The Faking of a Saint

Carmen Hernandez, co-founder of the Neocatechumenal Way with Kiko Arguello, died July 19, 2016.  Within days, followers of the Way began declaring Carmen a saint of a “superior category”. While attending World Youth Day in Poland, the typical “Kiko meeting” after the Papal Mass the following day, Neocats from around the world gathered to hear Kiko bloviate once again.  In that gathering, not quite two weeks after her death, there was already a blown up photo of Carmen with the word “Santo” (Saint) running up the side.   The Way, as usual, likes to lie and deceive its way past the processes of the “natural religious” regular Catholics in order to achieve status and legitimacy.

 The photo banner displayed at the Vocational Gathering with Kiko less than two weeks after her death, with digitally added prayer hands – already they began to decieve and manipulate.

The absolute arrogance of the those in the Way pushing through Carmen, a woman who scoffed at Catholic sacramentals (http://www.junglewatch.info/2017/05/saint-carmen-of-neocatechumenate-supreme.html );a woman who spoke with disdain about the church; who mocked the actual sacraments of the church and who spoke against established Catholic doctrine the same as any other Protestant – the Neos ( http://www.cathud.com/RESOURCES_CATHOLIC/pages_MR/Neocatechumenal_Way_Kiko_Arguello.html ) proclaimed her a saint within days of her death – petitioned and opened cause for beatification and are now claiming over 3000 miracles attributed to her intercession already.  😂

On the recent anniversary of her death, those in the Way were given days to organize a special celebration of Carmen, and to continue to press to keep the stories of miracles coming.  In typical fashion, members were to drop all their summer family activities, preparations for World Youth Day, work and any other activities for this gathering. 

(The letter translates as such: After the opening of the diocesan phase of the Cause of Beatification of Carmen on December 4, 2022, we are in an important phase of study of the numerous documents and testimonies. We celebrate the seventh anniversary of the death of the Servant of God Carmen Hernandez on July 19, 2023. Kiko, Mario and Ascension, would like if possible, each parish to celebrate this Wednesday, July 19, a Eucharist with the communities asking the Lord for the eternal rest of her soul and to continue as quickly as possible the process of canonization. A catechist or responsible can give a monition on the life of Carmen, and also record any brothers that received a grace from (Carmen’s) intercession and send it to carmenhernandez@ffn.es )

Let’s take a brief look at far holier people that have lived, served and died within their Catholic faith – this is just a relevant and recent list of those who many are well known, if not more well known that Carmen from the Neocat sect. 

Archbishop Fulton Sheen – Died December 1979. Cause for canonization opened in TWENTY-THREE years after his death in 2002. Only by 2012 he was named “venerable”. Sheen did major evangelization through radio and television, still used today. In 2019 miracle approved and moved toward beatification. 2022, beatification suspended during investigation of mishandling of a priest accused of sexual abuse even though the Diocese of Peoria has thoroughly examined and exonerated Sheen from any mishandling. AB Fulton Sheen’s beatification is still in limbo today.

Rev. Emil Kapaun – Died May 1951 – a priest who served as a chaplain in the Army and eventually was captured and died a POW after faithfully saving his fellow man from execution at his own risk, and served his fellow man despite his own injuries and illness. He was named Servant of God in 1993, 42 years after his death. Cause for canonization opened 2016. 3 miracles reported so far and yet, he has still not received the title of saint.

Local Colorado favorite, Julia Greeley a Secular Franciscan “Denver’s Angel’s of Charity”  – Died June 1918. Cause for canonization opened in almost 100 years later in 2016.

He?áka Sápa — commonly known as Servant of God Nicholas Black Elk (1863-1950) of the Oglala Lakota people. A survivor of the 1890 Wounded Knee Massacre, the Lakota holy man became Catholic in 1904, and is reputed to have brought more than 400 people to baptism. Cause opened SIXTY-SEVEN years later in 2017. 

The 10 most recent saints declared by Pope Francis most died over 100 years ago. 

It’s an average of 181 years between death and sainthood. Notable recent exceptions are Saint Theresa of Calcutta and Pope Saint John Paul II. 

Many of those who have been declared an official saint in the church, throughout church history and especially today – it is more who, of influence, they knew (https://www.ncronline.org/news/people/people-power-popular-devotion-key-factor-sainthood-process ); their popularity and the amount of money there is to offer (https://catholicreview.org/finances-bottleneck-potential-canonization-of-dozens-of-american-saints-and-martyrs/) . Although Catholic belief states that those souls who are in Heaven are Saints – whether given an official title or not – the process of official recognition in the church surely has its flaws.

