{"id":500,"date":"2004-09-02T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2004-09-02T00:00:00","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/lanuera.com\/cmwp\/?p=500"},"modified":"2004-09-02T00:00:00","modified_gmt":"2004-09-02T00:00:00","slug":"neocats-and-religious-life","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/church-mouse.net\/?p=500","title":{"rendered":"Neocats and religious life"},"content":{"rendered":"<h3 align=\"justify\">Is the Neo-Catechumenate Way Compatible with                Religious Life?<\/h3>\n<div align=\"justify\">             <\/div>\n<div align=\"justify\">             <\/div>\n<h5 align=\"justify\">Updated version of an article first published in Religious Life                Review, Ireland, Jan-Feb 1994 , Vol.33, No.164 by Gerald A. Arbuckle, sm<\/h5>\n<div align=\"justify\">\n<blockquote>\n<p>Gerald Arbuckle, sm, Ph.D., is a graduate in social anthropology                  from Cambridge University, a former assistant-general of the Marist                  Fathers, Rome, and professor of pastoral anthropology at the East                  Asian Pastoral Institute, University of Manila, Philippines. He                  is currently a co-director of the Refounding and Pastoral Development                  Research Unit, Sydney. Of his ten published books, four have received                  awards from the Catholic Press Association of the United States.                  He has been appointed consultant theologian by the Union of Superiors                  General, Rome, for the Congress on the Future of Religious Life,                  2004.<\/p>\n<p align=\"center\">\n<\/p>\n<\/blockquote><\/div>\n<p><!--more--><br \/>\n<\/p>\n<p align=\"justify\">Some time back a temporarily professed religious asked his superiors                for permission to join the Neo-Catechumenate movement (or The Way,                as it is sometimes called). He said: &#8216;This organization really impresses                me with its evangelical zeal, strong sense of community and faith                in the Lord. By being with them I can only become a better religious&#8217;.                The superiors agreed, but after a few months they found that the                religious was increasingly unavailable for community projects and                less interested in the spirituality and formation requirements of                the congregation. At the same time he became intolerant of those                who questioned the Way&#8217;s methods of evangelization. When these issues                were pointed out to him, he replied: &#8216;To be true to the movements                goals I must give all that I have. After all that is what commitment                to the Lord means in religious life. I am just fulfilling what the                Lord wants of all Christians and especially religious.&#8217;<\/p>\n<div align=\"justify\">             <\/div>\n<p align=\"justify\">This incident raises a serious question for superiors and formation                staffs. Is the joining of movements like the Neo-Catechumenate compatible                with the commitment demanded of religious? I believe that a religious                cannot belong fully to both because he\/she cannot be totally committed                to two distinct groups whose primary goals are in opposition to                each other. Second, the primary task of the Way in practice is to                downplay the importance of inculturation, but a religious must unconditionally                support evangelization through inculturation. Consequently, religious                superiors have an obligation to set limits to the involvement by                members of their communities in the Way in order to safeguard the                charisms of religious life and the congregation.<\/p>\n<div align=\"justify\">             <\/div>\n<p align=\"justify\">In this article I explain the reasons for my conclusions. I argue                that the manner in which the Way acts, according to the experience                of people in England, United States, Australia and in the South                Pacific, marks it out as a sect-like movement. I believe that no                authentic religious can belong to a sect. My reservations about                the Way&#8217;s organization and pastoral methods could be used by readers                as a case study to assess other contemporary new religious movements                within the Church.<\/p>\n<div align=\"justify\">             <\/div>\n<h6 align=\"justify\">UNDERSTANDING NEW RELIGIOUS MOVEMENTS<\/h6>\n<div align=\"justify\">             <\/div>\n<p align=\"justify\">Particularly over the last two to three decades a wide variety                of new religious movements (NRMs for short) have emerged both within                and outside the mainline Churches. History shows that movements                of this kind arise at times of socio-economic\/political upheaval                or chaos. They emerge as an initial and inevitably simplistic effort                to provide a new social integration, as a response to conditions                of acute social anomie or normlessness. During the 1960s the Western                world went through one of the greatest cultural revolutions in recorded                history affecting every aspect of life; no political, religious,                social or artistic institution remained unaffected by the revolution&#8217;s                radical evaluations. The revolution, which is sometimes referred                to as the Revolution of Expressive Disorder , left many people emotionally                and culturally exhausted, without a sense of identity and belonging,                because the old securities had disintegrated under the speed and                depth of its attack. The NRMs, such as the Unification Church (Moonies),                Scientology offered disoriented people ready-made, clear cut meaning                systems and direction in life.