerous', and is important has consider. This mystery bends on the belief that we are all individuals - only, independent and detached - as well as the all (in a certain way), united like one. In particular, the Christian tradition learns that we add some individuals, and that we are united (in The Christ), eternally. This way to believe is explained admirably by St. Paul in the picture marvelous of the Mystical Body.
However, the belief that the two concepts are true is essentially the mystical belief, and, of course, no one n' affirms such obvious paradoxes. A lot of people in history had like idea of the two concepts - to be unique and however united - but with a tendency to accentuate a more of them that another. It is that that, I fear it, occurred with your communities - the excessive accentuation on the activities and l' 'unit' some group entailed the reduction of the liberty of the individuals in the group. Associated with the idea fundamentally mentioned already of the individual bad, and the insinuation that we cannot have confidence in ourselves, that there is a sort of spiritual emptiness of which the only hope of exit requires that the community guides the individuals to and through them the life of the church. I saw the people who adopt a jargon, of the gestures and a schedule more and more load (not permitting assummer of other liabilities anymore), apparently out of respect to the priorities of the communities of the path. It afflicts. I saw this danger elsewhere himself rependre (as in the Charismatic communities), as being part of the community formation, and it is sad and dangerous. It is too much close to kingdom of the fundamentalists or the communities of cult; everything that would make grow personally the individual is against the mind and night everybody, and is therefore as bad for the true community. It requires the Providence to try to balance the priorities of the individuals surely and those of the group, with different notions concerning the time, the mission and the direction, he/it is however crucial to maintain the effort.
Therefore, our belief in the Mystical Body accentuates the essential compatibility then, between the needs of the individual and those of the community. In this sense, our belief affirms that the liberty divinely given of the individual must not be abused ever, nor to be forced, nor handled (no matter them 'supposed needs good of the group). It is only in this way that each among us (and us all) can find the truth, that is the christ, has been made like that explicit by Vatican II:
But the truth. . . must be searched according to the manner clean to the dignity of the human person and has his/her/its social nature. To know by a free research' (DC§31).
But the true liberty is in the man a sign privileged of the divine picture.Because god wanted to "let has it his/her/its own advice" so that he can him even to look for his/her/its creator and, as adhering freely has Him, to end thus in a blissful fullness. The man's dignity requires it therefore that it acted according to a conscious and free choice, propelled and determined by a personal conviction and no under the only effect of instinctive thrusts or an outside constraint.
. . ' (DC§172)
A.M.J. Kloosterman, I.C.D.
CONTEMPORARY CATHOLICISM, Thought since Vatican II,,
Whereas there is the multitude of linked implications to the ideas of 'liberty' and of 'dignity of the human person', one of the central themes is the traditional belief that we are able all to lead our life as Jesus lived it. There was a lot of support for this idea in the Medieval period and related written works, as THE CHRIST'S imitation (Thomas in Kempis). It became a lot popular and introduced again to help and to guide people through the spiritual life. Let's approach the problem of the Jansénisme once again, the following passage enhances the belief that Jesus (being human) was and is worthy to be followed, and that we have the capacity to make it :
Implicit in the defense of the church that The Christ because he/it is united substantially to God's word was some chos ede more has solve in the temporary controversy with the Jansenisme. It was the recognition of the constant tradition, based on the revelation that (the man) Jesus can also be imitated by the supporter in their practice has the Christian virtue. Indeed, to model their lives on the terrestrial virtues of the Mr., makes them grow in God's resemblance, since Jesus is God.
John A. Hardon, S.J.
THE CATHOLIC CATECHISM
Because of the time and the limitations of this support, I won't say a lot of things about the decree of your liturgies, except what follows: - I found them offensives, somewhat oppressive, and largely antithetic to the goal of the liturgy. I believe that it ensued, enough naturally of your beliefs about the sin and the human nature. The liturgy, as I understand it, has for intention to help us to glorify God and has sanctify us all - all people - not by exhortation (as I found for a big part in your liturgies), but by encouragement and supplementary involvement in the Mystical Body. To my despair, I saw and heard of the people who prolong readings and reflections as menacing teachings, and then to tell people to hurry to go himself 'to Confess' during the Penitential Service, to mention God's love and to accentuate this God who tests us then and 'removes His/her/its hand of our heads during these times, and to persuade people to attend the meetings and the liturgies (while always telling them not to wait) and to insinuate their criminal character, make indignant, and their trustworthy lack.
If you continue to construct some communities, please make the therefore with more of care for the immediate needs of people - of the individuals - as well as those of the community and kingdom. Finally, although mystically, us the Christian affirms that all it is compatible. I don't wish to be against you, but he/it is that I am against the major part of that for what appears yourselves to be. If he/it pleases you consider Aristotle's words, one of the main sources of inspiration in St. Thomas Aquin, and the man St. Thomas called 'The Philosopher' (or Lover of Wisdom):
The major part of the men is naturally capable to be swung rather by fear that by reverence, and to abstain rather of the pain because of the punishment that it brings that because of his/her/its own impurity.
This situation must be avoided, as St. Jean reminds us that 'l '' Perfect Love has all fear escaped.' In a certain sense, consider that that John Newman Crimson suggested us like being a way advanced for the members of the church:
It is what one says that the church wants, not of the men with parties took, but of the sensitive, moderate, temperate men, of people to guide it through the channel of no significance, between theScylla and Charybdis of aye and No. [< To >]
Finally, please accept my apologies for my terseness in this letter. I didn't have the intention to offend (although I fear that I made it), but to try to reach the truth and to express - honestly, sincerely and to the best of my capacity - my reactions, concerns, and convictions about your communities and their securities and messages. I hope that you will feel free to debate these matters with me, or to tell me if you want all enlightenment of that that I told.
Sincerely,
Ronald Haynes
(July 1992)
P.S.: You can like to know that, out of respect, the copies of this letter have been given originally (in mid May) in Cannon O'Brien and Fr. Francis. I don't know if you saw this letter previously, but after him (more that) sufficient delay that I decided to send you this directly. I wait for the supplementary communication with impatience.
DC, Religious Liberty, the 16 document conciliar of Vatican II, p559,
DC Pastoral Constitution on the church in the Modern World, the 16 document conciliar of Vatican II, p188,
Scylla and Charybdises were huge posted to the stones of the opposite in the odyssey of Homer, while representing the difficult path between badly and disaster (which must be crossed nevertheless in order to live and to grow).