“For every Dorothy Day — or St. Teresa of Kolkata, St. Oscar Romero or St. John Paul II — there may be hundreds, even thousands, of anonymous potential saints who are not raised to the altars for a very simple reason: Their advocates just can not afford it.” ( www.catholicreview.org/finances )

In the year 1234, Pope Gregory IX established procedures to investigate the life of a candidate saint and any attributed miracles. In 1588, Pope Sixtus V entrusted the Congregation of Rites (later named the Congregation for the Causes of the Saints) to oversee the entire process. Beginning with Pope Urban VIII in 1634, various Popes have revised and improved the norms and procedures for canonization, and even lessened the requirements.  

One part of the process is that the Church will also investigate the candidate’s writings to see if they possess “purity of doctrine,” essentially, nothing heretical or against the faith. This part of the process right there should be an instant disqualifier for Carmen as her heretical and oppositional teachings are documented in video and writings, despite her recent release of her “diaries”. For just a sampling of her contempt for the Church’s beliefs: http://www.junglewatch.info/2016/09/carmen-hernandez-her-unortodox-lessons.html  and for more on her discovered diaries that have even Kiko scratching his head as if it was a totally different person from the one he worked with for 50 years – read here https://neocatecumenali.blogspot.com/2017/07/carmen-noi-non-sapevamo-del-suo-amore-a.html )

Generally speaking, what qualifies someone to be declared a saint (besides the noted help of money, fame, and connection) one needs to have demonstrated “heroic virtue” 

“This definition includes the four “cardinal” virtues: prudence, temperance, fortitude and justice; as well as the “theological” virtues: faith, hope and charity. A saint displays these qualities in a consistent and exceptional way.” (https://theconversation.com/who-becomes-a-saint-in-the-catholic-church-and-is-that-changing-81011#:~:text=This%20definition%20includes%20the%20four,a%20consistent%20and%20exceptional%20way. )

Did Carmen demonstrate prudence – perhaps.  It’s not likely that many of the decisions were made on where to go and where to establish a seminary, for example, were done so without a lot of preparation – however, it can be said that she took the microphone often, and even Kiko couldn’t get her to stop talking even when she was clearly stepping into a territory that could cause trouble.  

“Prudence is the deliberative, judicial, and decisive means by which Charity manifests itself.”  Can proponents of the Way honestly say that Carmen was charitable? Charitable with her words, deeds and actions – this woman who often spoke with rage, who was regarded as unpleasant, rude and so disobedient that she could not humble herself to conform to the convent or any other order?  Was she faithful to the church or to the Way?  This woman who scolded priests and seminarians about being obedient to “us”, not God, not the Church, but the catechists, themselves…was she faithful to the Church?  (https://neocatecumenali.blogspot.com/2017/05/carmen-e-l-insopportabile-ragazzina-che-amava-la.html )

Let’s play Devil’s Advocate for a moment.  Carmen did found a movement within the church that gained hundreds of thousands of followers.  She did make her way close to those in the Vatican and have private meetings with the Pope. She, with Kiko Arguello, helped to bring many young men to discern the priesthood and to establish communities and seminaries throughout the world, quite remarkable accomplishments. 

However, playing Devil’s Advocate once again; based on these arguments, why not declare Joseph Smith, founder of the Mormon church or any other Protestant leader like Martin Luther a saint, afterall they too established a movement within Christianity.  Too broad?  Well, ok, let’s say they have to have said they were a practicing Catholic, who met with the Pope, who had “approval” – then let’s open the cause for Marcial Maciel founder of the Legionaries of Christ.  Maciel was a sexual predator though, so certainly he was no saint…Carmen wasn’t a predator in that fashion, but it’s hard to imagine she wasn’t aware of multiple high ranking clergy that were (McCarrick and Apruron being the most notorious affiliated with the Way); she still used their connections to further expand the Way and its influence. Kiko himself eulogized that Carmen had no interest in him until she saw him with a bishop – again it’s who you know.

Finally, if we dismiss that there was any heretical teaching of doctrine, that Carmen did truly embrace the faith, and was holy and obedient; did not participate with any scandals – given that, would members honestly be able to say that she demonstrated virtue consistently; that charitable is even a word that would be in the top ten words to describe her?  That is a tough one to prove given so much video of her through the years and many accounts of those who’ve interacted with her, including Kiko himself.