<\/p>\n<div align=\"justify\">             <\/div>\n<p align=\"justify\">Vatican II&#8217;s demolition of the Church&#8217;s ghetto culture coincided                with the countercultural chaos, so many Catholics were left struggling                to cope with the aftershocks of two revolutions at the same time,                namely the cultural and the conciliar revolutions. Little wonder                that NRMs within the Church, such as the charismatic movement, the                Neo-Catechumenate, Opus Dei and Communione e Liberazione, developed                such an immediate appeal. Many Catholics craved for the certitudes                and boundaries of a pre-Vatican II Church and these movements offered                them a response to these needs. Like most fundamentalist movements                adherents actively look to the central authority, in this case Rome,                to use its coercive power &#8216;to put things right&#8217; in the Church. Rome,                however, while continuing to support these movements, has at times                expressed reservations about them: Pope John Paul II spoke of &#8216;questions,                uneasiness and tensions&#8217; at the level of local churches because                of &#8216;presumptions and excesses&#8217; of members.<\/p>\n<div align=\"justify\">             <\/div>\n<p align=\"justify\">From history we see that, when movements begin to form by way of                reaction to revolutionary change, they run the risk of developing                sect-like qualities. A sect sociologically is a grouping formed                in protest against, and sometimes separating from, the parent organization.                Its followers believe that the members of parent grouping have lost,                or compromised, traditional orthodoxy, so they seek a return to                the earlier and purer teachings and practices. Sects, therefore,                commonly have the following qualities. They are elitist, claiming                to have the total truth, so that salvation is possible only by belonging                to the sect. Individuals must earn their membership of a sect by                performing acceptable actions or by undergoing a dramatic conversion                or re-birthing experience.<\/p>\n<div align=\"justify\">             <\/div>\n<p align=\"justify\">Sects may accept at least in theory a democratic form of government,                but in fact the power of the group to control individuals, directly                or through its leaders (commonly men), becomes authoritarian. Total                loyalty is demanded of adherents to the group; errant members can                be harshly dealt with, even through formal expulsion, if rules are                broken.<\/p>\n<div align=\"justify\">             <\/div>\n<p align=\"justify\">Sects generally are fundamentalist in orientation that is, they                angrily reject dialogue with the contemporary world or non-believers.                For example, when fundamentalists react to the &#8216;polluting evils&#8217;                of modernity, they assert that the world and\/or members of the parent                organisation have absorbed the evil around them and their task is                to bring the organisation back to the assumed golden age of a former                period. Sect members, believing they have the fullness of the truth,                are intolerant of people who dare to think differently; they indignantly                condemn anyone daring to question their assumptions of righteousness.                Dialogue can only endanger the commitment of sect members to orthodoxy.                In the Church these movements tend to be lay organisations. Priests,                however, may be accepted as having a necessary function, but they                must submit to the lay authority in matters other than the priest&#8217;s                sacrificial role.<\/p>\n<div align=\"justify\">             <\/div>\n<p align=\"justify\">Cults technically are milder forms of sects. Throughout this article                I use the word sect strictly as described above. In contemporary                popular language, what are today called &#8216;the cults&#8217;, such as the                Moonies, are sociologically sects.