DIOCESE OF CLIFTON

Report into the
presence and activities of the
Neo-Catechumenal Way
in the
Diocese of Clifton.

November 1996

Clifton

1 November 1996

Bishop Alexander

Canon 212: St Nicholas of Tolentino; St Peter and Sacred Hearts
THE NEOCATECHUMENAL WAY: PRELIMINARY ENQUIRY

Submitted for your consideration is our lengthy report relating to the presence of the Neocatechumenal Way at three Parishes of the Clifton Diocese: St Nicholas of Tolentino in Bristol, St Peter in Gloucester and Sacred Hearts at Chariton Kings in Cheltenham.

Appointed for the Enquiry at the beginning of the year, each member of the Panel knew nothing or very little about the Neocatechumenal Way. We looked on this start situation as very advantageous to all the 'participants', simply because the Panel had no preconceived ideas. In this way, we would be able more readily to assess all the representations (written and oral) with an open mind without a prejudiced attitude so that the Enquiry would be perceived by all as fair, open and reasonable. We still hope that this has proved to be the case; we believe that it has.

Given our starting position, the Panel has experienced a 'learning curve' about the Neocatechumenal Way. This has necessarily taken time but could not be avoided: we felt this to be necessary m order to understand the expressed views. As you know, two members of the Panel are unfamiliar with an investigation process of this kind; this has been another learning curve. Time will tell whether the experience has been beneficial.

As the Chairman, my role has necessarily been at the front but this does not mean that Valerie and Fr Barnaby merely added to the Panel in appearance. Their assistance has been invaluable, not just to bolster but to provide words of counsel; I appreciate this. I am most grateful for their unstinting assistance and sense of humour shown at just the right time. The investigating experience for Fr Barnaby is not made easier because fellow priests from the Diocese are part of the Enquiry process. I would ask that this be remembered.

We have met and worked as a team very regularly, more regularly during the report formulation period. At the beginning and end of our meetings, we prayed for guidance knowing also that others in the parishes had and were praying for the Panel We are most grateful for such necessary support and the co-operation of people either in writing or at the meetings. We wish to thank each priest: Canon O'Brien, Canon English and Fr Trafford for their help.

Finally, the Panel wishes to thank you for your co-operation by answering our questions some of which might have been difficult.

Valerie James Tom Millington Fr Barnaby Dowling

Father all powerful and ever-living God,
we do well always and everywhere to give you thanks
through Jesus Christ our Lord.

Through Christ you bring us to the knowledge of
your truth,
that we may be united by one faith and one baptism
to become his body.

Through Christ you have given the Holy Spirit to
all peoples.
How wonderful are the works of the Spirit,
revealed in so many gifts!

Yet how marvellous is the unity
the Spirit creates from their diversity,
as he dwells in the hearts of your children,
filling the whole Church with his presence
and guiding it with his wisdom.

[Preface of Christian Unity]

NC ENQUIRY - REPORT

PART 1

1 THE ENQUIRY

2 PAPAL SUPPORT FOR THE NC; PANEL APPRAISAL

3 THE NC WAY; PANEL APPRAISAL

PART 2 SUMMARY OF FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS:

A. THE ENQUIRY; VIEWS AND EXPECTATIONS

B. PERCEIVED PAPAL ATTITUDES TO THE NC WAY

C. INITIAL INTRODUCTION OF THE NEOCATECHUMENAL WAY TO THE CITY OF BRISTOL

D. SUBSEQUENT NC INTRODUCTION TO PARISHES AND DISCONTINUANCE

E. PARISHES WITH THE NEOCATECHUMENAL WAY:

i. ST NICHOLAS OF TOLENTINO

ii. ST PETER

iii. SACRED HEARTS

F. PARISH CLERGY AND ATTITUDES TO NC

G. BISHOP ALEXANDER AND THE NC

H. ATTITUDES OF VICARS GENERAL TO NC

I. NC CATECHESIS AND NC COMMUNITIES IN THE PARISHES

3. PERCEIVED PERSONAL BENEFITS OF NC WAY

K. THE LITURGY OF THE NEO-CATECHUMENATE

L. VULNERABILITY AND ADVERSE PERSONAL EFFECTS OF NC

M. ADVERSE REACTIONS TO NEOCATECHUMENAL WAY

N. THE SITUATION JUST BEFORE AND AFTER MARCH 1994

0. DECLINING MASS ATTENDANCES

P. ADULT CONVERSION; ROLES OF RCIA AND NC WAY

Q. SACRAMENTAL PREPARATION PROGRAMMES

R. EDUCATION AND YOUTH PILGRIMAGES

S. SECRETIVENESS AND EXCLUSIVENESS

T. NC 'AUTHORITY' AND 'CONTROL'

U. POSSIBLE FUTURE SOLUTIONS

V. CONCLUSIONS; CANON 212 AND RECOMMENDATIONS

Part 1

1 THE ENQUIRY

1.1 At the beginning of January 1996, the Right Reverend Mervyn Alexander, Bishop of

Clifton, established a Panel of Enquiry to consider the claim made by some parishioners

in at least three parishes in the Diocese that their parishes have suffered harm and neglect

through the presence and activities of the Neo-Catechumenate. These views were made

known to Bishop Alexander in accord with Canon 212.

-- 1.2 Canon 212 states:

i. Christ's faithful, conscious of their own responsibility, are bound to show

Christian obedience to what the sacred Pastors, who represent Christ,

declares as teachers of the faith and prescribe as rulers of the Church.

- ii. Christ's faithful are at liberty to make known their needs, especially their

spiritual needs, and their wishes to the Pastors of the Church.

iii. They have the right, indeed at times the duty, in keeping with their

knowledge, competence and position, to manifest to the sacred Pastors

their views on matters which concern the good of the Church. They have

the right also to make their views known to others of Christ's faithful, but

in doing so they must always respect the integrity of faith and morals,

show due reverence to the Pastors, and take into account both the

common good and the dignity of individuals.

1.3 The Enquiry sought information from those who are members of the Neocatechumenal

Way, from parishioners of the three parishes who are not members and from persons

outside of the parishes or outside of the Clifton Diocese who wished to offer their views.

1.4 The Panel appointed for the Enquiry is: Mr Tom Millington (chair) a Member of the Lord

Chancellor's Panel of Independent Inspectors assisted by Mrs Valerie James, a Member

of the Diocesan Trustees and a former National President of the Union of Catholic

Mothers and by Fr Barnaby Dowling, Parish Priest of Wells.

1.5 After considering different enquiry methods, it was decided by the Panel to invite written

representations in answer to the question:

"what has the Neo-Catechumenate done for you and your Parish?"

1.6 Following the consideration by the Panel of the written responses received over a period

- of months from the parishes, public meetings were held on a separate basis for members

of the Neocatechumenal Way and for non-members. These meetings took place:

1. The Parish of St Nicholas of Tolentino in Bristol: for NC members on 27

April at the Dunstan Centre and for non-NC on 28 April at the Apostle

Room, Clifton Cathedral;

ii. The Parish of St Peters in Gloucester: for NC members on 8 June at the

- 1

'Upper Room' of the Church buildings and for non-NC on 13 June at the Parish Social Centre;

iii. The Parish of Sacred Hearts at Charlton Kings in Cheltenham: for NC members on 22 June at the Parish Hall and for non-NC on 29 June also at the Parish Hall.

1.7 In addition, the Panel has met the Parish Priests on an individual basis to seek clarification of matters in representations or at the public meetings, also to understand more clearly their involvement in and their commitment to the Neocatechumenal Way. These meetings took place with Very Rev Canon Jeremiah T O'Brien (PP of St Nicholas of Tolentino) on 24 July, with Very Rev Canon Michael English (PP of St Peters) on 1 August and with Fr Anthony D Trafford BA (PP of Sacred Hearts) on 26 July. The Panel also met the Vicars General: Rt Rev Mgr Canon Joseph C Buckley Prot Ap, JCD on 15 August and Rt Rev Mgr Canon William Mitchell MA JCL on 22 August to obtain clarification of their reported involvement at two of the Parishes in consequence of the NC. On 9 September, the Panel met the NC National Teams of Catechists (Fr Jose' Guzman, Mr & Mrs Lees, Mr & Mrs Hayward) in Bristol to obtain clarification about the Neocatechumenal Way generally and its objectives in particular. Individual people have also been interviewed by the Panel.

1.8 Prior to formulating this report, the Panel has met Bishop Mervyn Alexander DD to seek clarification on matters raised in writing or orally about the Neo Catechumenate or Neocatechumenal Way within the Clifton Diocese since the Autumn of 1979.

1.9 This presence goes back for some 17 years and over such a period, individual memories might not be so sharp or well remembered. Inevitably, events and their dates are not always explained on a consistent basis; there are contradictions. Though the submitted written and oral information has not been tested fully in an adversarial or judicial sense, the Panel has sought to validate information as far as possible. All the representations from the parishes and from outside have been considered by the Panel in formulating comments, conclusions and recommendations.

1.10 As indicated at the beginning of each public meeting in the parishes, the Panel regards

the main purpose of the Enquiry to assess whether the presence and activities of the a

Neocatechumenal Way has caused harm in each Parish and to what extent.

1.11 The Panel is grateful for the written and oral responses, for the warm welcomes when visiting the Parishes and the clergy; and not least for the many prayers inviting the Holy Spirit to provide the necessary powers of discernment, wisdom, patience, compassion and charity for the Panel and all involved during this necessarily lengthy investigation. The Panel much appreciates the typing assistance provided by Mrs Barbara Jones; her unstinting application to the task of creating this long report is commendable.

2 a

2 PAPAL SUPPORT FOR THE NC; PANEL APPRAISAL

- GENERALLY:

2.1 In responses to the Panel, members of the NC point to and rely upon two papacies (by

- Pope Paul VI and Pope John Paul II) for the validity and credibility of the Neocatechumenal Way over the years. In responding to various points of clarification by the Panel, Bishop Mervyn Alexander explained: "On several occasions I was given literature emphasising the strong support of the Holy Father for the Neocatechumenal Way.." Hence this report begins by identifying the more important of numerous statements brought to the Panel's attention either in representations or in texts submitted with or without comment, that bear directly upon the Panel's task of assessing the effect of the NC Way at the parishes.

2.2 Some of the leading lay opponents of the Neocatechumenal Way perceive this Papal support to be gained on the basis of incomplete or even misguided information: for example, the Panel has been requested 'to discover' the documentation about the NC that is referred to in a papal letter of general approval for the NC Way on 30 August 1990. Whilst such 'discovery' is outside the scope of the Enquiry, the concern is noted by the Panel given the limited 'official information' about the Neocatechumenal Way provided for the Enquiry by the NC itself.

2.3 Fortunately, informative and seemingly authoritative documents are provided for the Panel by others. There is a caveat to this provision namely, that the specific source from whom the documents about the NC Way are obtained remains anonymous. The Panel

- respects the request for anonymity and, as far as possible, includes extracts from the submitted representations so that they are not readily attributed to a particular person.

PAPAL LETTERS:

2.4 Two letters from His Holiness Pope John Paul II on 30 August 1990 and 12 April 1993 about the Neocatechumenal Way are submitted by NC members pointing to the validation given by the Holy Father. These letters are reproduced below. Other or additional papal views are given in the book: "The Neocatechumenal Way according to Paul VI and John Paul II," a copy of which was delivered to each member of the Panel by the 'NC Itinerant Team of Catechists' on the evening prior to the first meeting with NC members at St Nicholas of Tolentino. The Panel's reactions to this visit are given later.

2.5 An editorial note explains that: "the present collection does not contain all the speeches and words of Paul VI and John Paul II....Here we report the texts of around forty meetings held with the NC Communities (general audiences, particular audiences, visits to parishes) out of more than sixty that have already taken place in the Vatican and the Diocese of Rome alone....Most of the speeches were made ad lib....and they retain all the strength and freshness of this spontaneity."

3

To Our Venerable Brother

Monsignor PAUL JOSEF CORDES

Vice President of the Pontifical Council for the Laity

Appointed "ad personam"

For the Apostolate of the Neocatechumenal Communities

Every time the Holy Spirit germinates in the Church impulses for greater faithfulness to the

Gospel, there flourish new charisms which manifest these realities, and new institutions which

put them into practice. It was so thus after the Council of Trent and after the Second Vatican

Council.

Among the realities generated by the Spirit in our days figure the Neocatechumenal Communities, initiated by Mr K Argüello and Ms C Hernández (Madrid, Spain), the effectiveness of which for the renewal of Christian life was acclaimed by my predecessor, Paul VI, as a fruit of the Council: "How much joy and how much hope you give us by your presence and by your activity... .To live and to promote this re-awakening is what you call a 'post baptism' way which will be able to renew in today's Christian communities those effects of maturity and deepening that, in the primitive Church, were realised by the period of preparation for Baptism" (Paul VI to the Neocatechemenal Communities, General Audience 8 May 1974 in Notitiae 96-96, 1974, 230).

I too, as Bishop of Rome, have been able to verify the abundant fruits of personal conversion and fruitful missionary impulse in the many meetings I have had in the Roman parishes with the Neocatechumenal Communities and their Pastors, and in my apostolic journeys in many nations.

These communities make visible in the parishes the sign of the missionary church and 'they strive to open a way for the evangelisation of those who have almost abandoned the Christian life, offering them an itinerary of a catechumenal type which goes through all those stages that the catechumens went through in the primitive church before receiving the sacrament of Baptism:

it brings them back to the Church and to Christ' (cf 'Postbaptismal Catechumenate' in Notitiae 96-96, 1974, 229). The announcement of the Gospel, the witnessing in small communities and the Eucharistic celebration in groups (cf Notification on the celebration of groups of the "Neocatechumenal Way" in L'OSSERVATORE ROMANO, 24 December 1988) is what enables the members to put themselves at the service of the renewal of the Church.

Many Brothers in the Episcopate have acknowledged the fruits of this Way. I want only to recall Mons. Casimiro Morcillo, the then Bishop of Madrid, in whose diocese and under whose government the Neocatechumenal Communities - which he welcomed with so much love - were born in the year 1964.

4

After twenty years of the life of these communities, spread throughout the five continents:

- taking into account the new vitality which animates the parishes, the missionary impulse and the fruits of conversion which blossom from the dedication of the itinerants and, lately, from the work of the families which evangelise in dechristianised areas of Europe and of the whole world;

- in consideration of the vocations to the religious life and to the presbyterate which have arisen from this Way, and of the birth of diocesan colleges of formation to the presbyterate for the new evangelisation, such as the REDEMPTORIS MATER of Rome;

- having examined the documentation presented by you: welcoming the request addressed to me, I acknowledge the Neocatechumenal Way as an itinerary of Catholic formation, valid for our society and for our times.

It is therefore my wish that the Brothers in the Episcopate - together with their presbyters - value and help this work for the new evangelisation so that it may be implemented according to the lines proposed by its initiators, in the spirit of service to the local Ordinary and in communion with him in the context of the unity of the local church and the universal Church.

As a pledge of this wish of mine, I impart to you, and to all those who belong to the Neocatechumenal Communities, my Apostolic Blessing.

From the Vatican, 30 August 1990, 12 Year of the Pontificate.

Signed: JOANNES PAULUS ppII

- 5

Venerable Brothers in the Episcopate, Dearest Brothers and Sisters!

It is a cause of great consolation for me, just a few years since my appeal for a new evangelisation of Europe, to know that you are gathered in Vienna to reflect together upon the fruits of the missionary activity which the priests, itinerants and families of the Neocatechumenal Way are carrying out with a generous impulse and great zeal for the Gospel.

On the occasion of the opening of the work of the Special Assembly for Europe, on 5 June 1990, I noted with regret that in our continent many people are used to looking upon reality "as if God did not exist". Within such a perspective, I added, man "becomes the source of the moral law, and only those laws which man gives to himself constitute the measure of his conscience and of his behaviour" (Insegnamenti, vol XIII, 1, 1990, pp. 1517f). On the other hand, it cannot be denied that the Holy Spirit, by means of the Vatican Council, has raised up valid instruments with which to respond to the questions of contemporary man, and among these is also the Neocatechumenal Way. After various years, having regard to the results which have been achieved, I decided to encourage this experience in writing, in view of the new evangelisation, wishing that this experience be helped and valued by my brothers in the episcopate (cf letter of 30 August 1990).

Many of you are direct witnesses of such results and also protagonists through the help you have given to spreading this new ecclesial reality; therefore your reflection today is particularly important, as was that of the bishops of the American continent during the meeting last year in Santo Domingo.

The Neocatechumenal Way, in which the itinerants and the family missionaries mature, is able to respond to the challenge of secularism, the diffusion of sects and the shortage of vocations. The reflection upon the Word of God and the participation in the Eucharist make possible a gradual initiation into the sacred mysteries, to form living cells of the Church and renew the vitality of the parish by means of mature Christians capable of bearing witness to the truth through a radically lived faith.

This Way appears particularly qualified to contribute in dechristianised areas to the necessary reimplantatio ecclesiae, leading man in his moral behaviour towards obedience to revealed truth and even to reconstructing the very fabric of society, which has decayed due to a lack of knowledge of God and His love. Already, in some regions, nuclei of missionary families are being formed which can be the light of Christ and an example of life.

But such a mission would not be possible without presbyters prepared to accompany and sustain with their ordained ministry this work of the new evangelisation. I am grateful to the Lord who has willed to raise up numerous vocations and therefore the setting up of the diocesan and

missionary seminaries in various countries of Europe, called by the sweet name of the Virgin a Mary, "Redemtoris Mater".

6

I also place your meeting under her maternal protection and her powerful inspiration, that it may give you further impetus and courage in your apostolic commitment towards contemporary man, who needs the guidance of pastors and of witnesses sent by them, in order to know God, to invoke His name and to receive salvation from Him.

May the light of the Risen Lord, which we have solemnly celebrated in the Paschal Vigil continue to shine within you, sustaining you in your mission in the service of the Church and of the whole of humanity.

- From the Vatican 12 April 1993.

Joannes Paulus II

7

2.6 Whilst the general import of the approval letter on 30 August 1990 is constantly borne in mind by the Panel, there are several particular indicators within the text that seem so germaine to our task given the neutral question for would-be participants of the Enquiry:

"what has the NC done for you and your Parish?"

2.7 The first 'indicator' from the letter is:

"These (NC) communities make visible in the parishes the sign of the missionary church and they strive to open a way for the evangelisation of those who have almost abandoned the Christian life offering them an itinary of a catechumenal type which goes through all those stages that the catechumens went through in the primitive church before receiving the sacrament of Baptism: it brings them back to the Church and to Christ."

2.8 In the light of the representations made to the Panel (written and oral) part of our task is a

to assess whether the experience gained since 1980, when the first NC community was

formed in the Clifton Diocese at St Nicholas of Tolentino and St Patrick in Bristol, "does

make visible in the three parishes the sign of the missionary church." Another part of the a

task is to assess whether these NC communities bring back to the Church and to Christ

those in Bristol or Cheltenham or Gloucester "who have almost abandoned the Christian

life." a

2.9 The second main 'indicator' from the letter is:

"The announcement of the Gospel, the witnessing in small communities and the Eucharistic celebration in groups is what enables members to put themselves at the service of the renewal of the Church."

2.10 The submitted information and the meetings show that there are two or three small a

communities (generally about 20 to 25 in each) at the three parishes, where each

community celebrates the Liturgy of the Word during the week and on Saturday evening.

The latter situation stems from the edict on 15 March 1994 by Bishop Mervyn Alexander

that the Eucharist shall not be celebrated by the NC communities on Saturdays or

Sundays though this is permissible during the week. These 'celebrations' by the NC

together with the issues of 'service' and 'renewal' are considered separately for each

parish with findings and conclusions in a summary at Part II of this report.

2.11 In forming conclusions, regard is given by the Panel to a 'primary indicator' of Pope John Paul II at the conclusion of the letter namely:

"It is therefore my wish that the Brothers in the Episcopate - together with their presbyters - value and help this work for the new evangelisation so that it may be implemented according to the lines proposed by its initiators, in the spirit of service to the local Ordinary and in communion with him in the context of the unity of the local Church and the Universal Church."

2.12 From the representations (written and oral), it is apparent to the Panel (and to others) that

8 a

Bishop Alexander perceived initially (in 1979/80) the 'potential' value and help which this (NC) work for the new evangelisation might have within the City of Bristol. However, the evidence points strongly that this initial perception of the NC objectives and methods was not on the basis of being "well informed" or "well briefed or guided" by those seeking to promote an important evangelical role for the Neocatechumenal Way within this city. Section 4 below considers the NC Way introduction to the City in more detail.

2.13 It has to be stated that the Panel's perception of the NC objectives and method of implementation has 'evolved' through a gradual and at times a labourious process assisted thankfully by the submission of documented information about the NC mainly from those who are not members but who have a more than a fleeting interest. The Panel is well aware that some of the motives behind those submissions could be in question but it takes the view that this co-operation is well intentioned in the hope that the Panel's task is enlightened and lightened.

2.14 This contrasts markedly with the rather guarded approach by the NC itself in regard to the submission of documented information, seemingly a limited resource and especially so given the often repeated claim that the NC is an 'oral tradition.' Whilst their book:

"The Neocatechumenal Way. ..."is informative in general terms, with a significant amount of its space given to papal statements or homilies about the NC, hence the book title, this book is available to all via the bookshop; it is not a 'restricted document' with detailed and informative as well as accredited guidance about the NC objectives and catechetical methods.

2.15 There has not been a particularly open enlightenment for the Panel from the NC itself (locally and nationally) about objectives for the NC Way in a Parish role. Virtually at the last minute, following the Panel's meeting in September with the NC National Team, was a formal explanation submitted to the Enquiry; this is considered in Section 3 below. The circumstances of this Enquiry are not comparable to the broader situation perceived by some leading lay opponents of the NC Way when asking of the Panel: "Just how well informed or how well advised was the Holy Father, Pope John Paul II about the NC activities in parishes prior to indicating approval for the Neocatechumenal Way in the letter of 30 August 1990?" This stems from their perceptions of the NC 'modus operandi' at the parishes in Bristol, Cheltenham and Gloucester.

2.16 Insofar as the Panel is able to adduce, this general approval for the NC Way in August

1990 seems to have been influenced by factors gleaned or seen directly by the Holy Father during a 20 year period throughout five continents and described in these terms:

a. it brings new vitality which animates the parish;

b. it brings vocations to the religious life and the presbyterate with the consequent 'Diocesan Colleges of Formation' to the presbyterate for the new evangelisation.

- Another facet will be any 'documentation' considered about the NC Way; the Panel is not privy to this..

9

2.17 This Enquiry essentially seeks to adduce whether 'a new vitality' has been created to 'animate' the three Parishes since the NC Way introduction and of course in that context, to identity any vocational fruits attributed directly to the NC. The fruits of evangelisation, any new vitality and any animation are considered for each parish with the findings and conclusions gathered in the summary - Part II of the Report.

2.18 As for: 'the implementation of the new evangelization according to the lines proposed by the initiators,' the Panel understands this to mean the evangelization method of the NC Way in a Parish along the lines of the initiators: namely Kiko Arguello and Carmen Hernández. Such lines are controlled and supervised by the NC National Teams Catechists from outside of the Clifton Diocese.

2.19 Whenever possible, the Panel has posed questions at meetings and interviews relating to the papal guidance about NC implementation: "....in the spirit of service to 'Bishop Mervyn Alexander' and in communion with him in the context of the unity of the local Church...." This guidance is interpreted by the Panel to mean that the Neocatechumenal Way should function as and where Bishop Alexander permits so that it is not or does not have the potential to become a cause of disunity within a parish. The expressions: "in the spirit of service to..." and "...in communion with..." are of the essence in this guidance, as is a most important word: 'unity' bearing in mind expressed views by Pope Paul VI and Pope John Paul II about the fundamental importance of the 'Parish' and 'Parish Community' (considered later).

2.20 It is known by the Panel that Bishop Mervyn Alexander initially regarded the NC as having something to offer in its goal of renewing faith and reaching out to those alienated from the Church. The Bishop has indicated this in a formal response to questions by the

Panel:

"In the early days my hopes were that the NC could have become a parish group in harmony with other parish organisations. ft seemed it could offer a deeper understanding of Scripture and a stronger commitment to the Church. I had heard about the many priestly and religious vocations that had come from among NC members elsewhere. Also there were accounts of parishes being revitalised by the NC. I have always realised the importance of small communities within a parish and so this attracted me initially Opponents say that in effect the NC seeks to take over the parish and to direct sacramental preparation programmes."

2.21 The following section of the report considers 'The Neocatechumenal Way' in more detail but it is appropriate to quote here from their published book (at page 163):

"It does not seem possible to prove the hypothesis of those who say that in the parishes with Neocatechumenal Communities all other movements disappear and that the priests neglect these other movements."

And:

"The Neocatechumenal Way is not a movement, an apostolic group or an association."

10

2.22 In a published critique about the Neocatechumenal Way, Mgr J Buckley (VG) asks the consequent question: "If it is not a movement or an association, what is it?" The Panel has not sought to answer this question but it explores, considers and reaches conclusions as to whether: "the NC at the three parishes has operated or does operate in the spirit of service to Bishop Mervyn Alexander and in communion with him in the context of the unity of the local Church..." The main findings and conclusions about the parishes are in the summary at Part II of the report.