Ultimately, the church will decide and it will be a relentless pursuit on the part of the Neocatechumenal Way to have Carmen named a saint as another way to legitimize themselves. If the church expedites and ultimately beatifies Carmen; this would surely be the final nail for those who already have misgivings about the church’s declaration of saints of late as a sham and further the distrust over the processes in place; just like they shoved through their Catechetical Directory bypassing whole steps because they have people in place of influence and money.

We Are Your God

 The following article was originally posted in Spanish on Crux Sancta. It details the anonymous testimony of a woman, now likely in her late 70s, who followed the Neocatechumenal Way for a period of about 3 years in the late 1980s. We invite the reader, as always, to test the veracity of this story by comparing it against the testimony of many others who have spoken across the years and around the globe, and perhaps even against your own lived experience.

---

At the beginning of February, what was presented as the "catechesis of the Neocatechumenals" began in my parish. I was 40 years old, had two teenage children, and had been a widow for a little more than two months.

Along with my children, I attended these talks that took place two nights a week. It was quite late for me, but I was attracted by the songs and the approach to the Word of God, which they explained in an animated way. After the talks concluded, there was a first "convivence" in which there were some very beautiful ceremonies, but what caught my attention was at the end of the third day, when the stay had to be paid for, a black bag was circulated among the attendees during a prayer gathering. Into this bag we were encouraged to deposit "what each one could, with generosity, taking into account that there were brothers who could not pay."

In the first round, the necessary amount was not collected. Another round was made, after which, with very heartfelt words, our catechist assured us that something great had happened: the sum was not only enough, but more than enough! His speech took on a magical tone. He came to say that a miracle had occurred in our midst, that something had come out of our pockets in which nothing was left out of pure generosity. Yes, yes... I'll come back to this episode later.

After this convivence, what was called "the second community of XXX" was born, the first one having existed for 3 or 4 years. Four responsibles were named. There were no married couples to separate, so one was me (I'm a teacher), along with a colleague of mine and two university students. From the first moment, a demanding rhythm was imposed for those who have jobs and prior responsibilities. We met regularly each week: once to prepare the readings relating to the "word," once for the celebration of the Liturgy of the Word, and once for the Eucharistic celebration on Saturday night.

This was all extremely tiring because we would finish around midnight or after. Later I realized that tired people are more impressionable and easier to manipulate.

In addition, as a responsible, I had to participate in some convivences just for responsibles. This was a burden for me because I had to leave my children and my in-laws alone.

At that time, our pastor suffered a heart attack and had to leave the parish to another priest, a good and honest person, but incapable of stopping the itinerant (I will call him John), who had come to, what they continued to call, "catechize us."

I soon became disliked of John's wife, a cold and sour woman whom I never saw smile. One of the times we clashed was after a "catechesis," in which she repeated several times, "...who doesn't hate his brother--and notice that the word 'hate' in the Greek language is really hate, hate, not to love less, HATE, etc. etc.--is not worthy of Me." I responded to this intervention by proposing the Gospel of St. John and his First Letter, but I noticed her inability to reason and only drew her ire.

On one occasion, during what they designate as a day of convivence, in the round of experiences, a girl accused me of a lack of hospitality. Her argument was that, having made my house available to the community for the Easter night agape, I should have allowed them to make trouble. And none of my brothers showed consideration for my neighbors! But things got even more complicated.

Neocatechumenal praxis establishes that after two years, there is a "step" to I don't know what. It was the end of January, there was a lot of work at school, and my 82-year-old father-in-law had a throat problem and was awaiting surgery, and I was the one who had to take care of his treatment. Well, just in those days you had to go to another town for the magical step that takes you to I don't know where. I decided to communicate my family situation to my "catechists" (as they called themselves) and I suggested that I attend the convivence during the day, but that at night I felt the moral and ethical duty to be at home. Their answer was that I had to expose everything to John, who was not my catechist, in neither name nor practice. I know now that there are ranks among the Neocatechumenals who consider themselves "catechists," and that except for the itinerants at the top, no other has decision-making power. Their mission consists only of informing the itinerant boss of how many there are in the community and how many of them have not made the "steps" and for what reasons.

I met John on January 17, Saint Anthony's Day, which is a holiday in our diocese. He listened to me with an air of smugness and assured me that if I did not sleep in the convivence location, the Lord would not pass by for me, but that I was free to come and go as I pleased. So he gave me to understand that my proposal was valid for "being useful" without neglecting my in-laws.

Consequently, myself along with three other people went and came back on Friday, as well as Saturday and Sunday.

On Sunday, the ceremony - not a liturgy, but mere posturing - of the "step" took place. They told us we had to be there by 3:00 pm. We brought flowers for the table, a bottle of "Opium" perfume to perfume the oil and many sweets for the agape with which the ceremony would conclude. When we arrived, everything was almost ready. There were about 50 people sitting in a circle around the lectern and the table. The flowers that we brought they had thrown away.