<\/p>\n<div align=\"justify\">             <\/div>\n<h6 align=\"justify\">ORIGINS AND THEOLOGY OF THE WAY<\/h6>\n<div align=\"justify\">             <\/div>\n<p align=\"justify\">The Way originated in the early 1970s, emerging out of the personal                religious conversion of an artist and musician, Kiko Arguello, and                a small group of companions in the Palomeras slums of Madrid. Theoretically,                the movement aims to re-create the lengthy period of training and                teaching that catechumens underwent in the early Church. This necessitates                an intimate knowledge of biblical texts, a powerful experience of                the Church as a small accepting community, the revitalization of                the Easter Vigil as the central Christian feast, and participation                in Sunday evening Eucharist and sacraments with a degree of commitment                exceeding what is expected in the average parish. It sees the Church                ideally as consisting of small communities with members being held                together by strong communitarian bonds; lay catechists have a central                position and members are expected to be generous in giving of their                time and income to the group&#8217;s activities. They may be required                to go as missionaries of the Way to any part of the world at any                time decided by the Way&#8217;s authorities.<\/p>\n<div align=\"justify\">             <\/div>\n<p align=\"justify\">The Way is not concerned with any particular social or political                programs. Their task, they claim, is verbally to proclaim the Word                of God. Little or no cultural knowledge of the area to be evangelized                is necessary; all that is needed is zeal and dependence on the power                of the Holy Spirit.<\/p>\n<div align=\"justify\">             <\/div>\n<h6 align=\"justify\">CRITIQUE<\/h6>\n<div align=\"justify\">             <\/div>\n<p align=\"justify\">There is no doubting the sincerity of members of the Way nor that                many people may experience profound conversion to Jesus Christ through                this movement. However, I and many others in the field have strong                reservations about the theology and pastoral methods of the Way.                First, the Way in practice commonly exemplifies many of the qualities                listed above for sects. For example, it requires an unquestioning                commitment from its members and submission to the authority of its                organizers. It is elitist in the sense described above and frequently                divisive within parishes. It demands an excessive time involvement                from priests\/religious and\/or it commonly acts without reference                to existing parish structures.<\/p>\n<div align=\"justify\">             <\/div>\n<p align=\"justify\">Second, in practice the Way rejects the Gospel commitment to inculturation.                Inculturation is the dynamic and evaluative interchange between                the Gospel and cultures, &#8216;an ongoing process of reciprocal and critical                interaction and assimilation between them.&#8217; As evangelizers we are                not free to choose or reject inculturation. It is a Gospel imperative.                As John Paul II says: &#8216;the Church&#8217;s dialogue with the cultures of                our time (is) a vital area, one in which the destiny of the world&#8230;is                at stake, and &#8216;the synthesis between culture and faith is not just                a demand of culture, but also of faith.&#8217; <\/p>\n<div align=\"justify\">             <\/div>\n<p align=\"justify\">Inculturation is a complex and difficult process for it &#8216;presupposes&#8217;,                writes the Pope, &#8216;a long and courageous (effort) &#8230; in order that                the Gospel may penetrate the soul of living cultures.&#8217; This is so                because inter alia inculturation assumes:<\/p>\n<div align=\"justify\">\n<blockquote>\n<p>a) that the interaction is between two cultures. It is not a                  simple encounter between the Gospel and a culture, because the                  Gospel comes to our times as already embedded in a particular                  culture of the time of the evangelists. There must be an ongoing                  discernment to discover what is at the heart of Christ&#8217;s message,                  and what belongs to Hebrew\/Greek cultures of his time and that                  of the evangelists.<\/p>\n<p>b) that the Gospel message is also further encased in the centuries-old                  culture of the evangeliser; the Gospel can be adequately proclaimed                  only if the evangelizer can remove this cultural baggage and present                  only what pertains to Gospel faith.<\/p>\n<p>c) that the Holy Spirit is already acting within cultures even                  before evangelization begins; evangelizers are to recognize this                  presence through acknowledging values that conform to the Gospel.                  Hence, the need to approach cultures with a critical respect,                  even a sense of awe in the presence of the Holy.<\/p>\n<p>d) that there is to be a dialogue, sponsored by evangelizers,                  between the Gospel and cultures. Vatican II speaks of a living                  exchange between the Church and the diverse cultures of people&#8217;.                  