2.23 In the letter of 12 April 1993 to Bishops, priests, itinerants and families of the Neocatcechumenal Way assembled in Vienna, Pope John Paul II praises their missionary activity. After recognising that the NC Way is able to respond to the challenges of secularism, the diffusion of sects and the shortage of vocations he stated:

"The reflection upon the Word of God and the participation in the Eucharist make possible a gradual initiation into the sacred mysteries to form living cells of the Church and renew the vitality of the parish by means of mature Christians capable of bearing witness to the truth through a radically lived faith."

"This Way appears particularly qualified to contribute in dechristianised areas to the necessary 'reimplantio ecclesiae' leading man in his moral behaviour towards obedience to revealed truth and even contributing to the very fabric of society, which is decayed due to a lack of knowledge of God and His love."

Again the concept of renewing the vitality of the parish is indicated: "by means of mature Christians capable etc..." which is of course referring to most of those present - to NC members in their missionary activity carried out with: "a generous impulse and great zeal for the Gospel."

- 2.24 Whilst this and other promulgated papal affirmation for the NC Way has to be considered, these letters in particular bear upon an often made point by those not in favour or those opposed to the NC that the NC Catechists and indeed their Parish Priest, uphold and encourage the NC Way as: "the only way to salvation." The Panel is quite satisfied that such proclamations have been made within the Parishes, though we cannot be certain of the precise context of such a pronouncement. However, it is necessary to record here the consistent response given individually to the Panel by each Parish Priest when asked directly about this:

"Such a stance is not and cannot be correct; it would be heretical for such a statement to be made."

2.25 In the letter of 12 April 1993, Pope John Paul II stated: "On the other hand, it cannot be denied that the Holy Spirit, by means of the Vatican Council, has raised up valid instruments with which to respond to the questions of contemporary man, and among these is also the Neocatechumenal Way." The Holy Father makes plain that the NC Way is but one among other instruments of Catholic evangelisation. This needs no

- further comment by the Panel.

11

2.26 In the context of this Diocesan Enquiry, it is not for the Panel to contemplate upon all of the reported statements by two papacies about the Neocatechumenal Way, but it is noticeable that the general affirmation for the NC by Pope John Paul II is not without qualification. In the general context of criticisms made by parishioners about the NC activities in their Parish, the Panel believes it very useful to bear in mind the more specific guidance given by the papacy about the Neocatechumenal Way to be found in the 'NC Book.'

Private audience for 2,000 Priests of the NC community (9 December 1985)

2.27 The Panel identifies extracts from this papal guidance that seem to be most apposite when later considering the representations made about the role of the Parish Priests and their involvement with the Neocatechumenal Way.

i. Pope John Paul II invites this audience to meditate upon the decree 'Presbytorium Ordinis' in which the Second Vatican Council gave its attention and care to the ministry and life of priests;

ii. His exhortation about the Church's expectations of pastors and priests is thought by him to have "a positive and beneficial influence on your communities and on individuals;"

iii. He acknowledges that "the aims proposed by your NC communities corresponds to one of the most agonising questions of the pastor of souls today, especially those in the great urban agglomerations;"

iv. Recognising the aim to reach the mass of baptised adults with little instruction in the faith, the Holy Father recognises also the consequent need for their position as leaders of the communities to be very clear: "so that your actions may be in harmony with real demands of the pastoral situation;"

v. He went on: "The first demand that is made on you is to know how to keep faith, within the community, with your priestly identity. In virtue of Holy Orders you have been signed with a special character which confirms you to Christ the Priest, so that you can act in His name. The sacred minister, therefore, must be welcomed, not only as a brother who shares the way in Community, but above all as the one who, acting in 'persona Christi' carries in himself the irreplaceable responsibility of Teacher, Sanctifier and Guide of souls, a responsibility which he can in no way renounce. Lay people must be able to recognise this reality from the responsible behaviour which you maintain. It would be an illusion to believe you can serve the Gospel by diluting your charism in a false sense of humility or in misunderstood manifestation of fraternity....Do not let yourselves be deceived! The Church wants you to be priests and the lay people you meet want you to be priests and nothing other than priests."

12

vi. He continued: "Another delicate and irrenounceable responsibility that

I hope you undertake is to build up ecclesial communion, not only within

your group, but with all members of the parochial and diocesan

communities. Whatever service has been entrusted to you, you are

always the representative of and the 'providi cooperatores' with the

Bishop to whose authority you should feel particularly united. In effect,

in the Church it is the right and duty of the Bishop to give directives for

pastoral activity (c f Canon 381) and everyone has the obligation to

conform to these. Do this is such a way that your communities, while

losing nothing of their originality and richness, can be inserted

harmoniously and fruitfully into the family of the parish and the diocese."

vii. There followed seemingly unequivocal guidance from the Holy Father; first: "It is the task of the pastors to make an effort to see that the parishes benefit from the positive values that these communities can bring and as a result be open to the communities. However it must be very clear that the communities cannot put themselves on the same plane as the parish community itself, as a possible alternative. On the contrary, they have the duty to serve the parish and the local Church. It is precisely this service given in conjunction with the parish and the diocese, that the validity of these experiences within the Movements and Associations can be seen."

and secondly:

"Here I offer another point for reflection: Exercising your ministry for

the guidance of the Neocatechumenal Communities, you do not feel sent only to one particular group but to serve the whole Church."... "The spiritual gift which priests have received in ordination, the Second Vatical Council reminds us, does not prepare them merely for a limited and circumscribed mission, but for the fullest, in fact the Universal mission of salvation...."

- 2.28 Whilst it is known by the Panel, as a fact that the three Parish Priests have attended NC events outside of the UK when Pope John Paul II was present, they do not indicate to the Panel that they were part of this 2,000 strong audience in 1985 though each, by that year, were adherents to the Neocatechumenal Way. Nor do they indicate to the Panel that they are aware of this papal guidance given in 1985 but it is assumed that this must be so particularly as it is included in the 'NC Book.' (pp191 - 196)

2.29 Those parts emphasised in the quoted extracts seem to be the most apt for our investigation, setting out an authoritative standard by which reasonably objective -assessments can be made about their NC involvements. Moreover, just as Bishop Mervyn Alexander thought initially (in 1979/80) that the NC could become 'a parish group in harmony with other parish organisations,' the Holy Father in 1985 appears to have felt likewise but exhorted the priests to ensure that 'your communities be inserted

13

harmoniously and fruitfully into the family of the parish...' The Panel believes that this could be regarded as a 'signal of disharmony' known by the Holy Father to exist in

consequence of the NC involvement at parishes; this of course is the prime purpose of -the Enquiry.

2.30 The 'signal of disharmony' seems to be a reasonable proposition because circumstances -

involving Pope John Paul I and the successor Holy Father are described in the 'NC

Book.' This explains (at page 16) that the initiators met John Paul I when he was the

Patriarch of Venice and who permitted the NC Way to his diocese: "He allowed the

Paschal Vigil to be celebrated all night confirming our praxis in everything in front of

some parish priests who had raised some difficulties." It also explains (at page 14) that

they first met the Holy Father in 1979 who, whilst Cardinal of Cracow had welcomed the

NC Way in his diocese and had defended the Saturday evening Eucharist in the

communities in front of certain parish priests.

2.31 As for the emphasised extract in (vi) above - 'the communities cannot put themselves on

the same plane as the parish community itself as a possible alternative,' this is the

substantial point raised in representations by those concerned about the NC in the light -

of their direct experience, or perhaps former involvement, over the years within their

parishes. The same applies to that part of the emphasised extract in (vi) above about

"exercising your ministry so that you do not feel sent only to one particular group but

serve the whole church"; there is a strong perception by those who are not NC, including

those with strongly expressed opposition to the NC, that the Parish Priests seem to cater

much more for 'their communities.' This is considered in more detail elsewhere with

findings and conclusions for each Parish in the summary at Part II of the report.

2.32 Finally in the context of this papal guidance, there is the emphasised point about the priest being "the representative of and the 'providi cooperatores' with the Bishop to whose authority you should feel particularly united." Despite the often expressed sense of obedience to Bishop Alexander by the three Parish Priests, and by the priest leader of the National NC Catechist Team, there is evidence to the Panel that the 'bond' or 'unity' with the Local Ordinary has not only been tested but found wanting in the past, particularly during a period leading to and after a meeting on 21 July 1993. The minutes of this meeting have been made available to the Panel.

2.33 Attended by the Vicars General and the three Parish Priests, the meeting's purpose was "to try and reach a common understanding and mind about the Neocatechumenal Way." The hope was that a 'live and let live' situation could be achieved at St Nicholas of Tolentino in Bristol, at St Peter in Gloucester and at Sacred Hearts in Cheltenham. Unfortunately a hoped for solution of compromise, whereby the NC Way would modify its activities in these parishes, was not forthcoming. A hoped for amicable solution to perceived problems did not materialise. Therefore not long afterwards, Bishop Alexander issued an edict to curtail and reduce the NC activities because of division and disunity at these parishes. This edict and its effects are considered for each parish with the findings and conclusion in Part II of the report.

14

Rebuilding the Parish basing it on the NC experience.

2.34 Given the differing starting points in the representations about the intended role of the Neocatechumenal Way in the "Parish" and/or the "Parish Area", considered elsewhere in the report, the Panel sees a need to highlight relevant Papal advice about the "Parish" and the NC, also derived from the 'NC Book.'

2.35 At a general audience on 12 January 1977, Pope Paul VI stated, amongst other things:

"The person who has been baptised needs to understand, to think over, to appreciate, to give assent to the inestimable treasure of the Sacrament he has received."

"We are happy to see that this need today is understood by the institutional Church structures: the parishes, the dioceses in particular, and by all the other religious families. In this area of structures, as I have said, the Parish is fundamental."

"Here we see a catechesis taking shape, which is subsequent to the one that baptism did not have. 'Pastoral Work for adults', as is said today, is taking shape, creating new methods and new programmes, and also new ministries. what a great need there is for people to help. And so we see catechists, sisters, and families too, who are becoming the teachers in their evangelisation that takes place after baptism...."

2.36 To the Panel in the context of the NC Way, clear guidance was provided by Pope Paul

VI about the: "institutional church structure - the Parish." This is worth repeating and

remembering because it is at the heart of the Panel's task - "The Parish is fundamental" within the "institutional church structure." Therefore any future reference to 'Rebuilding the Parish' or 'Transforming the Parish' should be within the context of 'the institutional church structure.' The Panel's assessments and conclusions are on that premise.

2.37 Some 5 years later, during a visit to the Parish of the Immaculate Conception at Cervellatta (Rome, March 1982), Pope John Paul II is reported to have stated that the Parish Priest must: "be in love with all the groups" - "but perhaps a bit more with your group. This could lead to favouritism but it has not ft seems to me that he has fallen in love with the whole of h is Parish. And the Parish is larger than your community but that is the way that Jesus arranged things " He went on a little later: "It (the NC community) is growing together with the Parish Priest and together with the parish." -"ten or fifteen years ago, he saw the difficulties of this parish, what there was and what was missing...."

2.38 Again the Panel perceives reasonably clear guidance here about the "Parish", particularly that the: "Parish is larger than your community", a point emphasised again some 3 years later at a private audience with 2,000 priests of the Neocatechumenal Communities referred to previously. In the message of March 1982, there is an acknowledgement that the: "NC community is growing together with the Parish" and pertinent reference to:

- "difficulties of the Parish" which might mean that desirable attributes were missing.

- 2.39 During a visit to the Parish of St Maria Goretti in Rome (31 January 1988) Pope John Paul II is reported to have stated: "I hope that you may receive all these fruits in this

15

Parish, which seems to me to be based as the Neocatechumenal experience."

"I think there is a way to rebuild the Parish on the basis of the Neocatechumenal experience. Of course this method cannot be imposed on everybody... It is authentic and is consistent with the very nature of the Parish, because just as each one of us Christians grows from baptism, so does the Christian community grow naturally from baptism." And then: "The Parish is the basic community in the Church."

2.40 Quite noticeably, Pope John Paul II explains that the Parish is the 'basic community' but the Neocatechumenal experience cannot be "imposed on everybody". This advice follows that given some three years previously; the NC communities should be "inserted harmoniously and fruitfully into the family of the Parish and the Diocese", also "it must be very clear that the communities cannot put themselves on the same plane as the parish Community itself" therefore words and descriptions such as 'Parish,' 'Parish Community,' 'the Parish is the basic community in the Church' leave little or no scope as to the interpretation of an objective: "to rebuild the Parish through the NC experience" and particularly where a Parish is experiencing difficulties." The Panel is satisfied that where reference to "Parish" is within papal guidance, it should be taken to mean the 'Parish Community of the Church' within a local area.

16

3 THE NEOCATECHUMENAL WAY; PANEL APPRAISAL

Discovery; Affirmation after Contradiction

3.1 On 7 March 1982, Pope John Paul II visited the parish of the Immaculate Conception at

the 'Cervelletta' Tor Sapinza, Rome and spoke to the Neocatechumenal Communities

there. Amongst other things he stated: "One fundamental word which always comes up

when listening in the Neocatechumenal way is the word DISCOVERY. Discovery is

always something great." and: "This discovery is all the more profound when it comes,

as an affirmation, after a situation of contradiction, of negation."

- 3.2 Contradictory evidence has been submitted to the Enquiry about the Neocatechumenal

Way. Since each member of the Panel either had very little or no knowledge about the

NC at the commencement of this investigation, thus obviating any preconceived ideas or

perceptions, there has been a process of Discovery and Discernment for the Panel in

trying to understand the objectives or aims of the NC particularly in regard to a Parish

and thence if possible, to resolve the contradictions.

The Neocatechumenal Way according to Paul VI and John Paul II

3.3 This 'NC book' includes the letter of Pope John Paul 11(30 August 1990) approving the

Neocatechumenal Way; this is followed immediately by a: "Brief comment for the

Vatican Press Office by Kiko Arguello relating to the letter of the Holy Father on the

Neocatechumenal Way;"

What is the Neocatechumenal Way?

In the early Church, in the midst of paganism, a person who wanted to become a Christian had to follow an itinerary of formation in Christianity that was called the 'Catechumenate 'from the word 'catecheo' which means 'echo', 'listening.'

The current process of secularisation has brought many people to abandon the faith and the Church. Because of this a new itinerary of Christian formation needs to be opened up. The Neocatechumenal Way does not lay claim to forming a movement in itself but to helping parishes to open up a way of Christian initiation to Baptism, in order to discover what it means to be Christian. It is an instrument, in the parishes, in the service of the Bishops, to bring back to faith many people who have abandoned it. Today in the West many dioceses are trying to carry out catechesis for adults. The Neocatechumenal Way is a theological-catechetical synthesis, a catechism, a catechumenate for adults, an itinerary of Christian formation for modern man.

In the early Church, the catechumenate was formed of a synthesis between Word (Kerygma), Liturgy and Morality. The early Church had above all a Kerygma, that is an 'announcement of salvation'. This announcement of the Gospel that was made by apostles like Paul and Silas, brought about a moral change in those who heard it. They changed their lives helped by the Holy Spirit who accompanied the apostles. This moral change was sealed and encouraged through the sacraments. Concretely Baptism was given by stages. In this way the

17

primitive catechesis was a 'gestation' to divine life.

when the catechumenate disappeared over the following centuries, this synthesis of Kerygma - Change of life - Liturgy was lost. The Kerygma as a call to faith implied a moral decision no longer existed; it was transformed into a 'scholastic doctrine, Morality became an 'internal forum ' - a private act. The liturgy became the same for all.

The Neocatechumenal Way recovers this 'period of gestation', this synthesis between Kerygma, Change of life and Liturgy.

Why is it called Neocatechumenate?

Because the Neocatechumenal Way is essentially offered to those who have already been baptised, but who do not have an adequate Christian formation. Catechesis Tradendae affirms that the situation of many Christians in the parishes is of 'quasi catechumens'.

what is so newsworthy in this Letter of the Holy Father is that it recognises in the Neocatechumenate a Christian initiation for adults of a catechumenal nature, thus offering the dioceses a concrete instrument for evangelisation without making it into a religious order, a special association or a movement. Many times in the history of the Church the saints have tried to make the spirit of the Gospel come to life again in the people of God without necessarily encompassing it within a religious order. The time was not ripe. Today after the Second Vatican Council, the current reality of atheism and secularisation puts the Church in a position where the renewal of the catechumenate is absolutely necessary.

With this Letter, the Pope validates 25 years of an experience which started in one of the poorest suburbs of Madrid, and which now extends to 600 dioceses, 3000 parishes and 87 countries through a total of 10,000 communities and acknowledges the fruits of personal conversion and its missionary impetus. The renewal that has taken place in these parishes thanks to the Neocatechumenate has caused an extraordinary impulse for the mission, such that many catechists and even entire families have been ready to go wherever evangelisation is needed.

Another important fruit in the local Church is the flourishing once again, of numerous vocations (in the first half of 1990 alone, more that 1500 young men from the Neocatechumenal Communities felt the call to become priests) and it has given rise to the birth of missionary diocesan seminaries that can come to the rescue of the many dioceses that find themselves in difficulty in this time because of a lack of vocations. The originality of these seminaries is that they involve a serious Christian initiation - the Neocatechumenate - in the formation of presbyters. Thus in a very short time, many bishops have decided to open these seminaries in their dioceses: in Rome, Madrid, Warsaw, Medellin, Bangalore, Callao (Lima) Newark (New Jersey USA), Takamatsu (Japan) and many other countries where they have begun to function.

With this Letter, the Holy Father, having verified its fruits all over the world, formally acknowledges the Neocatechumenal Way as an 'itinerary of Catholic formation, valid for our society and our times' and hopes that all the

18

Bishops together with the presbyters value and help this Way in their dioceses -Rome 24 September 1990

3.4 In appendix I of their 'NC book' (at page 127 to 135), a brief synthesis about The Neocatechumenal Way by Kiko Arguello and Carmen Hernandez is given. The footnote (at page 127) states: "These notes by Kiko Arguello and Carmen Hernandez are taken from a brief document giving information on the Neocatechumenal Way that was prepared for Pope Paul VI in 1974 and which was also presented, with slight variations, to the Plenary Assembly of the Congregation for the Evangelisation of Peoples in 1983." In the light of the footnote explanation, the Panel wonders whether 'these notes' (the synthesis) form the basis of the documentation submitted for approbation by Pope John Paul II.

3.5 Be that as it may, it is appropriate to include here extracts from this reported synthesis which seem to be the most apt and which, with other documented material about the NC, is borne in mind by the Panel when considering representations for each of the parishes.

3.6 Following the sub-title: "A concrete way of evangelising those who are far-away" the synthesis explains that the Neocatechumenal Way is lived out within the existing structure of the parish, and in communion with the Bishop, in small communities each composed of people who are different in age, social status, outlook and culture. The synthesis explains that the NC is not a group formed spontaneously, neither is it an association, nor a spiritual movement, nor an elite within the parish. Rather, it is a group of people who wish to rediscover and to live Christian life to the full; to live the essential consequences of their Baptism by means of a Neocatechumenate divided into different stages, like that of the early Church, but adapted to their condition as baptised persons.

3.7 However, the submitted evidence followed by questions of clarification or of validation at the meetings or at the interviews raises strong doubts in the minds of the Panel about the veracity of some explanations quoted in the preceding paragraph from the 'synthesis'. The last mentioned phrase for example: "adapted to their condition as baptised persons" is very misleading because the reality of the NC process, as explained to the Panel by NC members and non-members, assumes such an 'immature faith' in all parishioners that those who decide to follow the Neocatechumenal Way 'begin at the beginning' irrespective of their individual level in or understanding of the faith.

3.8 In other words, all new NC members are required to partake in the first stage of the process - the Kerygma and their progress beyond this initial stage to other stages is controlled strictly by the NC Catechists; the surprise discovery for the Panel is that this strict control is exercised by three 'outside Catechists' upon the Parish Priest. This is a matter of concern expressed in representations about NC control within the investigated Parishes and is a topic - 'NC 'Authority' and Control considered in Section 4 below.

3.9 The Panel recognises that 'the group' is not formed spontaneously because the submitted evidence shows that a 'community' evolves to suit the particular situation within the Parish. Our understanding originally was that, in theory, a new community is created following the annual general invitation to join the Neocatechumenal Way, the reality is

19

different. For example, details provided to the Enquiry indicate that whilst there might have been as many as four communities at St Nicholas of Tolentino in Bristol, there are now three. Similarly, submitted details indicate that some 10 to 15 people joined the NC at Sacred Hearts in Cheltenham each year during the 1988 to 1991 period, but there are only two communities there, the second of which has the young members.

3.10 An explanation is not offered to the Panel as to why the Neocatechumenal Way is not an association nor a spiritual movement, the latter probably being a quite apt description. There is an authoritative assertion to the Panel that their 'disassociation' relieves the NC Way of canonical obligations particularly in regard to official records and financial controls.

3.11 Whilst the Panel notes the explanation in this synthesis that "the NC is lived out within the existing structure of the parish" and the other explanation that the NC communities "do not impose themselves; they consider it a duty not to destroy anything, but to respect everything," there is considerable evidence from representors opposed to the NC or from those who take a more neutral ("live and let live") stance, that such guidance from the initiators is not followed in their parishes; this is considered in more detail elsewhere with findings and conclusions in the summary at Part II of the report.

3.12 Under the sub-title: "The Neocatechumenal Process" this synthesis explains that a primary objective is the formation of community, the latter being very imperfect at first. The synthesis thence explains that these communities are "born in the Parish" because this seems the most suitable place for the local Church to appear as the 'sacrament of salvation', without creating a parallel Church, without destroying anything but gradually taking on the reality of the Church of today and the period of transition through which she is going. Some leading opponents of the NC in the diocese question the theological validity of the Neocatechumenal Way and whilst the Panel is not called upon directly to deal with the point, there does appear to be a contradiction in terms whereby the NC process follows that of the early Church but seeks to 'take on the reality of today's Church'. The reality at the three Parishes, before and after the NC introduction, is considered and conclusions reached about this.

3.13 There are claims in the representations that the Neocatechumenal Way is a 'Church within the Church', that it creates a parallel Church though this is denied by NC members. The Panel comments about this perception of the NC after considering the details for the Parishes but notes here an explanation in the synthesis that: "the whole parish is called to conversion 'because ' most traditional Christians live their faith at a childish level as is clearly shown by the divorce between religion and life in them. Hence the absolute necessity for a serious process of conversion which takes place in our everyday experience." Whilst each of the Parish Priests explains to the Panel why they perceived a need for the Neocatechumenal Way to be introduced to their Parishes (considered elsewhere), the submitted evidence to the Panel shows that a sizeable number of people in each parish (100 to 250) responded initially to the NC invitation of renewal.

3.14 It is appropriate therefore to emphasise now that such responses indicate clearly to the Panel an awareness by the parishioners during the 1980's at St Nicholas of

20

Tolentino in Bristol, at Sacred Hearts in Cheltenham and at St Peter's in Gloucester, of a need to deepen their faith. The strong signal given then is that a sizeable number of parishioners welcomed an opportunity for 'Adult Catechesis' but only a limited number of these found the 'NC Process' acceptable; various reasons are given for this. Even if this investigation does not bear any other fruit, the Panel wishes to emphasise and to re-emphasise the signal given about the need for 'Adult-Catechesis'.

Initiation Talks

3.15 Copies of the 'Initiation Talks' have been submitted helpfully to the Enquiry together with tapes of 'convivences' attended by communities from St Nicholas of Tolentino as well as photographs of a baptism by immersion in the early 1 9809s at St Thomas More school within the Parish of St Nicholas of Tolentino.

3.16 An examination of these 'Initiation Talks' (Second Day: The Sign of faith) provides less than coherent explanations about the NC process; there are inconsistencies compared to the published 'NC Book' but it is possible to identify objectives. Importantly, the Parish is identified as the focus for a 'Pastoral of Evangelisation' because: "The world is gradually leaving the Church" and "The Parish Priest who today fails to begin a pastoral work for tomorrow, will be left with an empty church.... or with a group of people without an adult faith." The Panel does not know whether such an assertion is made on the basis of extensive research or experience o? is conjecture.

3.17 The second initiation talk poses a question: "what do we want to do in the Parish?" and within the answers there is a statement of intent: "We say to the Parish Priest: This pastoral is missionary for the ones who are far away These communities which we form are not for those who are in the parish but for those who never come." and: "This (Christian) community will end up by changing the pastoral work and the structure of the parish." Significantly, Kiko then states: "Thus we arrive to a new type of parish, an atomical parish made up of small Christian communities all in a way of conversion, on a Catechumenal Way, reliving Baptism in a Christian community." This 'new type of parish' is illustrated (by Kiko) to be in the form of cells (ie. the communities) with links to a larger central unit that, as explained to the Panel by the National NC Catechists, is the 'Local Church.'

3.18 As explained in the Initiation Talks, this concept of an "atomical Parish" involving a change to the Parish structure, contradicts the explanations in the 'NC Book' that existing structures of a Parish would not be harmed or altered. This in the Panel's view, gives credence to the perception by some representors of the three Parishes that the NC seeks to "Take-over the Parish" and for a number of reasons, this is opposed.