We sat down, too. John burst into the room and called our attention with a peremptory gesture: "You, you and you, come with me." We got up without knowing what was happening, but we had the feeling that nothing good awaited us. We followed him into a small room where two priests--the priest who replaced our pastor and an itinerant priest--were waiting for us. Rudely and with a lack of education, they told us that we could not make the step - wherever it goes - because we had not spent the night in the convivence house, which was the reason why "the Lord had not passed for us." I stood up and said that God does not happen here, there, or in other places, but happens in people's lives, and I appealed to his understanding through the mediation of St. John Bosco, whose feast was that day. John responded with contempt, "And who is this St. John Bosco?", to imply that he had more discernment than any saint or that God himself bowed down before the criteria of an itinerant Neocatechumenal. I had never witnessed such a display of pride, contempt, and lack of love for the other, which is Christ.

We left that assembly humiliated and mistreated, and the week passed in a rather traumatic way. On Saturday afternoon, we met again with the brothers of the community who had made the famous step. The brother whose turn it was to give the environmental monition of the Eucharist spoke of the presence of the devil within the community, of some who were the devil, and he repeated the concept several times and managed to make us feel called out: "Is it me?" "They are those who have not made the step."

Despite this, we participated again on other Saturdays, as well as in some Liturgies of the Word. During a Word, the responsible who had mentioned the presence of the devil in the community called us aside, begging us to raise some money as soon as possible because there was about to be a convivence to form a new community. For this reason, I quote his words: "We have to do as always, that is, have a generous sum at your disposal, in the event that when the bag is passed, not enough money comes out in the first round." That's when I understood that our community had acted in the same way. Other people put in the missing money! It could always have been argued that it was Providence, but why not say outright where the money came from? Why deceive with an impression of mystery and magic to impress us?

I wanted to discuss it with the priest of the responsible team and he replied that... I shouldn't judge (?!). I stopped going to the community.

After a while a friend told me that if I wanted to return to the community, I could go and do that famous step in which I had to reveal my "cross" in front of everyone. I answered no. A year later, the "Shema" was announced to the people of the community where I had been for three years. So I asked if I could participate as an "external": I would have liked to spend a few days in prayer and recollection. The answer was not surprising: no one had the power to decide whether or not, they had to talk to the itinerant boss, John. He said no. But a few days before the feast of St. Anthony, the pastor - the substitute for our good sick pastor - called me on John's orders, saying that John wanted to speak with me. I reiterated that I did not want to see him, and the priest told me to make a gesture of obedience... and I reluctantly accepted at the priest's insistence, trusting his criteria. I did not repeat that mistake.

I was summoned to the parish at 8:30 pm on January 17, 1989. I thought I was the only one the team of itinerants headed by John wanted to talk to, but I was surprised to see five other people. I was also surprised that we found ourselves in some kind of criminal court, without a lawyer and without knowing the charges against us. The six of us were sitting side by side, leaning against a wall, and in front of us, the inquisitors: John, his wife, a forty-something spinster, the priest who shined John's shoes, and a Neocatechumenal who had spent many years in India.

The questioning began with the married couples, which generated a lot of debate. They were asked questions that those of us who didn't know them shouldn't have heard, and they barely managed to articulate plaintive justifications without the servile priest stopping them, for which I felt more and more dismayed and bewildered; I would never have expected such a thing. So, I asked them to tell me immediately what they had to tell me, because I was not going to keep listening to what was not my business, and if they had nothing for me, I would leave now.

Then, with a gesture of offended authority, John asked me if I had taken the step. I answered that I had not and that surely the Lord would have decided when it was time. He was silent. He asked me if I wanted anything and I told him that I would like to go (on my own) and join the community to pray in the Shema. He replied that it was absolutely impossible unless I first did the famous step. I wondered if by any chance there was a passage in the Gospel that prohibited anyone who wanted to join others in prayer. I also said that many times and everywhere the Pope repeated: "Open the doors to Christ!", in the sense of welcoming Jesus and the brothers and helping them in difficulties...

John replied to me: "You have to obey and that's it, whether you like it or not, we are God!"

I was stunned. No one silenced him, and he added, "and if not God himself, we are his angels!"

Again, no one objected. I expected a word from the priest, from one of those present... nothing!

I picked up my bag, got up, and left forever.