I have highlighted the two words &#8216;living exchange&#8217; to emphasize                  the remarkable theological boldness of the Council Fathers. Through                  a process of dialogue and exchange between the Gospel and cultures,                  local expressions of worship and theology should emerge. <\/p>\n<\/blockquote><\/div>\n<p align=\"justify\">But dialogue is impossible, if evangelizers are not prepared to                be open to the culture of the people being evangelized by learning                as much about their way of life as is possible &#8211; the language, for                example. As Paul VI significantly writes: &#8216;what matters is to evangelise                human culture and cultures (not in a purely decorative way as it                were by applying a thin veneer, but in a vital way, in depth and                right to their very roots). The transposition has to be done with                discernment, seriousness, respect and competence.&#8217; To act otherwise                is to insult the people one wishes to help. There is no shortcut                to this process, unless the Holy Spirit works miracles and they                are not the normal way of evangelization!<\/p>\n<div align=\"justify\">             <\/div>\n<p align=\"justify\">No doubt the Way is adapted to its culture of origin, but it does                not at all translate constructively to other cultures. As measured                by the demands of inculturation outlined above, the Way falls gravely                short. In their enthusiasm to preach the Good News the Way&#8217;s followers                remain uncritical of the distinction between the message of Christ                and the ways it is expressed in the cultural language of the apostolic                times. This is precisely the oppressive situation that Peter and                Paul condemned at the Council of Jerusalem (Acts 15:1-35). Gordon                Urquhart, who has studied the organization, writes of the Way&#8217;s                lack of concern for inculturation &#8211; with its justice imperative                and the need to respect the presence of the Holy Spirit in other                cultures &#8211; in this way. He says that the Way&#8217;s &#8216;world-rejecting                stance is so extreme that little interaction with the wider society                is possible. The emphasis is on the spiritual life and detachment                from all worldly cares. All attempts to change or influence society                are actively discouraged as presumptuous.&#8217; <\/p>\n<div align=\"justify\">             <\/div>\n<p align=\"justify\">The rituals and catechetical material of the Way&#8217;s evangelizers                are pre-packaged in Europe and they are then imposed on other cultures,                with no dialogue considered necessary or advisable. This inhibits                the inculturation process. Culturally insensitive methods to express                community bonding are encouraged. Thus the hugging that may be characteristic                of, and acceptable in, contemporary charismatic Western communities                is markedly offensive in other cultures. For example, in Melanesian                countries within the South Pacific, this form of public &#8216;joyful&#8217;                expression is taboo outside very narrowly defined social boundaries.                Furthermore, I see no concerted attempts among the Way&#8217;s evangelizers                to prepare themselves for work in cultures so different from their                own. Simple trust in the Holy Spirit is no substitute for the serious                cultural openness and respect for diversity, discernment and pastoral                competence that Paul VI considers essential for inculturation. The                Way also exemplifies fundamentalist qualities. Its followers are                not prepared to dialogue with people questioning their pastoral                assumptions and methods; they have the truth, so dialogue is unnecessary.<\/p>\n<div align=\"justify\">             <\/div>\n<h6 align=\"justify\">RELIGIOUS LIFE COMMITMENT VERSUS THE WAY<\/h6>\n<div align=\"justify\">             <\/div>\n<p align=\"justify\">A religious is one who is called by God for a mission of faith\/justice                service. He\/she is to respond freely and totally to the Gospel by                witnessing within a Church-approved community that is constantly                striving to be formed by Christ and in his vision. By &#8216;Church-approved                community&#8217; we mean that the Church acknowledges the gospel authenticity                of the founding insight; members commit themselves exclusively to                live out that insight under the legitimate authority of the group,                not that of another congregation or group. And that authority must                be used collaboratively, that is, individuals need to be consulted                and, as far as is possible, to be encouraged to participate in all                decision-making processes. Anything that interferes with this exclusive                commitment to the charisms of religious life and the congregation,                no matter how good it might be in itself &#8211; such as, for example,                a particular form of spirituality, a type of community life &#8211; is                contrary to the original offering made by the religious to the Lord                and his Church.