3.19 On the second day of the "Initiation talk" (by Kiko) there is an explanation that, in the process of conversion on a Catechumenal Way, a catechist leads the community in the catechumenate as "the brother of the one who knows." The evidence to the Panel with ensuing clarification from NC members and non-members substantiates that the catechetic process is undertaken by people outside the community and for the first

- 21

community at least, these are from outside the Parish or outside of the Diocese.

3.20 The role of the Parish Priest within the ambit of a community under catechesis does not seem to be that of a leader, but as one of the community subject to instruction and subsequent scrutiny prior to succeeding into the next stage of the NC process. As noted before, that progression is dependent upon an assessment by the 'outside NC Catechists' and will also be governed by the rate of progress by the community as a group including that of the 'slowest brother or sister.' This subservient role by the Parish Priest is perhaps not so surprising given the statement in the 'initiation talk' (by Kiko) that: "Badges are not worth anything here; nor priests, nor monks, nor nuns, nor Bishops." Taken literally, the traditional hierarchical arrangement within a Diocese is thus regarded by the NC as inconsequential; the Panel perceives this to be seriously at variance with the Holy Father's guidance to the NC about Episcopal authority and obedience.

3.21 Towards the end of the second day 'initiation talk', the community is described (1,y Kiko) as: "the efficacious sign the sacrament.... that you are the Son of God." The theological veracity of such an assertion is beyond the remit for the Panel. There follows (',y Carmen) "what it is necessary to do first of all is to evangelise those who are in the Church, re-evangelise the Church itself which is what the Pope and all the Bishops are saying." Whether that is a statement of fact is not clear but the Panel is mindful of Bishop Alexander's anticipation in 1979/80 that the NC Way had something to offer in its goal of renewing faith and reaching out to those alienated from the Church.

3.22 From this assessment of the 'initiation talks' it seems to the Panel that the NC objectives are: evangelise those who are in the Church; re-evangelise the Church; form communities in the Parish thence transform the Parish 'from a pastoral work concentrated on the sacraments to one of evangelisation" (reference: NC book page 129).

Presentation of the Way (1993)

3.23 By far the most informative document submitted to the Panel about the NC objectives, the reasoning behind the objectives and the NC process on implementation is a fifty-nine page transcript of a talk given by Kiko Arguello titled: "Presentation of the Way." That presentation we are advised was to Bishops meeting in Denver during 1993. Just over half of this presentation covers the background about Kiko himself and how the NC came into being.

3.24 Whilst it is not considered necessary to reproduce this presentation paper, salient extracts are necessarily given (below) because this tends to clarify objectives and the 'raison d'être' for the NC; it helps to explain noted inconsistencies from other submitted material about the NC. It is regarded by the Panel as authoritative because it emanates from one of the initiators and it is probably the most up to date, outlining the NC experience over a period of some 30 years until 1993.

3.25 These quoted extracts are taken sequentially from the paper; the first is at page 10:

22

i. The Way ends receiving a white Tunic

ii. I (Kiko) had an encounter with the Virgin Mary who said to me "it is necessary to make small communities like the Holy Family of Nazareth, which live in humility, simplicity and praise.

iii. All the first catechesis were created by the poor. That which John XXIII said, that the renewal of the Church would come through the poor, at least this is how it has been in the Way. These catechesis which we give in the parishes ,from which everything is born, were created by the poor.

iv. Other people don 't have any experience, they have a learned faith; they need an experience of the intervention of God in their history.

v. I (Kiko) had to die to myself

vi. We went to a bourgeois parish in Argues, but the rich people of the parish whom we had gathered for a catechesis about The Eucharist were not willing to listen to anyone catechize them, nor were they willing to let anyone call them to conversion. This business of calling to conversion is to make a moral judgement.

vii. We realised that the people were very covered over and that a way of descent, of going down into the waters of baptism, was necessary. ft was necessary to strip the people of false ideas. The people were not catechised, they thought they were Christians, that their Sunday masses were enough for them. They talked back at every point; the bourgeois parishes did not accept us; the pastor wanted us but the people were opposed We have discovered little by little, step by step, the necessity of a way of gestation in the faith.

viii. We have a base which is the tripod; the second Vatican Council speaks fifty-four times about this. It says that Christian life is based as a tripod: WORD, LITURGY and COMMUNITY We also discovered that a way of descent was necessary, in order to strip away false ideas, until the corpse of the old man was left in the waters of our baptism so that a new man, who is a new creation, could come up from these waters.... There is a new creation, and it is the divine nature which appears.

ix. The Neo Catechumenal Way is a time of formation: A long time.

x. ft is not a matter of duration; the important thing is whether fruits are given, whether conversion is really given, whether a new creation is truly given with signs and indications.

xi. The Neocatechumenal Way inaugurates a serious change in pastoral work of evangelisation without abandoning sacramentalization; this

- 23

means to continue the pastoral work inside the Church and also to reach the man who is outside

xii. It is necessary that faith be preceded by signs which open and predispose man to faith, to listen.

xiii. The parish is a huge conglomerate; I only go to Mass on Sunday and I don 't know the people. But Christ speaks of loving one another visibly

xiv. We believed this: that if in this parish there appears a small community which has an adult faith, in this dimension in which faith is made visible, that our love and unity will create such a big question mark for this man that he will unfailingly come and ask about our faith.

xv. The parish needs that we give it an instrument of evangelization; so we say to the pastor, we are going to give you this instrument.

xvi. So that the people of a parish understand what it means to call to faith someone who has no faith, we begin giving the catechesis without presupposing faith in anyone. Not with those who are far away, but rather with those from the parish.

xvii. We don't come to form a movement. We are opening a way of adult Christian initiation in the parish. Have we opened a way? Has a nucleus been constituted here, has this become a community of communities? Has the parish been transformed? Then we have finished our mission and we can go. There you have the communities for your parish and for your Bishop; now you can follow the pastoral plan of the Bishop, not that of Kiko.

xviii. The priests say: And those movements which have their own pastoral programme? what happens to the Bishop's pastoral plan? But we still don 't have a formed Christian. when he is formed there you have him! Look how he obeys you.... Do you need vocations? 1,200 vocations; for you, not for me; I don 't govern any priest.

xix. We find ourselves in front of two sorts of ecclesiology. We met priests who have a clerical ecclesiology. He is the priest. He is the one who evangelizes. He, not me, not the lay people. He doesn't know how to collaborate with us, because he has all the charisms. This is the way it was before the Council, clergy on one side and laity on the other.

xx. The word 'laity' has never been used in the Neocatechumenal Way. The clergy, a priestly class, doesn't exist among us. We are a body and there is a head and some members. Since this man has a clerical mentality, if lam a charisma which God has raised up to help him, he doesn't know what to do with me; he sees me as antagonist; he is jealous.

24

xxi. The charisms had all been assumed by the priest But he needs help.

They form this clerical mentality and when they change or die, their groups disappear. The next priest does his own pastoral work; they are always building up and tearing down, never doing effective things for the people, everything is at the service of the priest.

xxii. Then there is the "lay ecclesiology"; the priest who never dresses like a priest...Everything is democratic; everything is done democratically. These priests say that dialogue is necessary. The obedience that you (Kiko) ask for is an assault on human liberty. These priests have their own ideas. They question the Bishop....and the Pope.

xxiii. Thanks be to God that many of these priests have good intentions and they convert; they convert thanks to having terrible sexual disorders in their lives which make them suffer a lot. In the Way they are cured from these things and begin to be chaste; and they begin to be grateful towards that which has saved their priesthood

xxiv. Is a new ecclesiology possible? Is it really possible to help the Church in this Way? Yes. God has provided a solution by founding Redemptoris Mater seminaries where a new kind of presbyter, one capable of governing a process of Christian initiation, is appearing.

xxv. To open this evangelization in the parish we give a catechesis to form the first community. We invite those who are close to the parish. We say to the pastor: we don't do anything in the parish if you aren't at the centre of the first community. But the pastor protests that he can 't lead all groups (eg Legion of Mary, Focolarinos).

xxvi. You (ie the pastor) have to discern. This is a Christian initiation. The one who has the catechesis in his hands has the church of the future. You devote yourself to saying Mass. You have to govern this. If you govern i4 you have to know it We have a language; you have to know this language.

xxvii. We have a Neocatechumenal language. If you have a word to say in the Church, you create a new language, a new theology, new terms. If we weren't saying anything other than that which the ancients had said, we wouldn't be adding anything. The pastor has to know this in order to

- govern it.

xxviii. So the first community is formed lam a team that has come from outside. If the priest is changed the community is not destroyed because it isn't linked to the priest but to the team. Which means that when all the pastors have changed, the communities haven 't died.

25

xxix. After three years we tell the community to elect catechists and they come with their catechists to see how I preach. Because they are formed in an oral tradition, they aren't given a booklet and told to learn it.

xxx. A second catechesis is given and a second community is formed, then a third, a fourth and so on. Finally, the parish is formed into a community of communities; we've reached the structure of the parish.

xxxi. A priest needs a community because it helps him as a Christian. And his preaching gains; it becomes fresher, we give joy to his priesthood. And he confesses better. His faith is sustained by the brothers of his community who help him.

xxxii. As the communities grow in faith, there comes a moment in the Way in which the whole community has to work in the parish. In the parishes we take care of the catechesis for children, marriage preparation, visits two by two from door to door. Each community, at a certain step in the Way, has to work in die parish, everyone in what we call the pastoral work of mediation. This is because it says in adult catechesis that in his formation a Christian has to learn that he is a builder of the church. After the Reditio the whole community offer itself; then the pastor presents the group which will visit the sick, the group of Caritas, the Sunday liturgy preparation group. Votes are taken in the community and the brothers most fit for each of these missions are acclaimed. In all the parishes where the Way has been present for some years everyone is working in the parish's pastoral work

3.26 There is more to come from this "presentation paper by Kiko", but it is best to pause and give the Panel's reflections upon the matters above bearing in mind the written and oral evidence presented from the three parishes (including the Papal letters) and the information provided by the NC book.

3.27 This paper explains that the Neocatechumenal Way involves a long time of formation (item ix) at the end of which the brother or sister will receive the 'white tunic' (item i) after renewal of their baptismal promises. Evidence to the Panel shows that no NC member in the Clifton Diocese, or indeed anywhere in the United Kingdom, has reached the end of the NC Way; no one has received the 'white tunic' though the first community at St Nicholas of Tolentino in Bristol has existed for about 16 years. The expression - 'a long time' could therefore be quantified as 20 or more years.

3.28 As representors point out, this long time duration of the NC Way is not explained to potential or new members; questions are not answered (item vii). Thus a NC will not be aware at the outset, and perhaps for years, that their individual 'conversion' to adult/mature faith (item xiv) or their way of gestation in the faith (item vii) will stretch for many years ahead. On the other hand, Kiko regards duration as unimportant; the fullness of the 'conversion' is important (item x).

26

3.29 There is authoritative (ie Kiko) clarification that the NC method of catechising in a Parish is not dependent upon a booklet but is an oral tradition (items iii, xxix), intended to correspond (via observation) with the form of catechesis used by Kiko and which initially was created by the poor for the poor of Madrid. The Panel is of course mindful of Bishop Alexander's concern and that of others in the Diocese, that there has not been submitted to him details of the NC catechesis for examination and approval though this has been requested. There is therefore a demonstrable flaw, on the NC part, in the relationship with Bishop Alexander given the papal guidance of August 1990 whereby the NC Way is to function in the spirit of service and communion with the local Ordinary.

3.30 As explained in representations, the reactions by some parishioners (in the three parishes) to "this business of calling to conversion" (item vi) was of incredulity, anger and resentment because complete strangers (ie outside Catechists, the National NC Catechist Team) should castigate publicly their commitment to God and/or to suggest that they have no or little faith (item vii). Kiko explains (item xvi) that the catechesis begins without presupposing faith in anyone from the parish; some representors perceive such 'moral judgements' (item vi) to be arrogant and offensive.

3.31 In representations from the three parishes, there are often expressed concerns that the NC intends to take-over and/or to transform the parish though this has been denied by the NC; their book for example explains that existing structures would remain and be respected. Subsequent to the meeting on 9 September with the NC National Teams of Catechists, Fr Jose Guzman has written to the Panel about this fundamental concern; he states:

"In regard to the relationship between Neocatechumenate and parish it is important to understand that the very idea of a 'Neocatechumenal Parish ' is meaningless. ft has never been the intention of the initiators to establish the Neocatechumenal Way at the expense of other realities present in the parish. In his brief outline of the Neocatechumenate presented to Pope Paul VI in 1974, Kiko states that the communities 'do not impose themselves, they consider it a duty not to destroy anything, but to respect everything' (from the book 'The Neocatechumenal Way according to Paul VI and John Paul II, Page 129).

This can be seen in practice. In 1988 the Spanish Episcopal Conference made a statistical survey of all its parishes, in preparation for the congress 'The Evangelising Parish'. From the results, among other things, it emerged that where the Neocatechumenal communities are present, other apostolic movements tend to flourish more than in parishes without the Neocatechumenate. Fr Francisco Azcona San Martin, director of the Statistical and Sociological office of the Spanish Episcopal Conference, concluded that "it does not seem possible to prove the hypothesis of those who say that in parishes with the Neocatechumenal communities all other movements disappear, and that the priests neglect these other movements" (cited in the Appendix of 'The Neocatechemenal Way according to Paul VI and John Paul 1£ page 163). These statistics are worthy of note because the research was carried out by experts for the Spanish Episcopal Conference and not by members of the Neocatechumenate."

27

3.32 However, the authoritative explanation by the initiator in the Presentation Paper is preferred by the Panel and by the reality at St Nicholas of Tolentino. Kiko makes plain (items xvii, xxx) that the parish will be transformed into a community of communities, reaching its structure and there comes a moment in which the whole community (communities) has to work in the parish (item xxxii); this will involve various pastoral ministries. The genuine concerns by parishioners, particularly by those who are or 'were' active, are therefore not hypothetical; judging by the situation prevailing at St Nicholas of Tolentino in Bristol, the concerns are founded on fact.

3.33 It is wondered by the Panel how the planned transformation of a parish by the NC "in accord with the pastoral plan of Kiko rather than that of the Bishop" (items xvii, xviii), itself accords with the specific guidance of Pope John Paul II on 9 December 1985:

a. it is the right and duty of the Bishop to give directives for pastoral activity;

b. that communities cannot put themselves on the same plane as the parish community itself as a possible alternative.

There is no information from the NC to the Enquiry about the pastoral plan for each of the parishes though the Panel is aware, by reference to the 'Visitation Reports,' of an indicated long-term policy for St Nicholas of Tolentino but without expressed terms.

3.34 Evidence to the Panel shows that the Parish Priest not only has to agree to the introduction of the Neocatechumenal Way at a Parish, but the Parish Priest is also at the centre of the first community (item xxv). Though there might be existing association/societies/groups within the Parish, the Parish Priest is called upon to 'govern' and to understand the NC process of Christian initiation (item xxvi) including the new language and theology (item xxvii). Whilst this governing or central role accords with the exhortation by Kiko that the pastor has 'to discern', the representations indicate strongly that such 'discernment' and 'governing' gives rise to a sense of loss or of general disinterest by their pastor for the remainder of the Parish - including the associations because "he is too busy and too involved with the NC." As noted previously (para 2.37), Pope John Paul II has indicated that the Parish Priest must be 'in love with all groups'.

3.35 From the frank explanations to the Panel by the Parish Priests, their NC 'governing' involves their own 'conversion' to the NC process, to become a NC and be subject to the various stages and scrutinies of the NC process as the community of which they are a member. Two of these priests initially were dismissive of the Neocatechumenal Way, one acknowledging that he resented (as did some parishioners) their approach; the third of these Parish Priests perceived the NC as a challenge.

3.36 There is evidence to the Panel that where the 'challenge' is not acceptable to a Parish Priest (in Section 4.D below), or he does not open the Parish door fully to the NC, any member of that Parish who is or who wishes to follow the Neocatechumenal Way seeks a NC community elsewhere; this can involve a round trip of 100 miles or more.

28

- 3.37 Given the preceding point that the NC is not accepted by a Parish Priest, it would be more correct to assert that some priests need a community (item xxxi) because this helps their calling to serve the Lord; there is evidence to the Panel about this. But there is also critical evidence to the Panel that, rather than enhancing his preaching (item xxxi) the pastor who is NC offers words of 'darkness' and a constant reminder about a personal cross along life's journey which some representors do not welcome.

3.38 The claim by Kiko that he does not govern any priest (item xviii) is probably correct

taken literally, but there is evidence to the Panel, and direct experience by the Panel, that there is a form of hierarchical control within the Neocatechumenal Way stemming from the head - Kiko Arguello. "where the NC communities exist within a Parish, it appears strongly to the panel that a form of 'NC Authority' is exercised by the NC National Team over the communities and this relates also to the Priest member of a community. As representors assert, their Pastor appears to be subject to dual authority. It seems to us that this 'additional authority' can be quite palpable given the papal guidance about Episcopal authority and obedience, the latter having to be in the spirit as well as in the letter of juridical authority."

3.39 Whilst noting the critique about the forms of ecclesiology (items xix to xxii), there is evidence to the Panel that 'shared ecclesiology' or 'collaborative ministry' exists and has existed for 10 years or more at St Peter's in Gloucester and at Sacred Hearts in Cheltenham without there being significant NC involvement so far. But the situation at St Nicholas of Tolentino in Bristol has changed over the years, involving displacement in particular ministries, so that there now exists an 'NC Power Base' in the catechetical and liturgical ministries. The transformation (item xvii) seems to be not far from completion there.

3.40 The Panel notes that this 'NC Power base' came to fruition just before the completion of a Diocesan report on the deployment of clergy. This 'NC Power Base' might be in accord with the NC objective that the whole community (communities) is expected to be involved in the Parish (item xxxii) but it seems most opportune, perhaps no more than a coincidence, that the 'NC Power Base' should come into being so as to ensure continuity of the NC at St Nicholas of Tolentino as envisaged generally by Kiko (item xxxiii), even when 'all the pastors have changed.'

3.41 Later pages of the presentation paper by Kiko explain the Neocatechumenal Way, as one akin to the Holy Family of Nazareth involving: Annunciation (the Kerygma), Gestation, Birth, Time of Nazareth, Baptism, Mystery of His Death and Resurrection. Kiko goes on to indicate:

i. The community has the 'mission' to be a mirror for the individual member who probably thinks that he/she is already 'converted 'But in the community there always appears the neurotic, the fool, the idiot, the proud one;

ii. they are together once a week for the celebration of the Word, on Saturday to

celebrate the Eucharist and once a month they have a 'convivence ' where each

- indicates the condition of his/her faith in their life. The community shows that it

29

is difficult for a person to accept another who bothers or destroys him/her. By

this, there is a discovery that the person has (very) little faith;

iii. the mission of the 'pre-catechumenate' period is to put the community to soak,

listening to the Word of God During this time, many people come from sin but

have not left sin. Listening to the Word they are soaked very carefully We have

to carry 'the lost sheep very carefully because the least carelessness will frighten

this person away;

iv. in these two years (1)re-catechumenate), descending a little bit, this brother/sister

discovers that he/she does not have eternal life within even though the person

goes to Mass. Because he/she responds to the sin of another (person) with sin,

with violence; the person does not have within himself/herself the ability to carry

the sins of the other. The person needs the divine nature;

v. when the person in community realizes that he/she does not have faith, or has little faith, we put the person in front of his/her baptism. The person asks: "what do I have to do to have faith?"; ask it of the church:

vi. we have discovered that conversion cannot occur in a person if first the person

does not have the injustices of his/her history (the cross of history), illuminated

for that person. We begin to talk about the cross and to ask the person: "Are you

willing to let us help you enlighten your cross or are you scandalized by the

monstrosity of your history, by what has happened to you in your life?"

vii. Then there is an exorcism, that of baptism, always in reference to the baptism

already received, baptism is not repeated The first part of baptism is renewed

in the first scrutiny The Bishop comes:

vi ii. In this first scrutiny we put the person in front of money, affections and before the cross. We say to the person: "Christ says that no-one who does not renounce all his goods can be my disciple". The goods referred to are the affections: wife, children. The person cannot be an idolater. After listening to the Word of God we put the person in front of his/her history, of his/her life today;

ix. The Bishop asks: "what is your cross?" The person answers publicly in the a

liturgy (the scrutiny). The Bishop asks whether this cross is illuminated by the

cross of Christ; what does it mean for the person? Because the person does not

rebel against the cross, nor against God, nor against their history, the process

of deepening the faith can begin. The person begins to discover what faith is,. that

it is a grace, a gift from God to be asked for;

x. There are three phrases: Pre-Catechumenate, Catechumenate and Election. The catechumenate begins with the first scrutiny Afterwards there is a second scrutiny where a sign with respect to goods must be given. Then there is an Initiation to Prayer; then the Traditio, the Reditio, the Our Father and the Election. After the Election, there is the renewal of baptismal promises (ie the white tunic).

30

xi. This process is known (by Kiko) as the rite of baptism of adults by stages involving three phases: Humility, Simplicity and Praise. In other words, the people realise that it is necessary to be small in order to be a Christian and that this simplicity can only be given by the Lord in prayer.

xii. We teach the brothers/sisters to pray an infused prayer; they pray the Psalter everyday like a priest. During the Lent and Advent seasons, they pray lauds in community before going to work. We have them discover the Paschal Mystery; this is the most important thing.

3.42 Since most of the final pages of the presentation paper by Kiko relate to the NC liturgy, their Eucharist and Baptism in particular, it is appropriate again to pause and to give the Panel's reflections about the NC process for the Christian Initiation of Adults - or perhaps 'further instruction' might be more apposite in some cases, bearing in mind the written and oral evidence submitted for the Panel's consideration.

- 3.43 There is written evidence to the Panel from NC members and Non-NC, as well as direct experience in consequence of the meetings with the NC communities at the three Parishes, that these have a spectrum of people ranging in age from 14 years to the octogonerian. These communities have five priests in total including one fairly recently ordained. The Panel is aware that these communities formerly had priests who are either elsewhere in the Diocese, elsewhere in the country or who no longer exercise their priestly ministry.

3.44 The Panel knows that these communities have the neurotic and those of less than normal capabilities or outlook (item I); the vulnerable are attracted as are the 'outsiders' previously at or near the edge of society. It also has those who variously demonstrated their faith prior to the establishment of the communities, from prayer groups for example, and they might have the proud ones (item i). There must undoubtedly be those of sound disposition in a cultural as well as a spiritual sense. The Panel has not sought to, nor would it be able to place the individuals into categories.

3.45 Nor would the Panel be able or would wish to form moral judgements though it understands, from this presentation paper and the submitted evidence, that the Neocatechumenal Way over a long time (20 years) seeks to lead people towards salvation. The fresh or new start involves a 'descent into the waters of baptism' by the individual, a sharing of their inner self with their brothers and sisters in a community until they are eventually deemed to have reached a 'mature faith'. This process is subject to periodic scrutinies by the NC Catechists. For some of the NC members and former members, this scrutiny process is a cause of considerable stress. [Dates of the scrutinies at the three parishes are submitted by the NC National Team; the first scrutiny in June 1983 (for St Nicholas and St Patrick's) with the last in May/June 1992 (for St Nicholas, St Peter and Sacred Hearts)]

- 3.46 As for the presence of the Bishop at the scrutinies (item vii), there to enquire about the individual's cross of life (items vi and xi), a NC member points out that the presence of

31

Bishop Alexander with the NC communities gives a seal of approval to the scrutiny process and to the NC itself indicating: "that it will not go off the rails as with other groups" experienced by the representor. The information given to the Panel about the Bishop's presence at the scrutinies shows that he attended a first scrutiny in June 1983 and again in November 1985 but not thereafter. Though there were scrutinies after 1985, the only inference to be drawn by the Panel is that these personal examinations by the NC Catechists, and in the presence of the community, do not enjoy the Bishop's affirmation. It is understood by the Panel that this has been made known.

3.47 The Panel has no doubts that the Neocatechumenal Way is beneficial to some people, but limited in number at a Parish judging by the numerical strength of the NC communities at the Parishes after so many years. The number at St Nicholas of Tolentino is stated by the NC (at the meeting) to be declining. That in the Panel's opinion cannot be attributed to the edict of March 1994 which precludes any new catechesis. The Panel has not sought details of membership; most of this can be gleaned by reference to the representations and the attendance lists at the meetings if necessary. There are those in the communities 'of the faith' previously, seemingly committed then in a prayer group (at Cheltenham) but seeking greater direction by means of the NC Way. There are those also in the communities without any previous belief or with antagonism towards God or to Christianity in particular.

3.48 In representations by Non-NC parishioners, there are perceptions of warmth and assistance by the NC members to one another within the community, but also of aloofness and spiritual superiority because they are in the 'Way.' Individual situations are cited where a person is perceived to have been harmed by the NC; some representations from former members explain this, also that pressure has been applied to join or to remain within the NC Way. From the representations, the Panel has little doubt that the NC Way has caused some spiritual, personal as well as mental anguish for people. In that regard, we are not forgetful of an explanation by Canon English that the NC itself causes 'division' within an individual, wondering whether or not to follow the NC Way.