To Catch a Kiko Predator

In the summer of 2019, the Spanish newspaper El Español published the headline:

Scandal in Yecla: Antonio, priest of the "Kikos," had sexual relations with a minor. The bishop denounced him after learning that he allegedly committed sexual abuse of a minor.

"Affectionate, friendly, funny in Masses, and with enough empathy to reach out to the youngest of the flock." This is how some members of the "Kikos" defined Antonio Lax Zapata, the parish pastor of St. John the Baptist and chaplain of the Virgen del Castillo Hospital, linked to the Neocatechumenal Way and convicted of committing sexual abuse of a minor. In fact, there is a large community of "Kikos" in the town of Yecla, and several councilors in the municipal government also adhere to the Neocatechumenal movement. "The news surprised us a lot," admitted the popular mayor, who also belongs. "No one suspected anything."

And when are the Neocatechumenals never NOT surprised?

Lax, born in Monteagudo, Spain (near Murcia), entered the Way with his whole family and crossed the ocean - sent by Neocatechumenal lots - to attend the Redemptoris Mater Seminary in Medellín, Colombia, where he was ordained a priest. (Fr. Ángel Arturo Vásquez Urizar, a native Guatemalan, also attended the Medellín RMS and was arrested in Jerez de la Frontera, Spain in 2020 for sexually abusing a preteen boy).

After 15 years in Colombia, ten of which were spent in seminary, Lax returned to Spain in 2006. He was assigned to two parishes considered reference points for the "Kiko" community and "he actively participated in spiritual retreats, trips, and gatherings of members of the Neocatechumenal Way."

His personal profile on LinkedIn was accompanied by a photo with a naked child in his arms, about to approach the baptismal font. This detail must not have favorably impressed investigators.

In fact, Lax befriended an underage boy and, before long, the friendship escalated to sexual abuse. In 2022, he was sentenced to seven years and nine months in prison for pedophilia.

In February 2023, the "Kiko" priest was in the newspapers again when Murcia's Provincial Court sentenced him to an additional nine years and two months in prison for sexually abusing two other minors, again as a priest in Yecla, which is part of the Diocese of Cartagena.

The sentence, published on March 9, 2023, considers him the perpetrator of two crimes of sexual abuse: one against a 13-year-old and another against a 16-year-old boy. In both cases, Lax took advantage of his status as a priest. In addition to the prison sentence, Lax must pay €8,200 in compensation to the two victims.

The defendant had made friends with the minors' families back in 2013. He would take them on fishing trips or trips to the ocean, invited them for ice cream, and gave them kisses. According to the sentence, the priest also had sexual conversations with the children, in which he asked them questions such as the size of their penises or the frequency with which they masturbated. (Perhaps he was preparing them for the ritual questions of the Second Scrutiny?)

The sentence, which is not definitive and allows an appeal to Murcia's Supreme Court, is based on the credible and reliable testimony of the victims, as well as acknowledgement of part of the acts by the accused. If the sentence becomes final, the nine years' imprisonment will be added to the seven years and nine months already inflicted for the other case of sexual abuse. However, the priest has yet to serve any prison time.

A statement from the Diocese of Cartagena expressed solidarity with the priest's victims, regretting that bad examples of this kind cloud the work of diocesan clergy, and reiterating its commitment to eradicate any behavior contrary to human dignity, especially the young and vulnerable; finally, it states that the priest is currently suspended and subjected to a canonical trial, still in progress. The current Bishop of Cartagena, since 2009, is José Manuel Lorca Planes.

Note well: the Merkaba "providentially" destined Fr. Lax to the RMS in Medellín, Colombia. If he had remained there, even if he was guilty of pedophilia, he likely would have had a better fate.

One of his colleagues, the Neocatechumenal Fr. Harold Casellas Triviño, ordained the same year as Lax, had a sentence on his shoulders of pederasty against an 11-year-old girl as early as 2015. He was first relieved of his parish duties and put in charge of formation at the Medellín RMS. Then, with a legal trick, he was sent to a "recovery home" for priests in Copacabana (just outside Medellín). He is currently a fugitive and several arrest warrants have been issued against him. The predator priest underground railroad, it seems, is alive and well and fully functional.

(The original Italian version of this article, courtesy of the Osservatorio, can be found here.) 

The Way: Communist or Fascist?