<\/p>\n<div align=\"justify\">             <\/div>\n<p align=\"justify\">Should a religious become a fulltime member of the Way without                restrictions, I believe that he\/she has equivalently opted out of                the congregation, because the Way demands unconditional loyalty                to its vision and authority structure. The fact is that a religious                cannot be committed to two organizations simultaneously, each demanding                of its followers total commitment. It would be equivalent to attempting                to be a Marist and a Jesuit at the same time!<\/p>\n<div align=\"justify\">             <\/div>\n<p align=\"justify\">From the standpoint of mission and spirituality religious must                struggle to be prophetically at the cutting edge of the Gospel and                cultures. That is their primary task. They cannot escape the mission                of faith\/justice to the world. They exist to challenge the world                and the Church to be true to the values and vision of Christ. Religious,                if they are to be prophetic, must, however, be specialists in inculturating                the Gospel. But, since the catechetical methods and assumptions                of the Way fundamentally conflict with the requirements of inculturation,                religious cannot be unconditionally involved with the Way. Religious                life, contrary to the sect-like qualities of the Way, stands for                universality and a critical openness to the world.<\/p>\n<div align=\"justify\">             <\/div>\n<h6 align=\"justify\">SUMMARY<\/h6>\n<div align=\"justify\">             <\/div>\n<p align=\"justify\">In brief, a religious congregation, if it is to be true to the                charism of religious life, must not become a sect, nor can it support                sect-like activities in other groups. Neither can a congregation                be acting authentically if it is not committed to the faith\/justice                mission of Christ. Inculturation is integral to that mission. The                Neo-Catechumenate in practice does not accept this apostolic vision                and openness, as clarified by Vatican II and further insisted on                by subsequent ecclesial social teaching. Therefore, congregational                leaders to safeguard the integrity of the charisms of their community,                and to support prophetically the integral vision of Christ to the                world, cannot allow their religious to be uncritically involved                in the Way movement. <\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<h3 align=\"justify\">Is the Neo-Catechumenate Way Compatible with Religious Life?<\/h3>\n<h5 align=\"justify\">Updated version of an article first published in Religious Life Review, Ireland, Jan-Feb 1994 , Vol.33, No.164 by Gerald A. Arbuckle, sm<\/h5>\n<p>Gerald Arbuckle, sm, Ph.D., is a graduate in social anthropology from Cambridge University, a former assistant-general of the Marist Fathers, Rome, and professor of pastoral anthropology at the East Asian Pastoral Institute, University of Manila, Philippines. He is currently a co-director of the Refounding and Pastoral Development Research Unit, Sydney. Of his ten published books, four have received awards from the Catholic Press Association of the United States. &#8230; <a href=\"https:\/\/church-mouse.net\/?p=500\"> Continue reading <span class=\"meta-nav\">&rarr; <\/span><\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":2,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"ngg_post_thumbnail":0,"footnotes":""},"categories":[15],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-500","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-general"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/church-mouse.net\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/500","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/church-mouse.net\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/church-mouse.net\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/church-mouse.net\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/users\/2"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/church-mouse.net\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=500"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/church-mouse.net\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/500\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/church-mouse.net\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=500"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/church-mouse.net\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=500"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/church-mouse.net\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=500"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}