3.49 This investigation shows that the NC Way lacks a definable structure as well as real clarity about evangelising objectives. This perhaps is not altogether surprising because the NC Way is in its infancy despite the alacrity with which it has spread. It is stated to have only an oral tradition. An initiator (Kiko Arguello) recognised that he awaited the inspiritation of the Holy Spirit to lead the NC Way to fruition. There is conflicting information as to whether the eventual aim is to transform the whole Parish to follow the NC Way, to have a 'community of communities.' From the papal guidance to the priests of the NC Way in 1985, it could be construed that such a transformation for a whole Parish is not possible because the NC communities cannot replace or take the place of the Parish Community. There is obfuscation about the aims and objectives for a Parish.

3.50 As far as we know, a pastoral plan has not been produced for the three parishes involved in substitution for any pastoral plan by Bishop Alexander, to quote a theme from the Presentation of the Way. Nothing appears to have been clarified with concerned parishioners about the future of their Parish. So many are under the impression that a NC take-over will occur sooner or later; their concerns are not allayed yet they see or are

32

aware of changes, described by some as subtle but nevertheless realised. There are complaints in the representations about a lack of openness by the NC Way; those are justified in the Panel's view. The Panel cannot help but applaud a commendable aim of the NC Way to steer people towards God from what is described by some NC representors as materialistic idolatry. Yet the NC process itself seems to be so dependent ultimately upon one person - Kiko Arguello, who not only appears to have the final say as to when a person after many years will receive a 'white tunic' but, as explained to the Panel, is the ultimate catechist.

33

Part 2

4 A THE ENQUIRY; VIEWS AND EXPECTATIONS

4 A. 1 Section 1 of the report identifies the procedural facets of the Enquiry indicating that Bishop Alexander established a Panel of Enquiry to consider the claim made by some parishioners about perceived harm and so on under Canon 212. The parishes involved are: St Nicholas of Tolentino in Bristol, St Peter in Gloucester and Sacred Hearts at Charlton Kings in Cheltenham. Representations have been submitted from these parishes, from Non-NC, as well as from parishioners who explain that they no longer attend at their own Parish; the reason(s) is given, usually relating to the presence of the NC Way at their Parish.

- 4 A.2 In addition, we are advised in a representation from Fr Trafford (Sacred Hearts) that he

and the other parish priests involved in this investigation also requested an Enquiry when

meeting Bishop Alexander in June last year. He asserts that: "ft is very damaging for (he

Church and for the Pope that the NC Way is labelled as a 'Cult' or as a 'Sect' when this

is a charism which is deeply and wholly of the Church. Such things need authoritative

refutation." Prior to considering this representation from Fr Trafford, the Panel was not

aware that there had been a joint request for the Enquiry; some equivocation was

perceivable in that respect when the Panel sought clarification about this from Canon

- O'Brien and Canon English.

4 A.3 On the evening prior to the first meeting (with the NC communities) at St Nicholas of Tolentino, each member of the Panel was 'visited' at home by a member from the 'Team of Itinerant Catechists for the Neocatechumenal Way' (London); this visit was unexpected, unwarranted and potentially prejudicial to the open and fair objectives set by the Panel for the Enquiry. Perhaps more seriously, the hoped for personal privacy for the Panel disappeared as a consequence of such a visit. In considering the other evidence put to the Enquiry, the Panel has disregarded this 'procedural irregularity' in seeking facts as well as in assessing the validity of some assumptions and opinions.

4 A.4 Each member of the Panel received the 'NC Book' from the NC Itinerant visitor together with a personal letter. Amongst other things, the letter states: "We are the itinerant catechists responsible for the Neocatechumenal Way in Great Britain. We are glad that this enquiry into the Neocatechumenate is being held, so that the truth may come to light. We hope that a better knowledge of the Neocatechumenal Way will clear up any misunderstanding or bad feeling." After explaining that the book contains the discernments about the Neocatechumenate by Popes Paul VI and John Paul II with a hope that it is of assistance in the Panel's task, the latter continues: "When a new reality appears in the Church, it always arises perplexities and persecutions. Saint Ignatius of Loyola was happy when such investigations were held, because they were a service to the truth."

4 A.5 Notwithstanding the above noted misgivings, the Panel acknowledges and appreciates the stance taken by the NC National Team about this Enquiry. It perhaps does not need to be stated, but we hope that the Enquiry and our findings will be of service to the truth about the Neocatechumenal Way for Bishop Alexander and the Clifton Diocese. We are aware

34

of the interest from outside of the Diocese.

4 A.6 The response to the neutral question: "What has the Neo-Catechumenate done for you and your Parish?" far exceeds the Panel's expectation. We believe that this shows genuine concern by parishioners, some of whom may not previously have expressed a view about the presence of the NC Way at their Parish, either from a position of affirmation or from a neutral stance or from a position of opposition in the light of experience gained over the years. Sixty seven representations were submitted from parishioners or former parishioners or NC members who are not 'parishioners' at St Nicholas of Tolentino; a few representors of opposition to the NC Way likewise are not 'parishioners'. Sixty representations were submitted from St Peter's and one hundred and fifty two from Sacred Hearts.

4 A.7 In the main, the representations were submitted in the January, February and March period but there continued to be flirther representations with accompanying 'papers' or 'articles' about the NC Way after March. At the request of the Panel at the Non-NC meeting in Sacred Hearts (29 June), another seventeen representations were received almost all responding with ideas about 'solutions for the fliture.' Quoted extracts from representations are necessarily selective but the aim is to give the gist of the points made within the context of the selected topic. Numerous topics are raised; the most or the more important of these were identified by the Panel prior to the meetings (public and private) in order to obtain clarification or to offer an alternative proposition for comment at these

meetings.

4 A.8 The meetings in each Parish were (')y intention) on a separate basis, for the NC members

and for Non-NC parishioners or persons with an interest (for or against) in the NC Way. a The aim was to hear different and probably opposing views without this giving rise to heated argument known by the Panel (from the representations) to have occurred previously at 'Parish Meetings.' The character of these meetings was markedly different. Generally speaking, there was an atmosphere of 'orderliness' and 'togetherness' at the NC meetings with an occasional forceful view expressed. Attendance (perhaps 40 to 50) probably reflected the numerical strength of the NC communities at each Parish.

4 A.9 At Sacred Hearts, the venue was the same for each meeting. That for the Non-NC was very well attended with perhaps as many as 150 people. The venue at St Peter differed; for the NC members it took place in the 'Upper Room' on a Saturday afternoon; for the Non-NC (and NC supporters) this took place on a weekday evening and, to the Panel's surprise, this too was very well attended with 100 or so present. In the belief that there would be insufficient capacity at the Dunstan Centre, the Chairman chose the Apostle Room at Clifton Cathedral as the venue for a meeting of the Non-NC at St Nicholas of Tolentino; this was a mistake and is acknowledged. Only about 30 people attended. Also in attendance were the media at this meeting and for the evening meeting at St Peter.

4 A. 10 The media did not attend the NC meetings. But the presence of a TV reporter outside the Dunstan Centre was not acceptable to the NC National Team and seemed likely to prejudice the meeting itself. In the event, the Chairman resolved the situation.

35

4 A. 11 A representor who is not NC, but who is clearly in support, hopes that the Enquiry seeks the truth as in a court of law, dealing only with facts and rejecting hearsay evidence or emotive sound bites. The Panel has explained at the NC and Non-NC meetings that the Enquiry is not adversarial though the co-operation of people is sought in offering the truth. Facts are welcome but the subjective responses of the NC and Non-NC are borne in mind by the Panel. That is an inevitable part of the investigation.

4 A.12 'Official' information from Diocesan sources has been used by the Panel with a view to verifying, if possible, whether or not assertions or opinions are tenable in the representations. 'Parish Returns', 'Visitation Reports' and 'Financial Statements' covering the relevant periods for each Parish have been considered.

4 A.13 There is a variety of expectations from the Enquiry; a few of these are noted here:-

xiii. 'My hope now is that the Enquiry will bring an end to our struggle. I welcome this Enquiry as a chance for outsiders to take an objective, disinterested overview. In our experience, it is very hard for people to grasp the enormity and depth of the problem or to appreciate the deep anxieties felt by the parishioners."

It is certainly true that the Panel members are not from the Parishes involved and hopefully, are able to take objective views about the NC Way presence at the three parishes. The overview necessarily attempts to form a balanced assessment of any advantages or disadvantages of the NC Way at the parishes, as gleaned from the representations and the meetings and the individual meetings with the clergy. The overview has regard to papal guidance about the Neocatechumenal Way and especially the guidance about the flindamental importance of the Parish in the Church's structure.

4 A. 14 At the end of a comprehensive representation from a NC is an expressed hope that:

"As a result of this Enquiry, some serious and ftuuful consideration might eventually be given to the lift and role of lay communities, of whatever description, in the Catholic Church.

This hope is set in the context of the Vatican II Decree on the Apostolate of the Laity (Apostolicam Actuositatem), Article II, a short paragraph stating: "To attain the ends of their apostolate more easily it can be ofadvantageforfamilies to organise themselves into groups." This representor also refers to the Report of the National Pastoral Congress in Liverpool (1980); the section under 'Evangelization' is quoted: "We must devise a strategy that will establish apostolic groups as the base of the local community, so that our Parishes are a community of communities. " The last mentioned description is, by now, very familiar to the Panel in the context of the NC Way though our research reveals that the quote is not quite correct at the end; it should instead be "communion of

- communities."

- 4 A. 15 The NC representor continues with a pointed and a very relevant comment:

36

"It was evidently not anticipated, either at Vatican II or at the NPC, that the presence of such a group or groups in a Parish might be seen by some other Catholics as a threat to the hft of the Parish as they know it, with a resulting reaction of considerable resentment and hostility. Vatican II certainly did not foresee this and, to my knowledge, the Church has not yet addressed the problem in any official document or statement."

Having previously quoted authoritative references about communities within the Church, this NC representor clearly recognises that there is a problem. The Panel notes particularly the expression: "as they know it."

4 A. 16 This Enquiry seeks to assess the extent of indicated problems and, after reaching conclusions about identifiable difficulties, to offer some recommendations for the way forward if possible. Bishop Alexander will doubtless decide whether this report, in total or in part, should be treated as an official document of the Clifton Diocese. We anticipate that this will be so. The Panel wonders also whether it could reasonably form the basis for a statement by the Conference of Bishops in England and Wales about the roles of 'lay communities' in the life of the Church; we are not aware that such a

statement has been made previously. The Panel is of the opinion that such a statement is desirable though recognising that this might not be possible for some time.

4 A.17 A post-meeting respondent concerning the future state: "Surely it is important to decide a ifthe NQ is of itselfa good thing or not. Therefore the teams's recommendation should

either say the NC is very good and ought to be introduced throughout the diocese or that the NC is bad for most people, or even, is intrinsically wrong and should be banned." Given the papal support for and experience of the NC Way, the Panel declines to become involved or to express views as to whether the NC is 'intrinsically wrong' though there might be a need to study later the 'NC Theology' and the 'NC Catechesis' in this country notwithstanding the indicated approval to the NC liturgical celebrations by the Congregation for Divine Worship.

4 A. 18 In the main, the Panel has regard to the general approval of the NC Way by Pope John Paul II though mindful, as indicated in Section 2 of the report, that this is not without qualification. An essential feature of the Panel's task is to conclude, in the light of the papal guidance, whether the NC Way has been beneficial or harmful overall to the three Parishes. And if it is perceived to be harmful, how can this best be rectified in the spirit of charity and care particularly as there are so many souls involved. We regard our Terms of Reference to be as in the preceding two sentences.

4 A. 19 Finally, at the meeting with Mgr J C Buckley (Section 4 H below refers), the Vicars General responsible for pastoral matters provided the Panel with a copy of his letter sent to the Editor of the Catholic Herald. The final paragraph states:

"My involvement with the Neo-Catechumenate has been and always will be with the understanding that the Bishop is the arbiter ofwhat needs to be done in order to pasture the flock of Clifton. As the Bishop has already chosen to deal with the

37

present matter through an enquiry team I am content to leave it there. I have already agreed to co-operate fully with the team whenever it wishes to consult me."

38

4 B PERCEIVED PAPAL ATTITUDES TO THE NC WAY

4 B. 1 In his representation to the Enquiry, Fr Trafford draws attention to part of the August

1990 letter of general approval for the Neocatechumenal Way by Pope John Paul II. The probable implications of this papal letter have been considered and the Panel's interpretation (without a canonical adviser) are given in Section 2 of the report. We do not therefore intend to repeat here the points commented upon earlier but to concentrate upon the extract and to demonstrate an understanding of points within it that bear upon his overall representation.

4 B.2 The first point relates to the evangelical fruits of the NC Way: "As Bishop of Rome I have

- been able to verify the abundant fruits of personal conversion and fruitful missionary

impulse in the many meetings I have had, in the Roman parishes with the NC

communities and their Pastors, and in my apostolic journeys in many nations." It is

obvious to the Panel that the Holy Father is describing his own 'first hand' experience as

the 'Bishop of Rome', gained in the particular (Catholic) circumstances of the Eternal

City and of course in the particular circumstances observed by him in 'many nations.' He

uses the word 'verify' - 'test the truth or accuracy of' - 'bear out' to quote just two of the

dictionary explanations; and he uses the word 'abundant' - 'plentiful' - 'rich in' to quote

again from a dictionary. Those authoritative observations are irrefutable in their particular

context or circumstances. In our opinion they cannot be ignored by anyone called upon

to consider the NC Way as an instrument of Catholic evangelization. The Panel has

regard to these.

4 B.3 We also have regard to the Holy Father's specific laudatory comments about the NC Way

- 'from experience': "taking into account the new vitality which animates the Parishes; the missionary impulse and the fruits ofconversion..." Again the Panel has regard to the particular observed circumstances. As the Bishop of Rome, the Holy Father has witnessed for himself that parishes have there and elsewhere been 'animated' with a 'new vitality'; they have been made 'more lively' or have been given 'life' to achieve a new 'capacity to endure and perform flinctions.' This is 'verified' by the Holy Father; he has seen this for himself. The Panel must accept that authoritative observation. This observation does not however state that all parishes in Rome have gained a 'new vitality' or have been 'animated' by the NC Way. Indeed evidence to the Enquiry suggests that perhaps no more that 25% of the parishes have the NC Way.

4 B.4 It should be noted that the Panel declined an invitation to visit Rome, albeit with some

reluctance, because our task primarily is to consider the particular circumstances in

Bristol at St Nicholas of Tolentino, in Gloucester at St Peter and in Charlton Kings

- (Cheltenham) at Sacred Hearts thence to assess if possible whether these parishes have

been made: 'more lively' or have been given 'life' or 'new capacity to endure and

perform functions'. In straightforward terms, have these parishes been 'animated' in

consequence of 16 years, 11 years and 8 years presence respectively of the

Neocatechumenal Way? The aim of the Panel is to reach conclusions about each having

regard to various topics or factors.

4 B.5 The quoted extract continues: "I acknowledge the NC Way as an itinery of Catholic

39

formation, valid for our society and for our times." The extract is then emphasised in the representation: "It is therefore my wish that the brothers in the Episcopate - together with their presbyters- value and help this work for the new evangelization so that it may be implemented according to the lines proposed by its initiators..." The quote ends at this point though the Panel is mindful that it continues so as to state: "in the spirit ofservice to the local Ordinary and in communion with him in the context of the Unity of the local church and the universal Church." The whole is identified earlier by the Panel as a 'primary indicator' of Pope John Paul II (at paragraph 2.11). Not noted previously was the word 'wish'. The Panel refers again to this word wish in B.7 below and in G.18 below.

4 B.6 As is to be expected, there are other NC representors who rely upon the perceived support by the Holy Father for the NC Way in such terms as: "In January 1988, the Pope warmly approved of the NC Way;"... "the Pope's writings about the NC Way are most supportive;"... "I know that it follows exactly all the teaching of Our Mother Church, uncomprisingly and emphatically, and is wholeheartedly approved by the Pope - who is God's vicar on earth and who has the ultimate earthly authority on right and wrong"... "It (ie the NC) is found world wide and its teaching, liturgical practice etc have been studied and authenticated by the relevant Congregations ofthe Church which has led to it being recommended by the Holy See as a means ofspiritual formation relevant for our time." This necessarily is a selection intended to convey the overall point by the NC members that the NC Way enjoys papal support.

4 B.7 We consider this general letter of approval in Section 2, noting that the papal affirmation is not without qualification, pointing in particular to preceding guidance by the Holy Father in December 1985 (at paragraph 2.28) also that the Holy Father makes plain that the NC Way is but one among other instruments of Catholic evangelization. Apart from two other points, little would be gained in the Panel's view by further comments. The

first relates to the last quoted extract and the word: 'recommended'; the Panel has not a been able to identify this word in the general letter of approval by Pope John Paul II

though this letter does state: "It is therefore my wish..." The second point is that such an expression does not convey to the Panel a directive or the like by the Holy Father; we interpret this to be discretionary, a matter for the local Ordinary, to judge having regard to the pastoral situation for which he is responsible.

4 B.8 A Non-NC representor comments in a broader vein: "I have been surprised that the very public written and spoken support ofPope John Paul for the NC movement has not been reflected by the Hierarchy of England and Wales. Perhaps it needs such a lead and involvement to move it to a more English Way." This last mentioned is very interesting and perceptive because it suggests a possible need for a modification of the NC process to reflect appropriately the 'English Culture' or that of the UK in general. This has been explored by the Panel but with only very limited signs of flexibility in response from the

NC.

4 B.9 Reference to a lack of interest by the Hierarchy is rather wide of the mark. The Panel is aware of indicated attitudes to the NC Way by some Bishops in the UK and the very recent published announcements by or on behalf of Cardinal Hume about NC seminarians

40

at Allen Hall and the NC presence in three parishes of the Westminster Diocese. An opponent of the NC Way has submitted to the Panel copies of letters received from the late Archbishop Worlock (November 1991) and from Cardinal Hume (November 1992). Amongst other things, Archbishop Worlock stated: "I am reasonably sure that reservations regarding this particular (NC) movement will find adequate expression

- amongst the episcopal delegates," the latter referring to a forthcoming (at that time) Synod of European Bishops.

4 B.1O As for the correspondence from Cardinal Hume (permission to repeat obtained), his expressed position was: "I do think that the NC, like many other Movements, is a growth point in the Church. ft certainly does help those who belong to it. But I do think that new Movements always need to change and develop. Any idea ofa Movement being divisive or claiming to be 'holier than thou' is, ofcourse, quite unacceptable." Cardinal Hume perceives positively that the NC Way is a growth point in the Church but obviously wonders whether the NC Way might be changed and developed to suit a different European culture, an idea put forward in the quoted extract above. Apart from the Easter Vigil, the seemingly stock answer is: "No change" and "This is a charism ofthe Church."

4 B. 11 It conveys to the Panel a 'mind-set' approach that unaccountably fails to recognise changes in the Church itself over the centuries, not least those stemming from the Second

- Vatican Council. Indeed, the existence of the Neo-catechumenal Way is seen to be inspired by the Holy Spirit, in consequence of that Council. The NC Way itself is described as a 'radical' way to formation, so different in application and over a long time to that of 'traditional Catholicism' in this country. Whilst appreciating the sense of loyalty by the NC communities in still meeting on the eve of the Sabbath for their Liturgy

- of the Word, as if to demonstrate the efficacy of the lines proposed by the initiators, they deprive themselves it would seen of the opportunity to celebrate their Eucharist in the week. This is permissible under the terms of the edict in 1994 and the subsequent extension to the end of the current Episcopate. It is difficult to understand such an unbending approach.

4 B.12 The Panel wishes to draw attention to the situation bearing in mind views about possible change to the NC process as indicated in representations. But this also signifies to the panel that the NC Way insists upon its own terms within a Parish, contrary to the unequivocal guidance given by Pope John Paul II and Pope Paul VI about the importance of the 'Parish' and the 'Parish Community.'

41

-4 C INITIAL INTRODUCTION OF THE NEOCATECHUMENAL WAY TO THE CITY OF BRISTOL

4 C 1 The heading refers only to the City of Bristol as the location for the NC Introduction to the Diocese of Clifton because there is no evidence to suggest that the 'NC Itinerants' (as they are known) called anywhere other than this City during September 1979. That is some 11 years prior to the papal letter of general approval for the Neocatechumenal Way (August 1990, report at Section 2) and some 5 years after the first reported (in NC Book) address to NC communities by Pope Paul VI on 3 May 1974.

4 C 2 Recollections about this NC introduction and initial visit some 17 years ago rest primarily with Bishop Alexander and the trio of Parish Priests, two of whom at the time (Canon O'Brien and Canon English) were (respectively but not as a Canon) the PPs of neighbouring parishes (St Nicholas of Tolentino and St Patrick) on the eastern side of the city's central area. The third PP Fr Trafford was (at the time) the recently appointed Curate (Assistant Priest) at St Nicholas who speaks Spanish. In September 1982 he became the Bishop's private secretary until January 1986 thence spending about a year away from the Diocese. Fr Trafford has explained to the Panel that this year was spent mainly as a 'NC Itinerant' in S. E. Asia and Ireland.

4 C 3 It might seem merely to be of historic interest for us to report the recollected information about the 1979 visit by the 'NC Itinerants.' The Panel nonetheless regards this recollection of events as an important part of the investigation, because it bears upon our conclusions as to what might or might not have been known by Bishop Alexander about the NC Way at the time.

4 C 4 There are differing recollections of events, not really surprising due to the passage of time

and the developing/developed controversy about the NC Way during the intervening

period. Recollections by Bishop Alexander might also be less precise because he has been

'visited' by 'NC Itinerants' on three occasions, seemingly on each occasion to announce

the 'Good News' of the NC Way. The first occasion was in 1979 (as noted earlier) again

in 1984 and again a few years later though the exact year is not known. It is known by the

Panel that the hospitality accorded to them on the last occasion was not the same as in

1984 when the Bishop invited the 'NC Itinerants' to have breakfast; this is described in

a published article: 'An Unusual Mission' (1)y Fr D Carthy) submitted for the Panel's

information. This article also refers to a gathering of some 900 NC catechists in Rome.

The Panel is aware that Canon O'Brien and Fr Trafford (then private secretary) attended

- this event in 1984.

4 C 5 In September 1979, it seems that two 'NC Itinerants' (a Spanish priest and an Italian layman) called at St Nicholas of Tolentino. This visit is described as providential by Canon O'Brien because a Parish Mission (by the Redemptorists) had not long been completed; there was a perceived need to maintain or to rejuvenate the impetus generated by the mission. Though Canon O'Brien was not present, Fr Trafford could converse in Spanish and was able to hear about the NC Way from these NC Itinerants whose English is described as very limited. Fr Trafford had heard previously about the NC Way and its radical form from a former tutor at Valladolid. The representation from Fr Trafford also

- 42

explains that the 'concept of community' was familiar to him in consequence of his voluntary work in the immediate years prior to his appointment to St Nicholas of Tolentino.

4 C 6 Fr Trafford admitted to the Panel that his initial understanding of the NC Way was limited; the ideas were difficult to grasp and that would also be so for Bishop Alexander. Canon O'Brien had not heard previously about the NC Way; he too acknowledged to the Panel that the NC Way is difficult to understand initially. Such is the impression conveyed to the Panel by Bishop Alexander in an answer to a question of clarification with him: "I knew very little about the NC Way at the time."

4 C 7 There are contradicting accounts, between those of Canon O'Brien and Fr Trafford as to whether the 'NC Itinerants' were or were not taken by car to meet Bishop Alexander at St Ambrose (Clifton). This might appear trivial but the Panel is aware that the Bishop does not speak Spanish; hence the presence of a Spanish speaking Fr Trafford would be helpful to serve as an interpreter and especially if; as explained to the Panel, this introductory meeting was lengthy. Apparently the NC Itinerants returned to St Nicholas of Tolentino, stayed there for 10 days and, with an indicated (or an implied) blessing from Bishop Alexander, they are reported to have visited 23 out of 24 Parishes within the city. Limited time is stated to have precluded their visit to other parts of the Clifton Diocese.

4 C 8 Canon O'Brien acknowledged helpfully to the Panel that Bishop Alexander could not have known much about the NC Way in 1979 but no ddubt thought it worthwhile: 'to give it a try.' That too is the candid response by Canon O'Brien about his own perception and an adverse reaction (initially) of the NC Way at the time. There is no evidence to indicate that Bishop Alexander gave a formal approval (ie in writing) for the NC introduction at St Nicholas of Tolentino or elsewhere in Bristol. However, the Panel is particularly mindful of the responses to them that: "the Bishop would not have been expected to prohibit the NC Way, given the evangelizing message conveyed to him by the NC Itinerants," and perhaps assisted directly in that regard by Fr Trafford. Our investigations reveal that other influencing factors could bear upon a tacit acceptance of the NC Way at the time in Bristol; these are considered a little later.

4 C 9 The Panel notes Bishop Alexander's stated recollections of the NC introduction believing

this to have stemmed from a meeting with Canon O'Brien and Fr Trafford, whom he a recollects was his private secretary at the time. However, the recollection about the latter

is awry because Fr Trafford became his PS in September 1982 after which no doubt opportunities presented themselves to discuss the NC Way. The Panel believes that Bishop Alexander was advised at the time, perhaps tentatively given the 'limited knowledge situation,' by Canon O'Brien and Fr Trafford (as the PP and Curate/AP) to allow the NC Way to be introduced at St Nicholas of Tolentino.