A recent post on the Italian blog Osservatorio brought back my own original thoughts that the Way hinted of Communistic tendencies.  Only recently did I dive into Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn's Gulag Archipelago about the rise of communism in Russia. As I read, I was amazed at how often some of the tactics reminded me of my time in the Way. Admittedly, as an American, you’d think we have been well schooled in what communism, socialism and fascism really are; however, having not gone through these things personally on our own soil (although one could argue it has been gradually spoiling the American waterhole for decades now), more recent generations are not being taught this thoroughly.  The Union of Soviet Socialist Republics (USSR) i.e. Communist Russia and National Socialist German Workers Party i.e Nazis were distilled down to (very basically), bad guys who killed a lot people in their own country and beyond, with the latter having had a tremendous more amount of time and attention in our history classes.  Learning about Mussolini in Italy, Franco in Spain, or Tojo in Japan were all fairly lumped together in the bad guy category of extremely nationalistic and egotistical fascists.  Dan Mitchell at the Center for Freedom and Prosperity writes a concise piece making the case that Communists, Socialists, Fascists, and Nazis, are all just flavors of collectivism. So if Socialism breeds Communism, and Communism and Fascism are “kissing cousins”, what does that have to do with the Neocatechumenal Way?  Don’t all the “isms” above despise religion?  So how could the Way possibly have anything to do with collectivism?  Let us examine some of the links.

JungleWatch has already done a thorough background on the founders of the Way Kiko Arguello and Carmen Hernandez, which can be read here.

“Far from being this movement of new revival portrayed with very great sense of marketing, the beginning of the movement by Carmen and Kiko is totally immersed in a Church in full cooperation with a Fascist movement, and using its connections in Rome to parlay special conditions for them to set a bridgehead in very close proximity to the Vatican.”

Fast forward to today where Carmen has passed away and Kiko has been pretty much sidelined; Italian, Giuseppi Gennarini (Official director for the Way in the United States) to take Kiko's place - by his own admission was a Marxist activist who happened upon a catechesis by Kiko, then joined a community with fellow communists and the “bourgeois” (this is an absolute favorite word used very broadly by Neocats everywhere - I can’t tell you how many homilies from Neocat priests speak with disdain using this term to describe their very own congregations). Interestingly, he doesn’t denounce his Marxism (at least only partly) but as Chuck White writes, the methods and tactics of Communism are very much still in full swing as we will examine in a moment.

“The Italian fascists had even closer ties to the Marxists, with Mussolini having begun his career as a Marxist publicist and writer. A few Italian fascists even held positions in the Comintern. The only serious divide between the Italian fascists (or those who would become fascists) and Italian communists in the 1910s was their support, or not, of Italy’s participation in World War I.”

“In his profound work Reflections on a Ravaged Century, Robert Conquest labeled all forms of totalitarian socialism a type of “mindslaughter.” Fascism and communism share much in common, he argued. First, the two ideologies came from identical origins in 19th-century thought. Second, both celebrated the peasant revolts of the 1500s as foreshadowing 20th-century uprisings. Third, both claimed to speak in the name of “the people” and “the masses.” Fourth, both embraced a variety of social sciences and pseudosciences from the 19th century, though the Marxists did it with more finesse. Fifth, both claimed to be progressing humanity toward some end goal. And, finally, both accepted moral nihilism.”

Robert Paxton, professor emeritus at Columbia University, defines fascism in his 2004 book The Anatomy of Fascism. He also argues that fascism's foundations lie in a set of "mobilizing passions" rather than an elaborated doctrine. He argues these passions can explain much of the behavior of fascists[32](I have bracketed simple examples of how the Way matches the bullet points by Paxton):

• a sense of overwhelming crisis beyond the reach of any traditional solutions; (the church is dying, families are in crisis! the Neocat will tell you)

• the primacy of the group, toward which one has duties superior to every right, whether individual or universal, and the subordination of the individual to it; (the Way is the “correct” and true church - even priests are commanded by lay catechists Kiko, and the Gennarinis the Way comes before duties to family, to your parish, to your parishioners)

• the belief that one’s group is a victim, a sentiment that justifies any action, without legal or moral limits, against its enemies, both internal and external; (any--and I mean any--criticism or even questioning of the Way the Neocat wails about being “persecuted”)

• dread of the group’s decline under the corrosive effects of individualistic liberalism, class conflict, and alien influences; ( “you are nothing without the community” they want the rich people’s money and the “regular” Catholic’s money all the while disdaining them and labeling them bourgeois; those within the parish but outside of the community are pathetic “natural religious” and are either not illuminated by the Way or if they have learned and rejected the Way they are a disease to be avoided)

• the need for closer integration of a purer community, by consent if possible, or by exclusionary violence if necessary; (have as many children as possible and condemn those who do not - even if they simply could not have a large family or any children- as selfish and inferior; the Way has their own private Eucharists, communities are closed, you can begin by attending the "catechesis")

• the need for authority by natural chiefs (always male), culminating in a national chieftain who alone is capable of incarnating the group’s historical destiny; (so-called “catechists” anyone?)