4 C 10 As noted previously, the Panel is mindful of the Bishop's stated perception about the NC Way: "it seemed to have something to offer in its goal ofrenewing faith and undertaking outreach to those alienated from the Church. Because I respected Canon 0 'Brien and Fr Trafford as good priests, I was ready to give permission for them to go ahead." It is not out of place to record here that such an affirmative view about 'these priests' (ie to

43

include Canon English) has been re-stated to the Panel by Bishop Alexander in the context of this investigation.

4 C 11 The NC Way was introduced at St Nicholas of Tolentino in Lent 1980 (on the basis of a detailed statement from the NC National Team - Fr J Guzman etc) but, as adduced by the Panel, there was no verbal or written guideline between Bishop Alexander and the NC Team of Catechists as to the form of catechesis or a specific requirement on the part of the Bishop to ensure that this 'radical form of adult catechesis' would actually be: "in service to and in communion with the local Ordinary." Perhaps because this papal guidance was still in the offing (by some 10 years), perhaps also because there was an unspoken and an understandable measure of 'trust' between Bishop Alexander and these 'good priests.' Whilst for a time any unspoken or loose understanding was not too consequential, it was to become so as the years progressed and reactions to the NC Way became more and more manifest.

4 C 12 Canon English, a former PP at St Patrick in Redfield, has explained helpfully to the Panel that the 'NC Itinerant' visit in September 1979 was not then welcomed because a Parish

- Mission was also in progress at St Patrick's. He also gained the impression that these itinerants, with their broken English, were not men of the Church. There were considerable problems in this Parish and, following the mission, it again became lifeless. Knowing vaguely about the NC Way, in bringing people to God, they were invited back to that Parish later in 1979. During the initial catechesis, thought by him to have been in 1980 or 1981, he and the NC catechists necessarily visited Bishop Alexander to explain

-- the situation.

4 C 13 The Panel is grateful for this explanation noting also that about 10 people joined the NC Way at St Patrick's but the successor PP (in 1983) was not keen to have the NC Way there. There is an explanation that some of the ten therefore joined a community at St Nicholas. Detailed information submitted to the Enquiry by the National NC team indicates: "Afier consultation with Bishop Alexander on 26.6.85, those remaining in the First Community at St Patrick's were invited to continue in the first Community at St Nicholas...."

4 C 14 As noted before, other Parishes in Bristol were visited by the 'NC Itinerants' during September 1979. There is a written account of such a visit by the former (now retired) PP of Sacred Hearts at Westbury-on-Trym; this account (made available to the Panel) describes: "a long and unpleasant skirmish with the original disciples sent to Chfton." Be that as it may, the submitted details and the representations (oral and written) show that only two parishes in Bristol, St Nicholas of Tolentino and St Patrick in Redfield, introduced the NC Way in response to the visit by the NC Itinerants in 1979. The vast majority of Parish Priests in Bristol at the time declined the NC Way invitation.

4 CiS Noted previously ("aragraph 3.35), Canon O'Brien and Canon English initially were dismissive of the NC Way and needed to be convinced about it. Fr Trafford saw the NC Way as a challenge. None of these priests could have had no more than a rudimentary grasp of this NC process; each has admitted frankly to the Panel that their current knowledge is so much greater but that is to be expected after 16 or so active years in the

- 44

NC Way. What is much less clear is the extent to which Bishop Alexander has been apprised of the NC process bearing in mind that in June 1993, he still wondered whether the NC Way could operate side by side with Catholic Association or groups existing in the parishes.

4 C 16 As if to underline the point about limited knowledge of the NC Way at the outset, there is a very pertinent reported comment by Kiko Arguello when addressing briefly the Synod on 'Penance and Reconciliation' at Rome in 1983. A paper submitted to the Enquiry about this Synod gives the comment at the outset: "I think that it is almost impossible in an intervention as short as this to understand what the NC Way is;" that comment is well understood by the Panel. Only with the valued help of submitted papers about the NC, especially the 1993 'Presentation of the Way' by Kiko Arguello referred to so extensively in the preceding section, has it been possible to fill in some gaps in our knowledge about the NC Way.

4 C 17 Unless Bishop Alexander had been apprised with reasonable clarity and detail about this 'radical process of adult catechesis' at the outset, and this obviously was not the case, the 'give it a try' approach is quite understandable and tenable. But when this trial of the NC Way illustrates flaws and generates adverse perceptions in the Parishes, this process of conversion is justifiably called into question when exercising Episcopal authority. Nevertheless, it seems to the Panel that very strong rumblings of concern or outright criticisms about the NC Way at St Nicholas of Tolentino were not wide spread for a

number of years after 1980 although Canon O'Brien acknowledges that some a

parishioners reacted with anger about the NC Way when it was introduced there.

4 C 18 The evidence leads the Panel to a conclusion that the NC Way enjoyed the tacit, ifnot an a

explicit, approval by Bishop Alexander to be at St Nicholas of Tolentino, and subsequently at St Peter in Gloucester and at Sacred Hearts in Cheltenham, as long as this

presence was on a 'side by side basis.' Though the papal letter of general approval for the a

NC Way did not materialise until some three years after the NC Way introduction at

Sacred Hearts, a responsibility was nonetheless placed upon the NC Way to ensure that

Bishop Alexander was well informed about these parishes and about the progress or

otherwise of this radical conversion process so that it could be seen to exist: "in the spirit

ofservice and in communion with the local Ordinary."

4 C 19 As for 'other influencing factors' mentioned earlier, aNC representor from Sacred Hearts Parish draws attention to (but does not submit) the Report of the National Pastoral Congress in Liverpool (1980) thence quoting part of the section entitled 'Evangelization.' The quote states: "We must devise a strategy that will establish apostolic groups as the base ofthe local community so that our Parishes are a community ofcommunities." The Panel is particularly grateful to this NC representor in providing such a timely reminder that the 'community' concept was a matter of discussion at the NPC in 1980, hence the consequent intention to form a strategy about this. Whilst there is no information to the Panel whether such a 'strategy' ever materialised, we are aware that months of preparation preceded that national event, that this Diocese had a particular interest in

Evangelization, and a key figure at the NPC came from this Diocese. a

45

- 4 C 20 The point is that the 'community concept' was uniikely to have been unfamiliar to Bishop Alexander and other leading clerics of this diocese at the time, that is prior to the NPC. That time (Autumn 1979/80) seems to have coincided with the unexpected arrival of the NC Itinerants in Bristol, offering the diocese generally and Bristol in particular an opportunity to form 'community of communities' on the NC Way basis. Set in the 'Catholic Community' atmosphere of the time, it is hardly surprising that the 'NC Itinerants' persuaded (if indeed real persuasion was necessary) Bishop Alexander to permit the introduction of the NC Way on a trial basis. As noted above, Bishop Alexander also listened to the advice offered to him by Canon O'Brien and by Fr Trafford who, by that time had experienced and had been touched by the idea of 'community.'

- 4 C 21 The NC representor from Scared Hearts makes a pointed and a very relevant comment:

"ft was evidently not anucipated, either at Vatican II or at the NPC, that the presence of such a group or groups in a Parish might be seen by some other Catholics as a threat to the life ofthe Parish as they know it, with a resulting reaction ofconsiderable resentment and hostility. Vatican II certainly did not foresee this and, to my knowledge, the Church has not yet addressed the problem in any official document or statement."

4 C 22 Although the NPC report has not been used to verify the above quote about 'community of communities,' the Panel has had recourse to the paper: 'The Easter People' produced in consequence of the NPC. The reform of structures within the Church in England and Wales is treated in a section called: 'A community offaith; bishops' conference, diocese, deanery, parish, groups.' Whilst the Bishops welcomed the development of small groups within parishes, describing them as: "a source ofstrength," they noted that they must not be: "exclusive in themselves nor seen as an alternative to Parish commitment." Thence it is stated: "Much will depend upon the Priest in the Parish as to how fully these groups are in fact integrated into the Parish community."

4 C 23 A pointed note of caution was therefore raised by the Bishops in 1980, that small groups must not be exclusive nor seen as an alternative to Parish commitment. Those words of warning seem to have been echoed by Pope John Paul II in 1985 as part of his address to

- 2,000 priests who follow the NC Way (para 2.27 above). The Panel perceives the guidance then given by the Holy Father to be unequivocal, directed to the priests whom our own bishops had, in 1980, recognised that much would depend upon them: "as to how fully these groups are integrated..." In the context of this topic, it is beneficial to repeat the papal guidance:

"It is the task ofthe pastors to make an effort to see that the parishes benefit from the positive values that these communities can bring and as a result be open to the communities. However it must be very clear that the communities cannot put themselves on the same plane as the Parish community itself as a possible alternative. On the contrary, they have the duty to serve the Parish and the local Church."

46

4 D SUBSEQUENT NC INTRODUCTION TO PARISHES AND DISCONTINUANCE

4 D 1 Details provided by the National NC team in September indicate that a NC catechesis was given in Advent of 1982 at St Bernadette in Whitchurch, stated to have been at the

- request of Fr Harding. These details also indicate that a 'follow-up catechesis' took place

in Advent 1983, but Fr Harding decided not to have further NC catechesis and the NC

Way was discontinued there.

4 D 2 A member of the Panel has met Fr Harding for more particulars. He explained that he was not happy about the NC presence; there were two particular grounds of concern:

c. There was an over-emphasis upon sin, not unlike 'Jansenism';

d. Questions were not answered except to the extent that the enquirer would be invited to attend the next NC meeting.

The NC method was not acceptable to him because, as the Parish Priest is accountable to the Bishop, it is necessary to know where the Parish is going in the future.

- 4 D 3 From the early representations, it seemed to the Panel that the NC Way had been

introduced at Holy Cross in Bedminster. That is confirmed in the submitted details from

the National NC team; a catechesis was given in Advent 1984 and then: "The team visited

Bishop Alexander to discuss the situation created by the retirement ofFr Nugent and the

arrival of a new PP. Since the new PP did not wish to have the NC in the Parish, the

community was discontinued as of2& 11.85. Individuals wishing to continue the NC were

- invited to jo in the second community at St Nicholas."

4 D 4 These submitted details show also that a catechesis was given during Lent 1982 at St Edmund, Calne at the request of Fr Meehan but: "this was to form a second community at St Patrick's and St Nicholas. The catechesis was halted on the eleventh evening as the PP had changed his mind and no longer wanted the NC in his Parish."

4 D 5 These details also indicate that a catechesis was given at St Peter in Gloucester during Lent 1985, following the earlier appointment of Canon English as the Parish Priest; and at Sacred Hearts in Charlton Kings during Advent 1987 following the earlier appointruent of Fr Trafford as the Parish Priest.

4 D.6 Although the NC Way existed initially (ie in 1980) at two parishes in the eastern part of inner Bristol, it was also introduced at two other parishes in the city not long afterwards, only to be discontinued by the Parish Priest after a very short period. At one of these, the Parish Priest discerned the NC process to be negative in approach; he was also concerned about the future of his Parish and mindful of his accountability to the Bishop.

4 D 7 Prior to the submission of detailed information in September, the Panel was not made aware about the introduction of the NC Way at St Edmund in Calne. There is no elaboration as to why it was discontinued there so quickly but we understand the reason for the discontinuance at St Patrick. Where discontinuance took place, this was at the

47

behest of the Parish Priest. We do not know whether these setbacks for the NC Way served as an early signal to Bishop Alexander in 1985 because it had been found wanting after an initial try in three parishes though the Panel is mindfiil that the NC communities at St Nicholas of Tolentino were formed from various parishes; it became and remains a focal point for the NC Way in Bristol.

4 D 8 It was known by the Panel from an early representation that the NC Way had been discontinued at St Patrick in Redfield, the writer expressing relief that this had happened after first explaining the initial involvement and reactions: "I attended the NC in the beginning when it came to St Patrkk's. ft was the wish ofFr English that we shouldjoin. But it soon became apparent that these meetings were not for me. ft did not make sense. IregardedFr English far more superior to those foreign people who wanted to teach me about God in a '?:ew way' - by going backwards." After explaining the adverse reactions at a personal level, the writer concludes: "There were many people who felt like me and were very glad when the NC came to an end and peace and unity was restored once more!" Whether there were in fact 'many people' cannot be assessed but the perception of restored peace and unity by this representor cannot be ignored by the Panel.

U

48

4 E PARISHES WITH THE NC WAY

4 E. 1 There are now three parishes with the NC Way: St Nicholas of Tolentino in Bristol, St Peter in Gloucester and Sacred Hearts at Charlton Kings in Cheltenham. Their Parish Priests are respectively: Canon J O'Brien, Canon M English and Fr A Trafford.

4 E 2 Information about these parishes is from various sources. Some is submitted by representors, some is provided directly to the Panel from official records after this has been requested. For ready reference, a table for each Parish has been compiled (included separately below) to show, as far as possible, the main identified features such as the Catholic population, Mass attendance, Catholic societies or groups and so on dating from 1973 (St Nicholas), 1979 (St Peter) and 1984 (Sacred Hearts). These dates relate to the situation prior to the appointments of the Parish Priests.

4 E 3 St Nicholas of Tolentino: is identified in the Diocesan Directory as Bristol No 2. The

centenary of its consecration was celebrated last year. At the Non-NC meeting, those

present explained that the Mass celebration, with Bishop Alexander as the Principal

Celebrant, attracted a congregation of more than 250 people that filled the Church. The

Panel has not sought authentication for the figure or about the capacity of St Nicholas.

4 E 4 The church and associated buildings are on the fringe of St Paul's, an 'Inner City Area'

with a poor reputation; the expression 'Inner City Area' is associated normally with social

deprivations in varying degrees and form. The generally accepted extent of the 'Parish

Area' includes St Paul's, Newtown, St Philip's Marsh, Russell Town (part), Upper

Easton, Lower Easton (part) and just beyond. At the northern extremity is St Thomas

- More Comprehensive School and St Maximillian Kolbe Chapel. The Panel is not

completely convinced that the description 'Inner City Area' fits the Parish Area; there are

parts not within the inner city.

4 E 5 Canon O'Brien explains in his representation that the 'Parish Area' has about 50,000 inhabitants with, it is believed, no more than 1000 people who attend a church on Sunday. He also asserts that there are literally thousands who suffer in a multiplicity of ways with: "Gods ofviolence, drugs and alcohol." It was wondered by the Panel whether such a bleak picture applies more to St Paul's than to the Parish Area generally but he has explained to the Panel that Easton is a difficult locality where the character, formerly terraced houses, was changed years ago. He cites other examples of change, including the M32 motorway provision (in the late 1970's or early 1980's) explaining that he found this Parish so different compared to earlier years as a curate at St Nicholas. He also quotes a view of his predecessor (Canon MeCarron) that: "the heart had disappeared from the Parish (ie in 1979) when taking over." Canon O'Brien nevertheless emphasised to the Panel that the Parish was not dead then and it is not dead now.

4 E 6 'Parish Returns' give details about the Parish, included in the accompanying table. There is presently one Mass at St Nicholas on Sunday (l0.30am) and a weekday Mass. Mass is celebrated at St Maximillian Kolbe Chapel on Sunday (9am) and at Horfield Prison (9am), where Canon O'Brien has been the Chaplain since 1981. From 'official documents,' Mass attendance since 1979 is indicated:

49

1979      1985       1987       1989       1991       1993       1994       1995       

621       402        371        325        327        285        265        221        

These figures tend to support assertions made in the Non-NC representations that: "Many people have left St Nicholas as a result ofthe NC" This is considered later by the Panel.

4 E 7 By contrast, members of Catholic Associations remain fairly steady with annual figures in the range of 'just under 90 to just over 100' for the 1985 - 1995 period. The indicated organisations are SVP, UCM, Legion of Mary, Neo-Catechumenate though these are not really perceived (1,y Kiko Arguello) to be a group or a Catholic Association. The 'Parish Return' for 1995 indicates that there are 19 (part-time) Pastoral Assistants (Parish Pastoral Staff) though their existence is denied by Canon O'Brien; reference to them cannot be clarified. A Finance Committee is required in a Parish by Canon Law 537. There were three members (Non-NC) in June 1988, two have since died and the third has moved from the Parish. In June 1993, the five members were all NC.

4 E 8 A Parish Council did not exist in November 1978. It is identified as 'Parish in Council' in 1983, meeting four times a year. It is similarly described in 1988 without reference to the meeting numbers or members. Though a representor explains that General Parish Meetings are of the past, another includes a copy letter of one to Bishop Alexander (19 November 1993) indicating that at least two Parish Meetings had taken place in the recent past; the procedures at the meetings are criticized. The 'Parish Returns' indicate a pronounced increase in the number of catechists between 1994 (22 No) and 1995 (45 No) compared to the preceding eight years when the number ranged from 10 to 19. Reasons for such an increase are not explained but might relate to the 'Core Group' arrangement and other facets formed in November 1993 by Canon O'Brien.

4 E 9 There is an adjoining school, St Nicholas Primary School, with about 186 pupils aged between 4 and 11 years. The Secretary of the Diocesan Schools Commission has been interviewed by the Panel Chairman due to specific concerns raised in the representations about the school and the NC. This is considered later.

4 E 10 Representors explain that there are buildings associated with the Church such as Parish rooms and another building, formerly a canteen, that is used for NC liturgies. The Panel has visited this room.

50

ST NICHOLAS OF TOLENTINO: PARISH INFORMATION

               1973         1978        1983         1988        1993        1995     

Gen           50,000       40,000      40,000                   40,000                
Population                                                                            

Catholic       2,500       3,500        3,200                    2,000       2,000    
Population                                                                            

Average         900                      430         340          290         221     
Sunday                                                                                
Mass                                                                                  

Average         10                       15           25          25                  
Weekday                                                                               
Mass                                                                                  

Average         300         180          250         200          100                 
Communion                                                                             
(Sundays)                                                                             

Easter         1,100     Not known   600 approx   250 approx                          
Duties                                                                                

Congregatio  Marginal      Static    Fluctuates  Diminishing  Diminishing             
n            increase                                                                 

Legion of       Yes                                   4            5                  
Mary                                                                                  

SVP             Yes                      Yes          7            6                  

UCM            Good          27          Yes          20          17                  

Guild of                     21           6           5                               
St Stephen                                                                            

Special                                                           26                  
Ministers                                                                             

Prayer                                   Yes          19                              
Groups                                                                                

RCIA                                                Once a       Being                
                                                  Fortnight   reorganised             

Neo-Catechu                               2           3            3                  
menate                               communities communities  communities             
                                                     (70)         (65)                

Liturgy                                                           15                  
Group                                                                                 

To be        130 (80)     55 (137)     10 (36)     21 (29)     Nil (23)               
confirmed                                                                             

Marriage                                                                              
Preparation                                                                           

Engaged                                                                               
Couples                                                                               
Club                                                                                  

Pastoral                                                                      19      
Assistants                                                                            

Parish          Yes          No      Parish-in-C    Parish                            
Committee                              ouncil      Meetings                           

Finance                                           3 members    5 members              
Committee                                                                             

51

4 E 11 St Peter: the church, presbytery and associated buildings are located by a very busy road junction on London Road, close to the railway station as well as to the bus station. It lies by the city centre.

4 E 12 Canon English explains in his representation that Gloucester has a population of over

100,000 though less than 5,000 go to any church on Sunday. He asserts that over 95,000 are completely unchurched, that many have lost the sense of sacred and christian values are far from them. He cites the tragic examples of the 'West murders' of national

notoriety in recent local history and quite close to the church; he states: "We see how a close we are to death and how little respect there is for hfe." During the Panel's meeting with him, Canon English explained his perception of a 'Battle for God' in Gloucester given the loss of the special values mentioned previously and the recent provision nearby of places of worship for non-Christian residents.

4 E 13 Afier the appointment of Fr (Canon) English as PP in October 1983, the Mass provision at the weekends was reduced from 8 to 5. From the representations, it seems that a former Solemn High Mass was replaced by a 'less solemn liturgy without Latin.' From the 'official records' Mass attendance figures for the 1983 to 1995 period are:

1983      1984       1985      1987       1989       1991      1993       1995       

2529      1573       1425      1187       1240       968       900        817        

These figures tend to support assertions made in the Non-NC representations that: "Many people have left St Peter's as a result ofthe NC' but the Panel is mindful of at least two factors that bears upon these figures: one is the creation of a new Parish and the others are reduced provisions of Mass with a major change to the solemn liturgy.

4 E 14 The compiled table provides an at a glance view of the Parish details:

52

ST PETER PARISH INFORMATION

                1979      1984         1985    1989         1993    1994     1995    

General         35,000    90,000               60,000               60,000           
Population                                                                           

Catholic        3,300     6,000        4,200   4,000        4,000   4,000    4,000   
Population                                                                           

Av. Sunday      1,600     1,700        1,425   1,290        900     969      817     
Mass                                                                                 

AY. Weekday     20 to 25  30                   40                   40               
Mass                                                                                 

Av. Communion   1,100     1,000                400                  700              
(Sundays)                                                                            

Easter Duties   1,350     1,200                600                  700              

Congregation              Diminish                                  Static           

Schools         3         3                    3                    3                

Hospitals       +         +                    +                    +                

Prison          +         +                    +                    +                

Societies: KSC  40        +                    24                   +                

CWL             20        +                                         +                

SVP             24        +                    8                    +                

Mother Teresa             +                    10                   +                

Catenians                 +                                                          

Life                                           10                                    

Spuc                                           6                                     

Cath Assoc                             140     335          121     121      35      
Mems                                                                                 

Groups:                                                             +                
Prayer                                                                               

Rainbow Club                                   20                                    

Senior Citizcn                                 30                                    

Special                   9                    24                   40               
Ministers                                                                            

Adult                     *see                                                       
Catechesis                footnote                                                   

Finance                   7                    5                    4                
Committee                                                                            

Parish Council  No                             Being                +                
                                               formed                                

NC                                             45                   +                

RCIA                                           +                    +                

Catechists                             16      92           45      44       37      

Baptism                                                                      0       

Euch                                                                         7       

Conf                                                                         10      

Marriage                                                                     3       

Children                                                                     0       

RCIA                                                                         7       

Others                                                                       10      

Pastoral Ass                                                                 2       

Reception                              10      4            8       10       11      

First                                  45      44           62      15       49      
Communion                                                                            

53

4 E 15 The table is an aid in assessing changes between 1985 (NC introduction) and 1995. A number of societies existed in 1984 though the numbers involved are not recorded; the same societies with additions seem to exist. Quite marked changes in the numbers for Catholic Associations are illustrated over the period under consideration. Pertinently, there is a clear indication in 1984 of an intention to: "start the Neo-Catechumenate." In answer to a question about catechetical formation of adults is: "We are about to start the NC. We have hadfive Parish Renewal weekends during the lastyear." This is mentioned here; it provides clarification for the Panel because Non-NC representors wonder whether Bishop Alexander approved this introduction to the Parish.

4 E 16 In the period since 1983, there has been at least one Assistant Priest at St Peter namely:

Fr David Ryan (1985-1988), Fr Bamabas Page (1985-1991), Fr Philip Newman (1990), Fr Kevin Hennessey (1992 - 1995) and Fr Timothy Nurse (in post). In addition to these, priests from outside of the Diocese include: Fr Fechin McCormick (1991 - 1992) and Fr James McGuire SDB (in house).

4 E 17 Non-NC representors seek to demonstrate the characteristics of St Peter's prior to the arrival of Canon English towards the end of 1983. Perhaps the most informative scenes given abdut the Parish are from two people, one who was interviewed seems fairly ambivalent though knowledgeable about the NC, whereas the other is seriously concerned about the adverse effects of the NC upon the Parish. The latter explains in a representation that Mgr Roche was the PP for 50 years stating: "history speaks for him and of him but the Parish needed to be brought up-to-date into post Vatican II awareness. Fr Michael caused a very significant enhancement of what already existed but he made some unpopular changes; some were upset by this but others saw these changes as necessary to help move together as a Parish community." This view is endorsed by another writer who points out that: "Fr English was like a breath of fresh air.

4 E 18 The interviewed person explained that there used to be a 'Latin Mass' involving a 'four part choir' which attracted people from outside the Parish. The music attracted a congregation from a wider area who came to listen as well as those to attend Mass. This celebration was stopped when Fr English came; some parishioners were upset by this and the organist especially so. Mass times were changed. A 'Folk Mass' was introduced. The changed liturgical scene for Sunday Masses was disliked by some people. Another representor indicates that the number of Masses was reduced from 8 to 5, as confirmed by Canon English who also confirmed to the panel that people were upset by these necessary changes. The Mass attendance figures show a considerable reduction from 2529 in 1983, when Fr (Canon) English became the PP, compared to 1425 in 1985, when the NC was introduced to the Parish.

4 E 19 The Panel agrees with a representor that this 38% reduction in Mass attendance could not be attributed to the NC presence. That changes were instigated by Fr (Canon) English, as the new PP, is not a matter of argument nor is there substantive evidence to suggest that deep-seated resentment remains among parishioners at St Peter's about liturgical or other significant changes made 11 or 50 years ago. It is obvious to the panel that Canon English perceived quite properly the need to bring this Parish into a post Vatican II

54

situation, but there is no evidence to suggest that the spiritual and pastoral condition of St Peter's was fragile or parlous in 1985 50 that it needed to be 'revitalised' or 'animated' by introducing the Neocatechumenal Way. The 'introduction' is considered as a later topic.

4 E 20 A representor, not in favour of the NC, has submitted helpfully a 'Parish Profile'; this is reproduced for reference purposes:

LEADERSHIP: Canon M English Hospital Chaplain,

(Parish Priest) Governing Body of High School

Infants School

Dean

Hon President Social Club

Promoter of NC

Fr Tim Nurse: Chaplain Infants School

(Assistant Priest) Prison Chaplain

First communion

& Confirmation Programmes

RCIA

Fr Jim McGuire Hospital Chaplain

(Assistant Priest) Promoter of NC

MASS TIMES: Open and published

SACRAMENTAL LIFE: Open and published

LAY MINISTERIES: Eucharistic ministers

Readers

RCIA (6NO)

SISTERS: Poor Servants of the Mother of God, 2 help with the elderly and hospital; 2 teach full-time in Infants School

SCHOOL: Infants, Junior, High School

FUNDING: Published in bulletin, covenant system but big debt

LAY INVOLVEMENT IN PARISH-BASED ACTIVITIES (open and advertised):

SVP, Knights of St Columba
Sacramental Programmes, CWL
Playgroup, Mothers & Toddlers,
Co-Workers of Mother Teresa
Brownies and Rainbow Guides, Guides, Cubs and Scouts

PARISH CLUB: Used for all groups; managed by competent lay management and offering facilities to wider Gloucester community - particularly local elderly parishioners and others as a daily meeting place.

55

4 E 21 An opponent of the NC indicates that the Parish in Council organised a Mission some 3 or so years ago. There is a perception by this representor that: "Great fruits were born; people were again touched by the Holy Spirit. Yet hardly any growth was experienced because the PP indicated that the Parish did not need a return visit to assess whether progress had been made following the suggestion by the Mission." Because this point seems to be contentious, a copy of the Mission report has been submitted to and has been considered by the Panel; it is dated 3 November 1991, covering a 3 week Mission by the Zion Community that began on 12 October 1991. The report of this Mission is laudatory but the Panel perceives signs within the parts about 'Parishioners' and 'Parish Groups' that indicate scope for change.

4 E 22 For 'Parish Groups' the report indicates that: 'many individuals and families are committed to the NC community." These were met: "they are sincere, committed people with a genuine desire to grow in Christ." This part of the report suggests 'Open Days' for all groups for awareness purposes but pertinently states: "All the groups need to be recognised as equally contributing to the glory of God, personal sanctification and reaching out in love to others. To achieve this, there must be communication and discussion in an honest effort to appreciate each others' contribution to the building up of the Kingdom of God in the Parish family. " A little later is a pertinent comment: "Equal opportunity avoids division or destructive criticism - which is not of God. Instead everyone will affirm that good that is being done and recognise each other's call."

4 E 23 In the Panel's opinion 'division' and 'destructive criticism' were recognised by the Mission in October/November 1991; suggested means to deal with this were put forward. Significantly in the Panel's view, the report indicates that: "There is a hunger for spiritual growth in the Parish, a good sense offamily community and a great desire for the Parish to be more open;" and "There is a hunger for spiritual growth in the Parish, a good sense offamily community and a great desire for the Parish to be more open'." and "There is a desire by many to begin a Prayer and a Scripture sharing group." This is heartening because, in a way, it bears out a more general assessment by the Panel of a need for Adult Catechesis, but the 'NC Way is not regarded as appropriate by the parishioners. Even with the presence of the NC Way at St Peter's "there is (or was in 1991) a desire to begin aprayer anda Scripture sharing group. " The NC was clearly not regarded as a means to that end, nor for that matter was the RCIA.

4 E 24 This Mission report also indicates (under 'Parishioners') that: "The parishioners are prepared to commit themselves to the spiritual development and on-goingformation of

the Parish community - given the necessary training for the responsibilities involved" a

A little later, this part of the report indicates: "The potential for leadership is here among the people, with an eagerness for unity and sharing at all levels." The Panel regards the latter as a sign, detected by the Mission almost 5 years ago, that St Peter's was not a united Parish but there was an underlying wish for that to be so.

56 a

- 4 E 25 Sacred Hearts: is a post-war church (1957 Ded 15.10.82) with a presbytery and a large Parish hall. Fr Trafford very helpfully provides a description: "This Parish is predominantly home-owning and middle class - and the houses are not cheap. ft is a very active and 'involved' Parish with many good things going on. There is a spirit ofcooperation and good wilL This is well exemphfied in our Eucharistic Ministers who not only ensure that five ofthefr number are on duty at each Sunday Mass, but also take Holy Communion to nearly 40 sick or housebound people every Sunday after 10. OOam Mass. We also have a very busy and well-run Parish hall, not to mention other activities and groups." The compilation table below provides information about the societies and groups.

4 E 26 Descriptions about the Parish prior to or upon arrival of Fr Trafford at the beginning of

1987 are far too numerous to mention. In the main, they describe a Parish with many activities and attributes including those spiritual as well as social or material. A few are not wholly complimentary, expressing some reservations about the spiritual life or character of the Parish prior to 1987. However, an indicated Mass attendance during the weekdays of some 30 or so people is hardly an indicator of spiritual lethargy in the Panel's opinion.

4 E 27 Given the inevitable variety of descriptions as expressed by parishioners not in the NC

- Way and by NC members, it is not easy to select one in particular that could be regarded as truly representative though most are laudatory. In order to demonstrate this variety at the Non-NC meeting, twenty people were invited to identify (on a form) whether quoted extracts about the Parish could be attributed to a representor belonging to the NC Way, or to an opposer of the NC or to a non-committed parishioner without strong views; seventeen of these forms were returned for the Panel's consideration. One of these noted that 'supporters of the NC' had not been identified; some people in that category attended this meeting. On four of these returned forms was a comment in these terms: "A very difficult exercise," thus confirming the difficulty of selecting a representative description.

4 E 28 However the exercise was quite revealing because of the four highest accredited 'scores', two were correct in identifying the writer's category (Non-NC and NC) but the other two (Non-NC and NC) were not. These four quoted extracts are repeated:

xiv. "I have lived in the Parish for the past 4 years. As someone not in the Parish in what I have been told were 'better times' before the NC, I must say that I am encouraged that the active participation of the laity - as Eucharistic Ministers (about SO), Readers and first Communion Catechists (all ofwhich I understand already established before the NC arrived) - continues, as do the parent -run classes for children at non-Catholic schools, the pram and pushchair group and the J and P group, largely through the efforts of some committed parishioners, as indeed they should be in the modern Church. We have found the Parish to be a close-knit and friendly community despite the falling off in numbers."

This quote from a Non-NC parishioner, was identified correctly in 15 of the 17 returned forms. It describes some characteristics of the Parish as it exists now noting particularly:

57

'the falling off in numbers' (during the past 4 years). Importantly in the Panels' view there is reference to : "largely through the efforts of some committed parishioners" whom we identify as Non-NC and have reason to believe that their commitment has remained consistent over the years in order to retain the numerous activities noted below in 'Parish Information.' Amongst some of the reasons noted in representations is a determination to carry on or to retain control notwithstanding a perceived lack of direct encouragement by their PP because his interest is (stated to be) directed mainly to the NC Way and its members in the Parish. The Panel is mindful of some views expressed that their commitment would be in question were the strained situation at Sacred Hearts to remain unresolved.

xv. 'The Parish, for me at any rate, before Fr Tony's arrival was very much a shallow veneered social organ isation and, if like me, someone did not fit in, they were simply ignored"

This quote, from a NC representor, was identified correctly in 12 of the 17 returned forms. Seemingly these were able to recognise (or perhaps to empathise with) the particular personal situation described, thence perhaps to relate this to NC members critical of an aspect in the Parish sometimes commented upon in less than favourable terms in other representations. In one representation at least, a proponent of the NC is indicated to have said: "There is no love in this Parish." That judgemental assessment, if reported correctly by the representor, seems to be an isolated view.

xvi. "The Parish was recognised then (ie in 1974) to be an excellent Parish. ft was well organised with modern liturgy and particular blessed in lay participation. Parishioners were rightly proud of their Parish, but, if there was one criticism which could be made it was that this pride had begun to turn into selfcongratulation and even to complacency

ft was clear to us that before Rev Trafford called his first NC meeting, the word had been spread that several key people who were important organisers would strongly oppose its introduction to the parish. They bridled at what they saw as an implicit criticism of their own previous efforts and way of hfe.

ft has to be said that we find a majority ofparishioners are not aware or concerned about pro' or 'anti' NC factions. They belong to what they and we still perceive as, an above average well organised Parish, headed by a deeply respected and well-loved PP."

This quote, from a Non-NC representor, was identified incorrectly in 13 of the 17 returned forms. There are less than complimentary comments, some are particularly pointed in referring to complacency and apparent reactions to perceived criticisms; these are not unusual traits nor is it unusual for those involved as organisers in a Parish to wonder and worry whether their roles will continue upon the appointment of a new PP. This quote might nonetheless convey more than an element of truthful discernment, that all was not as well as might be thought in the Parish, hence the need for some change.

58 a

The Panel does not regard the quoted representor to be a supporter of the NC.

xvii. "I came to Charlton Kings in 1987 The Parish is predominantly home-owning and middle class. ft is a very active and 'involved' Parish with many good things going on. There is a spirit of co-operation and good will. We also have a very busy and well run Parish Hall, not to mention other activities and groups."

This quote is part of the description by Fr Trafford; it was identified incorrectly in 14 out of 17 returned forms as being from a Non-NC writer. The Panel clarified with him whether the 'present tense' description in the last quote could be applied also to the past, he agreed. We therefore take the description as applicable for the 1987 situation at Sacred Hearts. While noting the caveats in quote (iii) that all was not entirely fine, the Panel wonders how the introduction of the NC to such an 'involved' Parish could bring about further 'animation' because on the face of it, it could not be described as 'inactive.'

59

SACRED HEARTS PARISH INFORMATION

                        1984        1987      1989     1991       1994       1995   

Gen Population        12,000 -              30,000 +                                
                       15,000                                                       

Cath. Population   1,300 - 1,400    2,500     3,000    3,000     3,000      3,000   

Av. Sunday Mass       600-700        600       676      656       497        442    

Av Weekday Mass                                                                     

Av Communion                                                                        
Sundays                                                                             

Easter Duties      More than 50%             No idea            No idea             

Congregation         Increasing              Static           Diminishing           

Schools                  No                     +                  +                

Hospitals                +                      +                + see              
                                                               directory            

Societies &                                                                         
Associations                                                                        

KSC                                                                                 

CWL                      +                      +                  +                

SVP                      +                                                          

Mother Teresa            +                      +                  +                

Catenians                +                                                          

Life                                                                                

SPUC                                                                                

Legion of Mary           +                      +                  +                

Serra                    +                                                          

Young Wives              +                      +                                   

Altar Servers            +                                                          

Folk Group               +                                                          

CMAC                                            +                  +                

NC                                              +                  +                

Newman                                          +                  +                

Carmelite 3rd                                   +                  +                
Order                                                                               

Justice & Peace                                                                     

Fraternal                                                                           

Ecumenical Group                                                                    

Rosary Group                                                                        

Journey in Faith                                                                    
for Youngsters                                                                      

Our Lady's                                                                          
Catechists                                                                          

Marriage Clls                                                                       

Parish Council                                  +                  +                
Finance Group                                                                       

RCIA                                            +                  +                

Womens Group                                                       +                

Reception                6            1        11        3         18         2     
(Converts)                                                                          

First Communion                      18                 22                    12    

Youth Groups             +                                                          

Confirmation             54          54        52        3         28         2     

60

-4 F PARISH CLERGY AND ATTITUDES TO NC

4 F 1 Ths topic is based upon the written representations to the Enquiry from Canon O'Brien,

Canon English and Fr Trafford; it is also intended to cover points of clarification made

at the (public and private) meetings with the Panel - the respective dates for the latter are

24 July, 1 August and 26 July. The Panel wishes to acknowledge the courtesies and

- assistance given to us when we visited their parishes. Though realising that an

introductory paragraph for each might not be necessary, we do so to indicate an

understanding about their priestly ministry.

4 F 2 Canon O'Brien: He was ordained in 1946, celebrating his Golden Jubilee this year. Bishop Alexander presided at the celebration Mass at St Nicholas of Tolentino; the church was flill. The Panel attended. He became a Canon of the Clifton Diocese in September 1986 and is a former Dean of the Bristol East Deanery. For the past 16 years, he has been a NC explaining in the representation that: "The NC is one ofthe many ways ofpersonal renewal that have arisen within the Church since the Vatican Council." The Panel is grateful for an acknowledgement that the NC Way is one of a number of ways for personal renewal.

4 F 3 He explains that after appointment as PP of St Gregory's in Salisbury (March 1966), more than thirty (charismatic) prayer groups were established in different parts of that Parish. Looking for something more radical and after studying 'Marriage Encounter,' he perceived this to be a source of renewal for the Church at its base and subsequent experience showed this apostolate to have an impact on the Parish. Couples either were not interested or were unmarried at St Nicholas Parish; in fact, eleven marriages were convalidated in one year by him. Realising that 'Marriage Encounter' was not appropriate, he explains how he was introduced to the NC in 1980 following the NC Itinerant visit in the autumn of 1979.

4 F 4 His representation explains that: "in focusing their attention on me as a man and as a Priest, those speaking about the NC told him 'bluntly' that the renewal ofthe Parish must start first in the heart of the PP." This radical approach was resented at first but it has enabled him to focus on the priorities of his personal life particularly with a greater awareness about the paramount importance of prayer. An initial reluctance to join the NC disappeared after 1 year. The NC provides for his ongoing personal conversion and renewal; he thanks God for this 'special grace!' but acknowledges that the NC Way is not for everyone. He is at the Reditio stage of the Way.

4 F 5 As for the Parish, Canon O'Brien explains that a mere handful of homes had a Bible prior

to the NC introduction but the reverse is now so amongst practising parishioners. There

- is no reference in the representation to Mass attendance figures; in clarification to the

Panel he explains that there is a decline throughout the Western World; it is worse in

some areas including the Parish Area. He acknowledges that some people have moved

elsewhere for Mass because of the NC Way; figures are not known, old parishioners have

died; others have moved. He wonders whether Mass attendance is the sole criterion to

assess the health and spirituality of the Parish.

61

4 F 6 Though silent in the representation about any divisions in the Parish in consequence of the NC Way, he explains very helpfully to the Panel that people in the Parish were opposed to the NC Way from the beginning; at the very first meeting there was aggravation. There have been signs of division from the beginning; there has been resentment and hostility to the NC Way even before the leading opponents appeared; hatred was demonstrated at meetings. There has been an uneasy existence for a number of years. The Easter Vigil situation brought things to the boil. The impression is that Bishop Alexander is aware of Parish restructuring with the NC at the centre. Canon O'Brien would like it to happen at St Nicholas of Tolentino; street mission is essential.

4 F 7 Canon O'Brien believes the NC Way is not a movement but a way of renewal for the Church. He acknowledges that Bishop Alexander could not have known very much about the NC Way in the beginning but like himself thought he would give it a try. Doubtless the Bishop learned a great deal more from Fr Tralford when he was his Private Secretary; there must have been discussions particularly about the first scrutiny. Implicit approval was given to the introduction for the NC Way; there were no formal guidelines from Bishop Alexander. Though the NC Way has existed in the Parish since 1980, more time is needed for it to animate the Parish. There is a need for the NC Way; it is a package that cannot be changed. It is doubted whether it could be modified.

4 F 8 Fourteen of the Non-NC representors (out of 29) offer views about their parish priest; the Panel regards these as personal and not for inclusion in the report. That said, there are strong criticisms about his involvement with and commitment to the NC Way tempered to a degree by an acknowledgement that it is very difficult for a priest in an Inner City Parish. Another point emerges too; this is loyalty to Canon O'Brien. One of these writers can be quoted in the Panel's opinion: "The majority ofthe Parish, although feeling very hurt, wish to remain loyal to the traditions ofst Nicholas - borne out by many donations" and so on. Another states: "Most parishioners are not given to writing to the Bishop to express their concern - loyalty to our PP plays a big part in this." The Panel recognises the loyalty point about by Canon O'Brien at St Nicholas of Tolentino.

4 F 9 None of the NC representors refer to Canon O'Brien but a warm acknowledgement is provided in a later representation from a NC seminarian in Rome who is from the Parish. An initial impression gained by the Panel at the NC meeting in April was of a strong affinity between Canon O'Brien and the NC members (the brothers and sisters) but the realisation is that it is more than mere affinity; as a NC, he is a member of the community; he follows the NC Way and is subject to its programme as for any other member of the community. His catechesists are akin to a spiritual director.

4 F 10 It is impossible for the Panel to offer a comprehensive assessment about his priestly ministry; his Chief Pastor will know Canon O'Brien far more that we could expect to gain in relatively short meetings. Nevertheless, the Panel is impressed by the frank responses to questions; to an acknowledgement given without equivocation that it would be an aim to re-structure St Nicholas of Tolentino with a street mission as is found in Italy. The impression is of a very experienced priest whose wish to spread the Good News is not dimmed. The Panel is mindful of the point that Bishop Alexander would be expected to give a very good reason why the NC Way should be discontinued. We are

62

also mindful of the wide respect for Canon O'Brien.

4 F 11 Canon English: He has been a priest of the Clifton Diocese since 1958. He became a Canon in June 1990 some 10 years after becoming an NC.

4 F 12 In his representation, he explains an involvement with the Legion of Mary and the Young Christian Workers indicating their value for the Church's mission prior to the Vatican Council but it became very difficult to continue with these and other organisations after the Council. He remarks that the time following the Council was one of a great excitement and anticipation, reminding the Church of the need to assist in meeting the world's problems. There was a changed atmosphere in the post-Vatican II Church, a situation prevailing in 1980 when introduced to the NC Way at St Patrick in Bristol.

4 F 13 Explaining that initially (in Autumn 1979) he was very much opposed to the NC Way, because he could not visualise the possibility of small communities in the Parish system but "eventually Isaw that Ineededto change." Indicating that the Prayers of the Church became more meaningful in consequence of the NC Way, also that: "The celebrations of

- the Eucharist and other Liturgies have become far more meaningful and living realities." He indicates a personal change for himself outside of the celebrations making better use of his time.

4 F 14 In addition, Canon English has seen many changes in the lives of other people who are NC. Examples are quoted: "People who were caught up in drugs and drink and other vices were able to change their ways and come back to be active members of the Church.... Marriages were rebuilt and several couples became open to hfe."

4 F 15 At our meeting with Canon English, he explained that people are being 'catechized' by the outside world; there is a need to be aware of this. The NC Way provides for his renewal as a priest; there is a need to replenish to compensate for: "the giving ofself in the priestly ministry to others." In this respect the NC Way is a blessing. He is very convinced that the NC Way is a necessary instrument of the Holy Spirit to combat secularism and atheism in Gloucester; he is also concerned about the influence of other religions in the City.

- 4 F 16 Canon English looks upon the NC Way as essential for his own spiritual renewal. It is most important for a priest to receive as well as to provide pastoral assistance; a two-way process is necessary to avoid becoming a 'Professional Priest.' The commuruty context of the NC with its catechesis serves his renewal purpose. Therefore the NC is personal; it facilitates spiritual growth in a deep and continuous way for him. Attendance in Rome (February 1983) at a meeting organised by the NC communities on the theme:

'Reconciliation and Penance in the Mission of the Church' has had a profound effect. The meeting was addressed by Kiko Arguello and Pope John Paul II.

- 4 F 17 In most of the Non-NC representation, there are glowing tributes to Canon English. These are personal and are not for the report; he is aware of their tone. A few representors refer to his involvement with the NC perceiving this to have differing effects upon him personally and upon his position as the parish priest. He rejects assertions passed on by

63

the Panel (verbally) that he is trapped by the NC also that the NC has a hold on him. As for the concern that personal confidences might not be respected, Canon English is very satisfied about the confidential trust within a community during the personal sharing process.

4 F 18 Canon English confirms that he is a member of the First Community at the Initiation to Prayer stage having had to start afresh following his move from St Patrick's. As for claims of exclusive dedication to the NC, he explains that the community meets on

Tuesday for about 1 Y2 hours (the second comm meet on Wednesday) and, taking into a account the convivences, on average he spends a maximum of4 hours per week with the

NC. He is aware of the assertion about the time with the NC but believes that such criticisms would not arise were he to be away from the Parish on recreational pursuits; it is the 'association aspect' which causes people to react in his opinion.

4 F 19 The Panel is in no doubt that Canon English gains so much from and is committed to the NC Way. He points to the personal hurt experienced against the charges, in July 1993, that the Parish relied largely upon the Assistant Priest for the day-to-day affairs allied to scurrilous rumours at the time of impending suspension. It is heartening for the Panel to note that he perceives the Enquiry to be of benefit in helping to reveal the truth about the NC Way so that this helps Bishop Alexander to discern and thence to make a decision.

4 F 20 We recognise the validity of the point he makes about 'association' which could cause exaggerated perceptions by those not in favour of the NC Way. Nevertheless such perceptions relate to a concern that the 'Pastor' prefers a particular group of people rather than others in a Parish. Whilst we realise that this involvement is not merely an 'association' but entails a deep spiritual awareness and growth, it might be that the quite clear guidance by Pope John Paul II to priests in the NC Way is being forgotten; he warns about the risks of seeking to relate too much with the NC Way in the Panel's interpretation. That said, there is nothing in the representations to indicate that those in need at the Parish are neglected; the opposite is the case.

4 F 21 Fr Trafford BA: He has been a priest of the Clifton Diocese since 1973. He joined the

NC Way in 1980 after being in the company of the NC Itinerants staying at St Nicholas

of Tolentino for a week in Autumn 1979. He was at the time a Curate/AP to Canon

O'Brien. Between September 1982 and January 1986, Fr Trafford was the Private

Secretary of Bishop Alexander. In 1986, he served outside of the Clifton Diocese as aNC

Itinerant in South Korea and the Republic of Ireland.

4 F 22 In his representations Fr Trafford recalls his seminary period (1967 to 1973) at the English College in Vallodolid describing those years just after the Second Vatican Council as turbulent and chaotic. Theology professors are stated to have been full of enthusiasm for the new Rites and the new-look Church but the reality of subsequent Parish Life was a severe shock because barely anything had changed. He explains how, at Chipping Sodbury (1973 - 1978), he became increasingly involved in work at hospitals for the disadvantaged and with organisations for the handicapped children, providing experience with people dependent upon others. With this volunteer involvement, a strong sense of bonding or community was experienced. The Panel recognises that in this early

64

period of his priestly ministry, the seeds of 'community' were experienced by Fr Trafford; as he explains: "I saw how important community was." He was clearly touched by this.

4 F 23 He explains the circumstances of the NC Itinerants arrival at St Nicholas of Tolentino:

"We were offered a Way, which would be on-going, which wouldform us as priests along with our people, and which would bring deep renewal of the Vatican Council to the Parish by evangelizing it. We were both familiar with Evangehi Nuntiandi (1975)." He had not forgotten: "the uncompromisingly evangelizing history" of his seminary days and realised that the NC Way offered (for nothing as with all God's gifts) the means to do this. He explains also his awareness of a need to change and to grow spiritually in his vocation as a priest.

4 F 24 Fr Trafford explains that just over 8 years after the initial catechesis, there are two communities: "a total ofabout 50 adults ranging from 14 to 87 years." Responding to accusation that the NC is perceived by outsiders to be an 'elite', he comments: "They are truly only an elite in the sense that God chose them from 30,000 people for whom I have responsibility. The numbers would probably be higher had there not been active opposiU6n (well orchestrated) from within the Parish and from Bristol." The Panel is in no doubt about the latter charge of active opposition from within and outside the Parish.

4 F 25 He perceives the NC Way as: "giving the possibility ofbecoming mature in faith" and to:

"seek the nature of Christ" pointing out that: "Nobody in the Church of Jesus Christ shouldfeel excusedfrom receiving catechesis (C.T.45)." He looks upon the NC Way and the community as helping him to grow in faith, to constant conversion, to be faithfiil to his priestly ministry, not to forget his real mission and to encourage preaching with authority what the Church teaches rather than what the world wants to hear. Citing numerous realities faced constantly in life as a priest, he looks upon the community as a place where he is deeply in touch with all humanity and which: "does not allow me to settle down and be comfortable." The NC Way pulls him towards Heaven and in his view answers the urgent call of the Church for the clergy to have on-going formation: "because of the rapid changes in the social and cultural conditions of individuals and peoples among whom priestly ministry is exercised, but also because ofthat 'new evangelization' which constitutes the essential and pressing task of the Church at the end of the Second Millenium" (Pastores Dabo Vobis 70).

4 F 26 In a considerable majority of the Non-NC representations (110 total), there is reference to Fr Trafford. These are personal and are therefore not included in the report. There are approbations in various ways, particularly in regard to unstinting pastoral care for those who are sick or for the elderly or the disadvantaged, and about his deep spirituality demonstrable at Mass in particular. A few of the representors perceive that the NC Way helps his vocation; there are complimentary representors with caveats of varying degrees relating to NC involvement or influence; there are those more strongly critical of perceived NC influence upon him. It must be noted that the letters with criticisms far outweigh in number those that are complimentary.