• the superiority of the leader’s instincts over abstract and universal reason; Kiko, Carmen, and the Gennarini’s,  yes, check)

• the beauty of violence and the efficacy of will, when they are devoted to the group’s success; (coerced public confessions, threatened or implied “bad things” will come your way if you leave, unmerciful scolding if you put family or your job before a lousy convivence or any time with community)

• the right of the chosen people to dominate others without restraint from any kind of human or divine law, right being decided by the sole criterion of the group’s prowess within a Darwinian struggle. (again, Catechists and supreme Catechist Kiko - how many times were we told to "listen and obey your catechist!")

“Collective is more important than the individual” - Community - the Way speaks of the Community more often than even perhaps Jesus Christ. They will tell you “the Lord has a word for you”; “the Lord wants to meet you in your suffering, your wounds”, all in the beginning, but how quickly they change the tune from “the Lord” to the community. You are lost without the community…in community you will learn to be humble, the community will teach you to love the enemy. How you are identified is by your community. How odd it was that even in general Catholic functions, when in conversation with someone who knew I was “in community” they would NOT ask which parish I belonged to but rather “which community”. I found this odd as our community was simply designated by a number (hmm Solzhenitsyn in The Gulag Archipelago goes into detail about how you are no longer a name, but a number, a cog in the wheel in his grueling account of Communist Russia).

The community comes before your family, your job, yourself, your parish, and Christ. Christ? Is that a bit far? How so you may ask? Well, how often is silent, contemplative prayer, one on one with our Lord even a possibility at the Eucharist with our Lord?  How about after confession?  Silence is often how we hear our Father in Heaven, and silence is simply taken up all. the. time. In the Way - with a catechist’s never-ending lecture, or songs and clapping. Not that disturbances don’t happen in a regular mass after communion with chatter in the pews or performance-worthy choir pieces that seem to prompt our ridiculous need to applaud at the end. Generally speaking, the church itself is a place of quiet prayer and preparation, especially as we should enter the sanctuary. In the Way, the sanctuary, if there is one, is a place no different that Protestant assemblies with greeting and chatter.  The collective is more important than the individual indeed. 

Promoted revolutionary change over gradual change. How quickly parishes that are led by a Neocat priest turn into almost a completely different dynamic.  Although they often won’t pronounce intentions of transforming a parish; the Kiko aesthetics begin to emerge rather quickly along with those working or volunteering in the parish replaced with those “already in community”. It’s a one party system in the neocat led parish and they come to divide like a sword. To them division is good in fact if there isn’t division you’re doing something wrong - they twist and turn Matthew 10:34; albeit one of Jesus’ more difficult quotes, they seem to forget that Jesus also had his disciple sheath his sword. Within the community, if we weren’t fighting, we were “being fake, still wearing a mask” - they thrive on division and the last three Popes have warned them about this. They love the sword analogy so much, that Kiko has incorporated his phallic like sword fountain at his Redmeptoris Mater Seminaries world wide. 

Finally, all the other aspects have to do with control.  Numerous accounts have been written and discussed on the mind control tactics used to break down and manipulate members. The Neocat will say, however, that the Way taught them to love the enemy, to reconcile with those who have or continue to hurt you.  Why does the Neocat not question why his fellow Catholic is labeled the enemy; or that loved ones are the enemy; or simply those who question are the enemy? Why are countless women told to put up with actual physical, potentially grave violence, by their husbands, endangering their children’s physical and mental well-being?  Truly harmful situations one is told it is their cross; that is ok - forgive and don't judge and don't leave unless that person is getting in the way of the community - but the one who leaves the Way is Judas, better off that he should not have been born.  The mindslaughter one is put through “in the Way” is the opposite of simplicity and love; it is of control and confusion.

"Cult Fiction," Part 9: Conclusion

 We arrive now at the concluding section of our nine-part series on Graham Moorhouse's short work, Cult Fiction: The Protestant Cuckoo in the Catholic Nest. In this section, Moorhouse offers four short points to close out his treatise.

In the first, he asks an extremely relevant question: How has Kiko managed to con the Holy Father so comprehensively?