4 F 27 The Panel's investigations show that his NC experience over a relatively short time (1980

65

- 1987) must have created a deep impression upon Fr Trafford. The Panel believes it reasonable to conclude that by January 11987, the NC Way had been imprinted deeply into his mind and heart as a Christian on a journey towards God, as a priest called to assist others in the goal and within the ambit of the NC community over a long period of time. His mind was then set, firmly set on the NC Way; he seems to have been unmoved in that regard over the years between 1987 and more recent times. During these years he has of course been bolstered by the National NC Catechists no doubt also subject to their influence. And during those years the perceptions by some parishioners about the effect upon him as their Pastor are not or are becoming less complimentary.

4 F 28 The Panel is in no doubt that Fr Trafford retains a very strong desire and determination to evangelize, with a very strong commitment to bring outsiders to the Church and to know God. In his representation, he indicates a spiritual responsibility for many many more people in the general locality than those who are at Mass on Sundays at Sacred Hearts. Meritorious as that spiritual objective is, sight cannot be lost of the immediate responsibility as a Parish Priest and especially in a situation without an Assistant Priest. As Pope John Paul II warns: "Do not be deceived." in this NC involvement.

4 F 29 Given this mission approach directed to those outside of the Church, it appears to the Panel that there might be an inherent conflict of spiritual interest for him; perhaps a flindamental incompatibility in a secular vocation, as between the primary role of the PP in caring for an existing flock having faith in a variety of ways and levels and the more directed spiritual role of a missionary serving a wider catchment yet within a supportive but specific Christian community in his Parish sharing his strong spiritual commitment or vision in this 'particular way.' And in the 'NC Way' that does not (apparently) and will

not compromise in what they the NC, regard as the best or indeed the only way towards a

God in some reported instances.

4 F OVERVIEW BY THE PANEL a

4 F 30 In section 2, the Panel draws attention to the papal guidance in the 1990 letter of general approval for the NC Way noting in particular the 'primary indicator' by Pope John Paul II of his 'Wish' that Brothers in the Episcopate - together with their presbyters - value and help this work for the new evangelization. As we note previously (at 2.12), Bishop Alexander perceived initially (in 1979/80) the 'potential' value and help which this (NC) work for the new evangelization might have within the City of Bristol. However, we also indicate our conclusion that this initial perception of NC Way objectives and methods were not on the basis of being 'well informed' or 'well briefed or guided' by those seeking to promote an important evangelical role for the NC Way within this City. Bishop Alexander admits to the Panel that he knew very little about the NC Way at the time; the investigation shows that to be so with the three priests because they too admit to this. The Panel is gratefill for these concessions.

4 F 31 The Panel is satisfied that in 'not disapproving of the NC Way,' it was on the basis of a tacit agreement or understanding that this should be for a trial period. It could hardly be expected to be otherwise without a clear picture of what it might entail, how parishioners might or might not receive this so called 'radical method of formation.' In other parts of

66

the report, the Panel considers numerous topics that include 'perceptions about the NC Way,' both for and against; those impressions are gained from experience during a period of 16 years or so. This period is of course less in the other two parishes. Nevertheless the Panel believes that sufficient information is to hand enabling satisfactory conclusions to be drawn for the three parishes under investigation by virtue of Canon 212.

4 F 32 In reaching conclusions, the Panel also has regard to other papal guidance about the NC Way; this is considered in Section 2 of the report. Of particular significance in considering the priests who are adherents of the NC Way is the guidance by Pope John Paul II given in 1985 (included in the NC Book) and noted within paragraph 2.27 above; it is considered by the Panel in subsequent paragraphs. This section 2 also notes the papal views about "Rebuilding the Parish basing it on the NC experience." This too is borne in mind.

4 F 33 It seems to the Panel that the highlighted extracts of the papal guidance in paragraph 2.27 are particularly relevant to the investigation. These are repeated for convenience:

xviii. "It would be an illusion to believe you can serve the Gospel by diluting your charism in a false sense of humility or in misunderstood manifestation of fraternity...Do not let yourselves be deceived! The Church wants you to be priests and the lay people you meet want you to be priests and nothing other than priests."

xix. "Whatever service has been entrusted to you, you are always the representative of and 'prividi cooperatores' with the Bishop to whose authority you should feel particularly united."

xx. "However it must be very clear that the (NC) communities cannot put themselves on the same plane as the Parish community itself as a possible alternative."

xxi. "Exercising your ministry for the guidance ofthe NC communities, you do not feel sent only to one particular group but to serve the whole church."

4 F 34 It is in the context of the aforementioned that the Panel now gives views about the 'evidence,' that is the presentations by each priest to the Enquiry bearing in mind also the points of clarification given helpfiilly and willingly when we met on an individual basis. The Panel also bears in mind views expressed in representations by parishioners about 'authority', 'loyalty' and so on; this necessarily includes reference to the so called

- 'authority' perceived by parishioners to be exercised without proper cause by the 'NC National Team.' This is considered as a topic. The Panel hopes that each priest, Canon O'Brien, Canon English and Fr Trafford will read the points made below in the context of papal guidance; we urge them to do so.

4 F 35 It seemed incomprehensible to the Panel that each of the Parish Priests had not referred to Mass attendance at their Parish on Sundays in their written presentation to the Enquiry.

67

We wondered whether this might be an accidental oversight upon reading the presentation from Canon O'Brien some weeks before receiving the presentations from Canon English and Fr Trafford. This omission was in itself a surprise but more perplexing because it was a common omission. Whilst a consistency of approach to the provision of information or otherwise to the Enquiry could perhaps be expected, this omission was unexpected bearing in mind the following:-

a. The background of controversy about the NC Way in their parishes;

b. The existence of the Enquiry itself which we had been advised (in writing) was requested by the priests;

c. The known assertions by parishioners, particularly those opposed to or not in favour of the NC Way, that the NC Way had caused demonstrable harm as evidenced by defections to other parishes for Mass on Saturday evening or Sundays;

d. The availability of official figures about Mass attendance that would (and do) form a substantive point in the arguments of others;

It seemed inconceivable to the Panel that this important matter was not addressed or covered in their presentations to the Enquiry.

4 F 36 This posed a substantive question for the Panel, the lay members especially: "How could a Parish Priest not be mindful of Mass attendance on Sunday in his Parish over the years?" especially in regard to a formally promoted Diocesan investigation under Canon Law into claims of harm to their Parish due to the presence of the NC Way. This commonality of approach, and the omission itself, seemed rather implausible and so unhelpfiil to their cause. Whilst the Panel recognises that Mass attendance is not the sole criterion to assess the spiritual well being of a Parish, it is very important indicator of the Roman Catholic well being; an action of a practi sing Catholic for all to see as a matter of importance in Faith.

4 F 37 The Panel has been puzzled seriously by this omission, especially as the figures submitted to the Enquiry do not paint a particularly healthy scene at each Parish; there is a very pronounced decline, well above the general rate for the diocese. This is considered as a topic. Hence the Panel had to ask each Parish Priest about Mass attendance; explanations were given and are noted by the Panel. However, the omission was all the more striking because in their presentations to the Enquiry, each priest provides an unfavourable picture of their general area - 30,000 people for whom Fr Trafford has responsibility, 100,000 people in the City of Gloucester and 50,000 in East Bristol and so on.

4 F 38 Understandably, each priest refers to particular aspects or features to be found within 'their areas'; the quotes are:

a. "Gods ofviolence, drugs and alcohor'

b. "Loss ofthe sacred and Christian values"

c. "Education is an obsession"

It seems to the Panel that each priest is 'looking out' beyond his immediate members who

68

form the Parish Community as a whole. This to the Panel is the 'mission concept,' a second strand of the NC form of evangelization explained in the Presentation of the Way paper. The points above are made seriously, seemingly to justify the NC Way existence in the Parish and yet the investigation shows that only at St Nicholas of Tolentino has the NC Way reached the 'door-to-door' stage of evangelization outside of the Church itself; we understand that the NC stage was reached in 1993 or thereabouts. So far, there are no significant indicators that people have responded directly.

4 F 39 Each priest regards the edict of March 1994 as an impediment to evangelization, perceived to help all those people who no longer worship God on Sundays and who otherwise would be reached by the NC Way. The Panel cannot agree that the edict prevents 'evangelization.' We are quite sure that this would be the last thing that Bishop Alexander would wish to achieve. The opposite is the case; the very reason why he agreed to the NC introduction in the first instance. The stance is perplexing by the priests; it seems to be a contradiction in terms towards their own pastoral flock on Sundays. The Panel cannot accept for one moment that each is unaware of the hurt experienced by their parishioners, some in their Parish for many years and 'loyal.'

4 F 40 Some of these loyal but very concerned parishioners, concerned for their 'Pastor', express the sense of hurt or even bewilderment that they see themselves as of limited, little or no consequence because their Parish Priest is so engrossed or so immersed by the NC Way. There are many representors who perceive the main or predominant interest of 'their priest' to be with the NC Way. At a public meeting, a parishioner opined: "They have a priest, we have a chaplain;" this was not challenged by others as an unfair assessment. Views of a similar tone are expressed in numerous representations by those not in the NC Way. The Panel cannot accept the counter-point by the NC Way that such people are 'jealous' or 'resentful;' those are most unhelpful responses in such a sensitive pastoral situation.

4 F 41 The Panel well understands that explained personal benefits for a priest who walks 'The Way' and equally, we understand why it is necessary for a priest to be with his community in the NC journey. But in consequence of this involvement, especially where there are two or more communities in a Parish but there is only one priest - the Parish Priest, his NC involvement must inevitably be quite demanding in time. This involvement is noticeable to parishioners. Whilst some of the expressed concerns could be exaggerated, the consistency of adverse comment speaks for itself in the Panel's assessment. The message conveyed is: "The NC Way is so important to...."

4 F 42 Moreover, whilst none of the representors claim that they have been neglected as an individual when in need of pastoral help, the message is that out 'Pastor' is either unaware or is neglectful of the hurt we feel because of the NC Way presence with his consequent conimitment to it. It seems to the Panel that parishioner responses reflect the very point, the warning given by the Holy Father in 1985 to priests who follow the NC

Way: "Do not feel that you are called to serve one particular group" and perhaps also, "do not let yourselves be deceived"" The Panel wonders whether such specific guidance

- is forgotten by each of the priests in earnestly following the NC Way. Only the priests themselves will really know.

69

4 F 43 It is apparent to the Panel, that the NC Way 'anhnates' existing members of the faith to a perceived (ie by the NC) deeper faith. A number of representors explain, either by first-hand experience or by observation, that the NC member is conditioned to think in the NC Way; the Panel has elsewhere in the report described the approach as akin to a mind-set; the view is set predominantly along the NC Way. The priests acknowledge that: "I had to change." The surprise for the Panel is not that 'good priests' felt the need to do so, but to do so in such a radical way.

4 F 44 Whilst they have gained personally, the wider and much larger Parish family feel that their pastoral needs have suffered in consequence. The Panel concludes that such perceptions are quite justified and that their sufferings should end. This inour view can come about by recognising, for the good ofthe Parish community, that the trial period for the NC Way has run its course. We recommend accordingly.

70

4 G BISHOP ALEXANDER AND THE NC

4 G. I The introduction of the NC Way to the City of Bristol is considered earlier, setting out the recollections of those involved during September 1979; Bishop Alexander was necessarily involved. He was 'visited' by the NC Itinerants though there remains uncertainty as to whether they were accompanied at the time by Fr Trafford to act as an interpreter and as an initial commentator about the NC Way. In the event, it appears that Bishop Alexander did agree to the introduction of the NC Way at St Nicholas of Tolentino in the Autumn of 1979 and probably a little afterwards at St Patrick given that the initial catechesis took place in both parishes during Lent 1980.

- 4 G.2 We again have regard to the expressed view (4.C.8) that: "the Bishop would not have

been expected toprohibit the NC Way," allied to the 'Catholic Community' atmosphere

prevalent at the time and to the verbal response by Bishop Alexander to the Panel: "I

knew very little about the NC Way at the time," that might otherwise have led him to

refuse permission. The Panel not only appreciates such an unequivocal answer but

understands why that was so on the basis of our own 'learning curve' about the NC Way

during the past 6 months or so.

4 G.3 As indicated earlier, it is known by the Panel that Bishop Alexander initially regarded the NC Way as having something to offer in its goal of renewing faith and reaching out to those alienated from the Church. We are grateful for the formal response about this to the Panel: "In the early days my hopes were that the NC could have become a Parish group in harmony with other Parish organisations. It seemed it could ojfrr a deeper understanding ofScripture and a stronger commitment to the Church. I had heard about the many priestly and religious vocations that had come from among NC members elsewhere. Also there were accounts of parishes being revitalised by the NC. I have always realised the importance of small communities within a Parish and so this attracted me initially Opponents say in effect the NC seeks to take over the Parish and to direct sacramental preparation programmes."

- 4 G.4 This response reinforces our earlier expressed conclusion that the pastoral climate was

right, there was a favourable atmosphere towards the concept of 'Catholic Community'

in 1979/80 in the process leading to the NPC at which this would be a subject for

discussion. We note also that the Initial 'attraction' of the NC Way stemmed from a long

standing realisation about the importance of small communities in a Parish. Thus the

'visit' by the NC Itinerants was opportune to say the least or providential as perceived by

others who later provided more information and probably advice about the NC Way. It

is a matter of conjecture as to whether that advice or information was soundly based.

4 G.5 Submitted to the Enquiry is a copy of a letter (12 March 1994) sent by the Vicars General (Mgr J C Buckley, Mgr W J Mitchell) directly to members of the NC communities which, amongst other things states: "The Bishop made it clear, first ofall, that he had allowed these communities to be set up on an experimental basis. That experiment, heftlt, had proceededfar enough and there were certain elements in the movement ofwhich he could not approve;" the background context of this letter is considered later. The particular point of importance to the Panel is whether or not the NC introduction was on an

71

'experimental basis' or otherwise, and upon what terms of reference or guidelines (if any) did Bishop Alexander accept the introduction to the City of Bristol in 1979/80 and elsewhere in later years.

4 G.6 The Panel has sought answers from the NC and from Bishop Alexander. At the NC meeting at St Nicholas of Tolentino in April, there was a rather resounding 'No' when the Panel enquired about their views as to whether the introduction had been 'an experiment.' However, any adverse reactions by the NC members to the letter from the Vicars General cannot entirely be discounted in their response. We give much greater credence to the later helpful response by Canon O'Brien that Bishop Alexander could not have known much about the NC Way in 1979 but no doubt thought it worthwhile to try this method of evangelization. As noted earlier (4 C.8 above), there is no evidence to indicate that Bishop Alexander gave a formal approval in writing. But that in itself is not so surprising given the indicated respect for the priests by Bishop Alexander, no doubt with a strong element of trust in their roles as Parish Priests acting in 'persona Christi' (papal audience, 2.28 above) and, from a practical aspect, guidelines could hardly be set if so little was known initially about the NC Way.

4 G.7 Therefore it is reasonable to conclude that the NC Introduction was on the basis only of a tacit agreement by Bishop Alexander without any mutually accepted terms of reference or pastoral guidelines. The Panel is also of the view that this initial support for the NC Way was not unqualified and in exercising his Episcopal authority, it was and is the right and duty of Bishop Alexander to review the pastoral effects of this NC introduction from time to time. (Canon 381 at paragraph 2.28 vi above).

4 G.8 One of the NC representors makes the point that the presence of Bishop Alexander at an NC liturgical celebration gave personal re-assurance about the validity of the NC Way:

"that it would not go off the rails as experienced in other movements." The Panel has therefore sought to assess the extent of this direct involvement noting first the acknowledgement by Bishop Alexander that he presided at a number of ceremonies and secondly, from the recorded details provided helpfully by the NC National Team. These show attendances at the three parishes, mostly after a catechesis but on very limited occasions following a NC scrutiny; the last recorded presence by Bishop Alexander was in Advent 1991 at Sacred Hearts parish. Although there have since been NC celebrations other members of the clergy have attended instead of Bishop Alexander. The constmction could therefore be that the Initial support for the NC Way had waned after 1991 although this may not have been made clear to the NC and to the parish priest. The priests are of the opinion that this was not indicated by Bishop Alexander.

4 G.9 In the period between 1980 and 1991, the evidence tends to show that the support was demonstrable. First by the probable awareness of Bishop Alexander that the three priests (Canon O'Brien, Canon English and Fr Trafford) attended NC international gatherings in 1983 or 1984; secondly by the continued NC involvement of Fr Trafford during his service as private secretary to Bishop Alexander culminating in agreement for him to serve in aNC role outside of the Diocese; third by the appointments of Fr (later Canon) English and Fr Trafford to parishes where the NC was to be introduced, though there is uncertainty as to whether Fr Trafford apprised Bishop Alexander of an intention to do so;

72

finally by the 'introduction' of two Spanish families in 1990 to serve at St Nicholas of Tolentino and the area of St Paul's in particular. This came to light in a representation from the couple and has been considered by the Panel.

4 G. 10 The representations from the Spanish family explains that they offer their lives to the NC Way as a 'missionary family' in foreign lands - as NC Itinerants and after their

involvement in Chile: "we came to the Chfton Diocese when your Bishop Menyn asked for families to help in St Nicholas Parish;" this was a surprise for the Panel upon first reading. Therefore copies of correspondence have since been submitted for the Panel's information and consideration following the NC meeting at St Nicholas of Tolentino attended by this Spanish family. It was made plain at the meeting that Bishop Alexander had requested such involvement; it is confirmed in the correspondence. The 'invitation' from Bishop Alexander expresses a wish to 'encourage the mission.' The letter is dated 23 November 1990, some three months or so after the papal letter of general approval for the NC Way in which there is reference to the 'dedication of the itinerants and lately from the work of the families which evangelize in the dechristianised areas of Europe...' The Panel does not know whether this letter of approval had any bearing upon the invitation decision but we have explored the background.

4 G. 11 Details submitted from the NC National Team indicate that in April 1990 a team met Bishop Alexander at St Ambrose to discuss, amongst other things: "the proposal to invite missionaiyfamiliesfrom NC communities to come to St Pauls to live." The team included the NC catechists from London and, because the visit ?elated also to St Nicholas, the Panel assumes that Canon O'Brien would also have been a member. We also have reason to believe that Bishop Alexander may have been reluctant initially to the idea of inviting families but was persuaded eventually upon advice from Canon O'Brien that these families could give a powerful witness by their presence and example. Whether our supposition about the circumstances is correct, the point is that support for the NC Way existed in November 1990.

4 G. 12 That support however was not without a knowledge by Bishop Alexander of some opposition to the NC Way at the three parishes. This we believe was manifest at Sacred Hearts, probably at St Nicholas of Tolentino and perhaps to a less marked extent at St Peter. Though invited by Non-NC representors (those clearly opposed to the NC Way) to inspect their letters of complaint or concern 'to the Bishop', we have not done so but some of this correspondence forms part of their representations in any event; we are aware therefore of adverse reactions in the 1980's. Another source for this awareness arises from a document 'Clifton Diocesan Synod 1988, Working Pariy Reports, Volume Two', in the Chairman's possession arising from earlier service for the Diocese.

- 4 G. 13 Under the title 'Laity' and the sub-heading 'Particular Problems' it is stated at (e): "In one

region of the diocese, grave concern and distress was brought to the attention of the

working party Q)oth publicly and privately) over the emergence of the 'Neo-

Catechumenate on this issue, making a one-sided view possible. However, we were struck

by the depth ofhurt and concern expressed about this movement's development, which

- needs to be noted. Opinions were divided as to whether time has healed at all." It must

be concluded that Bishop Alexander was aware of adverse perceptions about the NC Way

73

in 1990 and 1991 but nonetheless still hoped that there was scope for an amicable existence with the NC Way as a 'Parish Group'; 'in harmony with other Parish organisations.' (paragraph 4 G.3)

4 G.14 The Panel is particularly mindful of a representor's perception of Bishop Alexander's approach to an indicated problem in consequence of the NC Way as: "gentle, reasoned anddiplomatic." In accepting that perception, we also have reason to believe that Bishop Alexander sought to promote a policy of 'live and let live', and consistently so as opposition to the NC Way developed. Upon later reading of our report, Bishop Alexander will realise from our independent assessments of the evidence that such a policy regrettably has not and will not succeed. We come to conclusions, explained later, that the NC members do seek t6 play a very involved part in sacramental preparation programmes, as well as other facets of Parish life, in accord with the explained objective by the initiator (paragraph 3.25 xxxii above).

4 G. 15 Submitted evidence allied to our investigations show clearly that the NC situation had, by 1993, become a serious pastoral problem due to the persistent and more intensive adverse reactions at the three parishes though not to the same degree in each. For example, the strained pastoral situation at St Peter in Gloucester does not seem to have been (ie in 1993) 50 heated as at St Nicholas of Tolentino and at Sacred Hearts. That might still be the case given a description from a representor at St Peter that: "there is not a running sore mentality here," seeking no doubt to illustrate that the problems there were/are not so pronounced.

4 G. 16 Earlier in the report and in the context of papal guidance about the NC Way (',aragraphs

2.32 and 2.33 above), the Panel notes the circumstances on 23 July 1993 when a meeting was called: "to try and reach a common understanding and mind about the Neocatechumenal Way. " As noted, the hope was that a 'live and let live' situation could still be achieved at the parishes. Whatever the misgivings by Bishop Alexander about the NC Way in 1993, it is clear to the Panel that the way forward might still be on the basis of co-operation, mutual understanding and trust in the search for an amicable pastoral solution. Notwithstanding, a subsequent meeting with the NC National Team led by Fr J Guzman, and thence mindful of their counsel to seek advice from the main recipient of the 1990 letter of approval, Bishop Alexander felt it necessary to exercise Episcopal

authority by promulgating an edict in March 1994. a

4 G.17 By that time, experience of the NC Way had been gained at several parishes within the Diocese beginning in 1980. The Panel does not know whether Bishop Alexander received adverse feed-back from the Parish Priests in the early 1980's, because the NC Way was discontinued there (Holy Cross, St Bernadette, St Edinund and St Patrick). He clearly received adverse reactions from many parishioners at St Nicholas of Tolentino, St Peter and Sacred Hearts, causing his Initial attitude of support for the NC Way to change following a 'trial period' or 'an experiment', whatever the expression. Whereas in 1979/80 the pastoral climate was right to introduce the NC Way, it seems to the Panel that in the light of experience the climate had changed and perceptibly so by 1991 or thereabouts.

74

4 G. 18 It is so much easier to consider situations in hindsight but the Panel cannot help but wonder whether in his own hindsight, Bishop Alexander would have preferred a pastoral situation without the NC Way at seven parishes in his care. Although the NC Way introduction took place ten years in advance of the papal letter of approval in 1990 (ie at St Nicholas of Tolentino and at St Patrick) the Panel concludes that Bishop Alexander was, and remains, very mindful of the 'wish' by Pope John Paul II that "brothers in the Episcopate value and help this work for the new evangelization." It is also reasonable to conclude that this encouragement ought not to be in doubt bearing in mind particularly the papal exhortation about the importance of the Parish.

75

411 ATTITUDES OF VICARS GENERAL TO NC

4 H. Though representations were not submitted to the Enquiry by the Vicars General, the Rt Rev Mgr Canon J C Buckley Prot Ap JCD and the Rt Rev Mgr Canon William Mitchell MA JCL, representations from others show that they were obviously aware of the NC Way situation, that they were mindful and concerned about the developing pastoral difficulties and were involved, one way or another, over the years and particularly in more recent years. A suggestion by the NC to the Panel is whether this involvement could be justified and whether it was warranted; the latter of course is a matter ofjudgement. Bishop Alexander and others will know much more about the background circumstances than the Panel, particularly those leading to the edict of March 1994 that followed almost immediately the joint letter from the Vicars General referred to previously.

4 H.2 The Panel has met each Vicar General on an individual basis to clarify some matters raised in the representations and at the (public and private) meetings. As for the justification or power to be involved, as might be expected this was explained by Mgr Buckley. Nevertheless, the Panel also had recourse (for earlier reference) to the previously mentioned report of the Clifion Diocesan Synod (1988) under 'Structures and Constitutions.' The role of the Vicars General is explained (page 186): "the Vicar General has a share in the govern ence of the whole diocese and has 'ordinary 'powers accordingly ('ordinary 'power means that which the law attaches to the office - not that which is delegated)." The reference also explains that the Bishop's Council comprises the VG and Episcopal Vicars. The Panel is in no doubt that juridical power exists with the office of Vicar General and that this has been exercised on that basis by the Vicars General in regard to the NC Way.

- 4 H.3 Submitted as part of the representation of an opponent is the 'paper' by Mgr J C Buckley:

"The Neo-Catechumenate" (An attempt at a Pastoral Appraisal) and other 'papers'. These

have helped in the Panel's understanding about the NC Way though it has to be stated

that the 'Presentation of the Way' paper by Kiko Arguello is treated as authoritative; it

has therefore been considered in detail by the Panel (Section 3 above).