He answers by positing that the Way was extremely adept at pressing John Paul II's "hot button" issues of the Gospel of Life, evangelization, and the youth:

They continually stress in [Pope John Paul's] presence their movement's opposition to abortion, artificial contraception and sterlization, etc - that's the gospel of life hot button pressed. Secondly, they reel off statistics about their rapid world-wide expansion - that's the evangelization hot button pressed. Finally they ensure that at any youth gathering, their youth are up early and at the front of the crowd waving Neocatechumenate banners - that's the youth hot button pressed. (Cult Fiction, p. 19)

We can see that these three issues are still very much front and center of today's Neocatechumenate, as well, despite now being two papacies on. Their talk in the public square is very different from their talk behind closed doors. It would be interesting, I think, to examine their approach to other popes' "hot buttons," as well, but Moorhouse does not touch on those. In the earliest days, Paul VI may have thought them too small and insignificant a movement to be worthy of too much of his attention, for example.

Moorhouse also makes this excellent point, which could easily be applied to any number of prelates, as well:

The Pope isn't a mind-reader. Like the rest of us, he sees what he sees, not what is deliberately concealed from him. Good people are by nature trusting and are therefore also by nature perhaps the last people to spot the sort of deep duplicity practiced by Kiko and his movement. (Cult Fiction, p. 19)

Good popes, bishops, priests, etc. want to see grassroots lay movements succeed. They want solid, orthodox Catholics spreading the Good News and propagating all over the world. If that's all you ever see of the Neocatechumenal Way, why wouldn't you wish it every success? Unfortunately, they work very hard to make sure that is all you see, despite so much deception and rot.

---

The second concluding point is what logically must follow from accepting the Way's premises:

If you embrace the Way, you must logically accept that the Church for the last sixteen centuries has got most of her doctrines hopelessly wrong... But if you accept that the Church was hopelessly wrong for so long on all these matters, you cannot possibly hold that the Church is infallible in matters of faith and morals. But if you do not believe the Church is infallible in matters of faith and morals, there is no logical compelling reason to remain a Catholic; for any other sect or indeed religion could be just as right as or even more right than the Church. (Cult Fiction, p. 19-20)

Following the Way is essentially following the way of indifferentism, which indeed is one of the modern world's most rampant heresies. Moorhouse's train of logic is quite simple and easy to follow; unfortunately, far too few people are able to make the same connections.

---

Moorhouse then recalls a scene (pictured above) from the 1987 film Escape from Sobibor, starring Alan Arkin and Rutger Hauer. The scene, near the very beginning of the film, involves an old Jewish man who has just arrived at the Sobibor camp. "Observe," he says to a Nazi soldier, picking up a handful of dirt. "Do you see? How I am scattering this grain by grain? That will be what will happen with your filthy lies. It will vanish like flying dust and passing smoke."

"I have no doubt," Moorhouse goes on:

that Kiko's empire, built on the dust of lies, one day will implode similarly... There is absolutely nothing more certain in heaven or on earth than that one day their facade will crumble and their lies will trickle through their fingers like so much dust. (Cult Fiction, p. 20)

Don't rejoice in saying "I told you so" when that day comes, he advises. Rather, weep and pray for the souls lost, hurt, and confused by the wicked negligence of so many of the Church's shepherds. Keep your feet firmly planted on the rock.

---

Moorhouse concludes with a postscript regarding the then-upcoming approval process for the Way's constitution, which he claims a source told him would be cross-referenced with the Catechism of the Catholic Church. He asks two questions about this, which we will answer.

1. Will this new constitution leave Kiko and Carmen the wiggle room they need to continue to advance their heresies, or will it be watertight? Time has shown they had, and continue to have, more than enough wiggle room.
2. And, if it is watertight, does this mean that Kiko and Carmen have recanted their many manifest serious heresies and returned to the faith of the Church, or have they simply concealed them in order to obtain the official approval they so desire for the advancement of their movement? A thousand times the latter.

---

At the outset of this series, we aimed to discover how this 20-year-old analysis of the Neocatechumenal Way stood the test of time--is it still relevant for today's inquisitor, or is it a woefully outdated and bitter relic of its time?

What we have hopefully seen is a document that, while imperfect, is a more than adequate introduction to an often troublingly silent topic. Although Moorhouse will occasionally misquote, neglect to cite, and provide cold or outdated takes on certain things, the overall content--especially in matters of specific teachings and practical applications--is entirely on the nose. The intervening decades and even Carmen's death have done little to soften the movement. It remains very much what it has always been.

We hope you will take the time to read Cult Fiction in its entirety, just as I did at the beginning of my journey, and share it with anyone who might benefit from the information it presents. Of course, feel free to share this "Cliffs Notes" series, too.

To read the other entries in this series, see Part 1, Part 2, Part 3, Part 4, Part 5, Part 6, Part 7, and Part 8.