4 H.4 Our meetings with the Vicars General help to confirm that each has, in the past attended or has presided at NC liturgical celebrations. This was normally instead of Bishop Alexander and in one instance, as a participant to experience the NC liturgy from the 'floor' as it were. Details submitted from the NC National Team indicate an involvement by the Vicars General as follows:

1. Mgr Buckley; Lent 1985 at St Peter

Preside at Liturgy of the Word and present Bibles.

ii. Mgr Mitchell; Lent 1986 at St Nicholas

Preside at Liturgy of the Word and present Bibles.

II November 1987 at St Nicholas

Sunday PM liturgy of First Scrutiny for second

community.

76

Mgr Mitchell; May/June 1992

Meeting with NC including Canon English and

Canon O'Brien

January 1993

Meeting with NC including Canon English and

Canon O'Brien

It is evident to the Panel that each Vicar General has taken part in a NC liturgical celebration thereby affording an insight to the reality of these and probably adding to their knowledge and perceptions about the NC Way; the Panel believes those perceptions, overall, are adverse.

4 H. 5 Representations show that the Vicars General have had a direct involvement at meetings with parishioners. Minutes of such meetings have been submitted for the Panel's information and consideration. They tend to show that efforts have been made to resolve

concerns on a pastoral basis though it is fairly common knowledge that Mgr Buckley has a expressed deep concern about the theology of the NC Way, about the 'modus operandi'

of the NC process and so on. There is concern by both Vicars General about the NC teaching - the catechetics, also that this has not been submitted for scrutiny and approval by or on behalf of Bishop Alexander despite requests for this. Copies of correspondence about this have been made available to the Panel; they have been borne in mind.

4 H.6 As noted previously (paragraph 3.29), there is authoritative (ie Kiko) clarification that the NC method of catechising in a Parish is not dependent upon a booklet but is an oral tradition. The submitted correspondence from 1994 to the Vicar General shows that position to be so, confirming that the NC Way has an oral tradition and as such does not generally publish any literature because it is considered not to be a movement but a way of renewal in the Church and a basic part of the Parish. There is no other evidence to show that this position has changed since 1994 except, to be fair, the 'NC Book' itself gives a brief synthesis (by Kiko Arguello and Carmen Hernandez) about the Neocatechumenal Way (at Appendix 1, p 127 to p 135); this too has been borne in mind by the Panel.

4 H.7 Also to be absolutely fair, the details submitted by the NC National Team show that Canon O'Brien, Fr Trafford and Canon English (one occasion) were part of a catechetic team. In Advent 1983 and seemingly thereafier, Canon O'Brien acted as a catechist on an annual basis at St Nicholas of Tolentino and once at St Peter; Fr Trafford was also a catechist in Advent 1983 at St Nicholas of Tolentino, again in Advent 1987 and in Sacred Hearts from Advent 1989. The presence of the Parish Priest at the catechesis, particularly as a catechist, should have allayed concerns about the validity of the teaching or doctrine though the credentials of the lay catechists are not known.

4 H.8 This leads us back to the situation in July 1993, touched upon earlier (paragraph 2.32) when the Vicars General attended the meeting called by Bishop Alexander with a purpose: "to try and reach a common understanding and mind about the NC Way" The

77

minutes of this important meeting are informative; no-one at our meetings seeks to suggest that they are erroneous. The circumstances are well understood by the Panel. Some months later, in fact immediately before the edict, the Vicars General issued their joint letter to NC members. There is reference in it to the earlier meeting - some months ago and so on, thence a request that the matters at issue be discussed at the NC meetings; the matters related to separate Masses for the communities, the Baster Vigil and further recruitment. It appears to the Panel that this letter could not be construed as a direction or the like but a request for discussion by the NC. What prompted this letter is not entirely clear, but the Panel has no doubt that the Vicars General were not acting 'ultra vires.'

4 H.9 Whilst the Panel understands a NC view that the role of the Vicars General in the deteriorating NC situation was too involved, causing some extra pressure for Bishop Alexander to act with Episcopal authority for pastoral reasons, that surely is not unexpected. Where they are so concerned about the pastoral situation in those parishes of the Diocese having a NC Way presence, and where such presence was perceived by them to create serious difficulties including abstentions and diversions to other parishes for Mass (as an example), the Panel believes that it was their duty to advise and to urge (if necessary) upon Bishop Alexander that his authority was under threat; action was necessary. We are very mindful of their canonical status as an 'Ordinary' as well as their membership of the Bishop's Council where we understand that they are immediate advisers.

78

-41 NC CATECHESIS AND NC COMMUNITIES IN THE PARISHES

4 II The investigation reveals that the NC Catechesis has been given at seven parishes of the Diocese; St Nicholas of Tolentino (Bristol) beginning in Lent 1980, St Patrick (Bristol) beginning also in Lent 1980, St Edmund (Calne) in Lent 1982, St Bernadette (Bristol) in Advent 1982, Holy Cross (Bristol) in Advent 1984, St Peter (Gloucester) beginning in Lent 1985 and at Sacred Hearts (Cheltenham) beginning in Advent 1987. As explained previously (see 4 D above), the catechesis did not continue at four of these parishes because the parish priest decided that it should not.

4 I 2 One of these priests has explained helpfully about two particular grounds of concern:

d. There was an over-emphasis upon sin, not unlike 'Jansenism;'*

e. questions were not answered by the catechists except to the extent that the 'enquirer' would be invited to attend the next meeting.

These two points are highlighted again by the Panel because they are referred to so many times by the Non-NC representors (also by the ex-NC representors) explaining their adverse reactions to the initial NC catechesis, to the style and method of presentation, to the content with so much emphasis upon sin and the lamentable condition of a person without spiritual life that would change over time were the person to follow the NC Way and so on. There are accounts in the representations that the NC Way is explained to offer the only means to salvation, a very important point considered previously (at paragraph 2.24 above).

4 13 A number of NC representors explain that their catechesis is available to all parishioners; all are invited to hear the Good News, therefore the charges made about exclusiveness are invalid. It cannot be denied that the 'invitation' within a Parish was offered to the congregation, on an annual basis it seems prior to the proscription in March 1994, but Non-NC representors explain that this invitation itself was somewhat duplicitous because the NC Way' was not announced as such. There are explanations that impressive invitation cards, with an icon designed by Kiko Arguello, were distributed at St Peter's. This and similar invitation cards have been submitted to the Enquiry. The Panel is satisfied that the 'NC Way' was not announced; it is probably not unfair to describe the initial invitation as an 'enticement.'

4 I 4 There is good broad evidence indicating that this 'enticement' was successful in drawing people at the parishes (St Nicholas of Tolentino, St Peter, Sacred Hearts) to the initial catechesis. Whilst we do not know the numeric response at St Nicholas of Tolentino, the Panel is mindful of the candid response by Canon O'Brien that some parishioners reacted angrily to the catechesis. He himself seems to have been less than impressed initially, as was Canon English; each acknowledges that the NC called for them to change as a priest and that they recognised sooner or later the opportunity that the NC Way offered for their personal renewal on an on-going basis within a Parish.

4 I 5 At St Peter's, it seems that many people responded in 1985 to the 'Good News' invitation, attributable in part to the spirit of renewal prevalent in some following Parish

79

Renewal weekends given by Canon English; these are warmly acclaimed in the representations. A Non-NC representor from St Peter explains: "Manypeople attended the introductory talks of the NC, especially those who had been awakened by the Holy Spirit (marriage encounter, parish renewal) and were hun gry for spiritual food. As the talks pro gressed people were beginning to have doubts about this new way; nevertheless most stayed to the end;" thence . . .. "Everyone was asked to offer an opinion about the talks; those who voiced concern about the total concentration on sin and suffering were dismissed by the arrogant strangers (from London)."

4 I 6 In interviews by the Chairman, a first hand account by a person who could not be regarded as one favouring or hostile to the NC Way describes that the priest (Fr Carmelo) gave a strident message about the evils of today - fornication, greed, self and so on. To this interviewee, it seemed that the NC attracted some weird or extreme people observed at the talks. A Non-NC representor explains: "Some of us attended afew of the early sessions led by the NC but were dismayed by the negative messages received We felt that to continue would impair our spiritual development and selfeste em. God was portrayed as a God of vengeance and retribution and not a God of love, though we know that he is a just God as well as being loving."

4 I 7 A person opposed to the NC explains: "I attended some ofthe initial catechesis and was un impressed by the uncaring, insensitive and judgemental attitudes of the speakers. At no point was it made clear that the intention of the catechesis was to initiate this NC process into St Peter's. The words Neo-Catechumenate were not even mentioned - then or in subsequent messa ges from the pulpit at Mass on Sunday. The basic message was:

'You are no good - no good because you have lost your way - you are a sinner - you do not have Jesus Christ in your life. Ifyou want Jesus Christ, then you must say 'Yes' and you will find him here. Ifyou say 'No' to this invitation, you are rejecting Jesus Christ -you are a sinner."

"In consequence ofthis negative message, people in difficult situations or in some way vulnerable, will ass ume that they themselves are at fault if they answer 'No' to this invitation and so will be punished even more. This guilt approach is not found in the Gospel, instead Jesus Christ says 'Come to me all who labour and are heavy-burdened and I will give you rest."

4 I 8 The reader will probably reach a particular view about the above explanations but it conveys to the Panel that a 'negative approach' is adopted in the Catechesis which, bearing in mind the initiator's words that a 'way of descent into the waters of baptism' is necessary for all, is not really surprising. Nor is it surprising that some people will respond to the method whereas others will not; a problem arises where this method attracts the vulnerable and those described as 'extreme' unless of course the NC is competent to cater or cope satisfactorily with such people.

4 I 9 The Panel accepts that there were many in the Parish of St Peter during 1985 who responded to the 'Good News' invitation, that over 100 of these stayed for the duration and we also accept the proposition that this signalled a preparedness by the Parish Community for spiritual uplift. They wished to be enlightened about God and the Church.

80

The Panel wonders whether some of these nurtured previously by the Marriage Encounter and br parish Renewal weekends felt a sense of strong disappointment or even disillusionment because the Neocatechumenal Way followed a different route and was not as anticipated.

4 I 10 The route was obviously acceptable for enough people to justify the formation of two NC Communities. One who joined a community after the initial catechesis explains: "Before the initial catechesis, I only felt that in this day and age, with all the pressures ofmodern hft, it was impossible to follow the teachings ofthe Church. Although Ihad been brought up in a staunch Catholicfamily at some point during adolescence, Ilost the precious gifi of 'Faith', and there was an emptiness. I continued to go to Mass on most Sundays although I never received Holy Communion. When I listened to the Catechesis, it was like a homecoming and through the NC I have rediscovered my faith. I really have experienced the love and mercy of Jesus Christ for me as a sinner." After reading the Initiation Talks by Kiko, the 1993 Presentation Paper as well as other representations from NC members, the last quoted sentence is very familiar to the Panel.

- 4 III An opponent of the NC asserts: "There is value and a necessity for on-go mg formation

for catechists, teachers, parents and individuals. We should be constantly striving for a

deeper faith and afliller understanding of the Gospel message. Reconciliation, healing

and willingness to serve should be part ofour everyday lives as Christians. As a Parish,

we do not always meet these needs and the needs of those most vulnerable.... I can see

positive objectives in building comm unities within the NC but their methods are wrong

and evil." Regrettably, the last word is very accusing. Whilst there might be serious

questions about the NC methods of formation, the person recognises the potential benefit

of building communities within the Parish. The Panel is aware that Bishop Alexander,

Mgr Buckley and others in pastoral ministries are also in favour of 'communities'. Earlier

in the report, the Panel draws attention to the sincere interest for Adult Catechesis by so

many people. This interest should not be allowed to wane.

4 112 Fr Trafford explains that in the Autumn of 1987 (some 9 months after becoming the PP in January 1987), all the Parish was: "invited to hear the 'introductory catechesis' over 8 weeks. Some 200 people came for the first night and, as is normal, numbers dwindled over the eight weeks." He was conscious at the time that: "the Church has always looked on catechesis as a sacred duty and an inalienable right (Catechesi Tradendae ] 4)." By way of clarification to the Panel, Fr Trafford explains that he consulted Canon O'Brien as well as people in the Prayer Group before introducing the NC to Sacred Hearts. There is uncertainty as to whether Bishop Alexander was made aware (directly) of this NC introduction to the Parish prior to the event.

- 4 113 The 'arrival' of the NC is described, quite graphically, in some of the Non-NC

representations. One describes the situation: "A few months afler Fr Tony '5 arrival we

were introduced to the NC Way Nobody that we knew had heard about it. The first series

of talks appeared to be an alternative to the mission that had been cancelled Being

addressed by a team of self-confessed failures was certainly a bit diffrrent! So was the

rather bad tempered priest who accompanied them." Another Non-NC representor

explains: "I attended the first meeting addressed by the NC from London and found it

81

distasteful. Catechists, husband and wife, made public confession of the offences against God and each other at length and in detail." The Panel has sought clarification as to whether a Mission had been planned for Sacred Hearts but Fr Trafford cannot recall whether that was a prior intention for the Parish.

4 114 An opponent of the NC Way explains: "it was announced that a series of bi-weekly talks, lasting about 6 weeks were to be given. It would be an experience which would change all our lives, as it had his. About 200 turned up for the first meeting The trio of speakers consisted of a married couple and an Italian priest, all of whom turned out to be NC. The soul baring methods of the couple were both distressing and embarrassing owing to an obsession with sin, particularly sexual sin. The almost hour-long lecture by the priest was positively intimidating although most of it was unintelligible. I attended the second meeting hoping that the first experience had been a bad dream but I left in total disillusionment, disbelief and disgust." These are not untypical descriptions of the adverse reactions by the Non-NC representors.

4 115 On the other hand, not unexpectedly, different perceptions about these NC Catechists are given in representations from a few of the NC members. One explains: We (husband and wife) were impressed for a number of reasons. Firstly, it was deeply rooted in Scripture, bringing to life both the Old and New Testaments in a way that spoke deeply to our hearts. " Later this representor explains: "Secondly it became clear that the approach we were being offered is based on complete fidelity of the Church's teaching. I had experienced much distress over the years at the continual attacks in the media on the Pope and the magisterial teaching ofthe Church, often coming from within the Church." Thence by way of affirmation for the role of NC Catechists: "Thirdly, we were deeply impressed by the dedication of the team of catechists, in the midst of difficulties and of their working and family lives, travelling twice a week from London for over 8 weeks to share with us the Good News that had so profoundly changed their own lives. Certainly, we did not see in this some sort of 'cult' at work for its own ends. On the contrary, we saw the grace of Jesus Christ working through the Gospel."

4 116 Some Non-NC representors express concern about the presentation and style, and how the weak or vulnerable seemed to be attracted. One of these explains: "I was alarmed because in particular I felt that the arguments put forward as to reasons for joining the NC were in fact profoundly psychologically disturbing. As apractising GP I do feel that I have some reasonable insight into the process of manipulation of individuals and groups in psychological ways. I felt at that stage the NC was relying heavily on guilt and there was even a sense of spiritual blackmail." Another Non-NC representor, expressing support in some other respects for the NC Way, touches on the same point: "I felt some emotional blackmail in the initial meetings with which I felt uneasy

4 117 Another Non-NC representor expresses concern about the initial presentation, first explaining that: "It was very strongly emphasised that the NC was the only way" and then: "As the meetings progressed I became more and more concerned about content and methods. The approach was very didactic and the delivery of all catechists was equally hesitant. Questioning and discussion were not permitted. The clear message was that one should suppress ones intellect. That message is ever present. A negative approach, fear

82

of God emotional blackmail were very much to the fore. Even at this early stage I had to consult a GP for advice when a fellow parishioner confided about the disturbing reaction to the 'talks'; this person needed psychiatric care for quite some time."

4 118 The Panel acknowledges these adverse reactions to the method of promoting the NC Way, regarded by some as emotional and spiritual blackmail; it was therefore rejected as unsuitable and as potentially damaging for their spiritual well-being. Evidenced by the numerous uncomplimentary comments about the initial promotion, the adverse reaction remains in some people's minds years afier the event. It is not difficult to appreciate that there is also some resentment because the NC Way remains, whereas in the minds of some parishioners it ought not to have been there in the first instance. The Panel does not conclude that such an adverse view is held by the majority of parishioners but we do conclude that the majority of those who experienced the initial promotion, in whole or in part, decided to reject the NC Way as a means for their spiritual development.

4 119 It is also apparent to the Panel that some of those who responded to the initial and to later offers of spiritual development via the NC Way were vulnerable in various ways; these are explained quite frankly in the representations. Fr Trafford acknowledges to the Panel that vulnerable people are drawn to the NC Way. As noted elsewhere in the report, the NC Way is not qualified or competent to cater satisfactorily for some of these vulnerable people.

4 I 20 Nevertheless, the initial and subsequent promotions of the NC Way were welcomed by some people at each parish, as well as by people from other parishes; it was recognised and accepted by them as a valid means to deepen their faith or to bring them back to the fold. For other responders, it provided the means to know about and to enter the Church. These positive responses to the NC Way must be and are recognised by the Panel. But the Panel is also very mindful that, despite the initial and subsequent promotions of the NC Way at Sacred Hearts, the NC in number formed a very small minority (less than 5%) of the indicated Sunday Mass attendance (in 1985) and remains as a minority at the Parish even compared to the much lower figure of Sunday Mass attendance in 1995.

Such is the situation at St Peter's. The NC communities there still represent a small minority (much less than 10%) of the Mass attendance, even though the latter has similarly declined since the NC introduction in 1985.

The comparative situation at St Nicholas of Tolentino is so different, first because there are three communities there with some 60 to 65 members though the number is in decline following the edict of March 1994. But in percentage terms, the NC members could represent as much as 27% of the official record of Sunday Mass attendance (at 221 in 1995) without allowing for the fact that 25% of the communities are indicated to live outside the 'Parish area;' the figure reduces to less than 20% if that factor is borne in mind. On the other hand, were a suggested 'unofficial figure' of 140 to be taken as valid for Mass attendance, to include say 45 NC members, the composition of NC to Non-NC parishioners is over one third.

4 I 21 It is stating the obvious but is has to be stated, that the process of numerical attrition involving a continuous trend of Non-NC parishioners who move away to attend Mass at

83

other churches or perhaps fall away altogether in consequence of their NC experiences, becomes more and more pronounced. On that approach alone, the 'Parish Community' is declining and continues to decline. Quite apart from the question of displacement by NC members into the sacramental preparation programmes, which the evidence shows does occur, it cannot possibly be concluded that the presence of the NC communities has animated' or 'revitalised' these parishes as a 'Parish Community' though we note the point made to us by Fr Trafford in his representation: "Numbers are not that important. The important thing is that the Parish now has, gratis, at no cost whatsoever, a true catechumenate." But the Panel believes that there is a cost.

4 I 22 The Panel does not share such an NC orientated assessment of the Parish situation; this very regrettably conveys spiritual elitism and a very narrow pastoral approach which Pope John Paul II so strongly warned against. Not only does the Panel recognise the narrowness of such an outlook, but it is recognised and resented by parishioners who do not understand why this should be so especially when they have tried the NC Process of catechesis and conclude: "It is notfor me" for a variety of reasons; the process of attrition begins and continues. There is considerable dissatisfaction, most pronounced at Sacred Hearts becoming more pronounced we believe at St Peter's and on the wane or largely subdued at St Nicholas of Tolentino because those most strongly opposed to the NC Way have moved on.

4 I 23 As for the theological efficacy of the NC Catechesis itself, we understand that there is a long-standing question mark about this in the minds of Bishop Alexander and some senior clergy of the Diocese. This is noted in the preceding section (at paragraph 4 H 5):

"There is concern by both Vicars General about the NC teaching - the catechetics. Also that this had not been submitted for scrutiny and approval by or on behalf of Bishop Alexander despite re quests for this." The Panel thence comments: "The presence of the Parish Priest at the catechesis, particularly as a catechist, should have allayed concerns about the validity ofthe teaching or doctrine though the credentials of the lay catechists are not known." That is still the case and it is a matter raised by some representors to the Enquiry.

4 I 24 The Panel is advised by the NC that the process of training for their Catechists is the responsibility in this country of Fr J Guzman of the NC National Team who in turn, as explained to the Panel, is guided by Kiko Arguello. The Panel considers and offers an appraisal about the NC Way (Section 3 above) on the basis of submitted papers, documents and the 'NC Book.' Our attitude towards the 'Presentation of the Way' paper is made clear; we regard it as authoritative though the source cannot be identified. This paper is not submitted as part of our report but there are various quoted extracts, some of which relate to Catechesis.

4 I 25 Parts of these are necessarily repeated from paragraph 3.25:

a. "we begin giving the catechesis without presupposing faith in anyone...with those from the parish" [at 3.25, xvi]

b. "we are opening a way of adult Christian initiation in the Parish"

84

[at 3.25, xvii]

c. 'the one who has the catechesis in his hands has the Church of the

future" [at 3.25, xxvi]

d. "we have a neocatechumenal language. If you have a word to say in the Church, you create a new language, a new theology, new terms"

[at 3.25, xxvii]

e. "if we weren't saying anything other than that which the ancients had said, we wouldn't be adding anything"

[at 3.25, xxvii]

f. "Afier three years we tell the community to elect catechists and they come with their catechists to see how I preach. Because they are formed in an oral tradition, they aren 't given a booklet and told to learn it."

[3.25, xxix]

4 I 26 The last mentioned extract (ie (f) or 3.25 xxix) makes it clear from the initiator (Kiko Arguello), that the NC Way relies upon 'an oral tradition.' As we note previously (paragraph 4 H 6), our examination of 1994 correspondence to the Vicar General (Mgr Buckley) shows that position to be so, confirming that the NC Way has an oral tradition and as such does not generally publish any literature because it is considered not to be a movement but a way or renewal in the Church and so on. By way of comment here, the Panel has considered an extract from a report in 1985 by Cardinal Ritzinger, submitted in September to the Enquiry by Fr Guzman; in this extract Cardinal Ratzinger includes the 'Neo-Catechumenal communities' within the generic title: 'New Movements.'

4 I 27 A request is made for the Panel to study and comment upon the validity or otherwise of

- the catechesis used by the NC Way. The Panel is neither qualified nor has a mandate to carry out such a study. We have been privy to various documents and tapes. These contain different forms of catechetical materials and methods used. In our limited capacity we can probably conclude that no doctrinal errors are manifest, noting (for the record) that the teaching is stated by the NC Catechists and leaders to follow the teaching of the Church. The style and method leave a lot to be desired.

4 I 28 Numerous representors explain that the style and presentation of the catechesis is tantamount to a long harangue. Having listened to the tapes, such a description is not inappropriate in the Panel's view. These seem to be the main reasons why relatively few people stay to complete the initial catechesis in the three parishes. Whether further investigation is needed, in a more detailed and theological way, is probably a matter for the Conference of Bishops.

- * Jairsenism

"A seventeenth and eighteenth movement in Europe especially France, which stressed moral

austerity, the evil of the human body and of human desires, and an elitist notion of salvation

- (Jesus died for a few). [Taken from the Glossary in 'Catholicism' by Richard McBrien]

85

- 4 J PERCEIVED PERSONAL BENEFITS OF NC WAY

4 J Reference is made previously (noted at F) about the perceived benefit of the NC Way for each of the priests. In addition to their views, the resident Salesian at St Peter's has indicated helpfully how the NC Way is of personal benefit in his spiritual growth, and how he benefits from the examples of brothers and sisters in the community. A representation has not been submitted from the recently ordained priest of the Diocese, though the Panel is grateful for information about this from the NC Catechists. The Panel draws attention to the fact, in the context of this topic, that two NC seminarians attribute their vocations to involvement with the NC Way at Sacred Hearts and St Nicholas of Tolentino; we are grateful for their explanations.

4 J 2 Not unexpectedly, all of the NC representors (100 in total) explain in various ways how their involvement, or commitment with the Neocatechumenal Way has either changed their outlook of life very dramatically, or has helped them to return to the Church, or has increased their faith and so on. It would be impossibly long to include all these letters of spiritual testimony about the NC Way; but all have a central theme about conversion, a new or better relationship with God, an awareness of sin and the wonderful healing power of Reconciliation, and of Jesus Christ within their lives; a sense of 'community' is expressed with the benefits.

4 J 3 The Panel thinks it sensible and realistic to include short sample quotations from the NC representations, on the basis of at least four from each Parish; an introductory comment might be given if appropriate. We hope that the NC members do not feel overlooked where their views are not repeated. In a presentation of this kind, it is very difficult. All have been read and considered by the Panel.

iii. "I have been in Rehgious Life over 40 years, attended a three month renewal course for Religious at Havkestone Hall (Redemptorist Pastoral Centre), have made many retreats and heard various lectures. I gained more knowledge and understanding of scripture, especially the Old Testament, since becoming involved in the NC Way. Much emphasis is given to the basic principles of Christian spirituality - the place of the cross is our lives, obedience, humility and forgiveness, that alas we hear so little of today." [Sacred Hearts]

iv. "It has called me to simple, direct faith; to the need to listen, to be receptive, to accept God's will for my life, knowing that he never rejects

or abandons me." [Sacred Hearts]

V. "The NC encourages prayer within the family and a solid base of catechesis for the children, regularly within the home and supplemented by a member of the community at monthly community days. The experience of long term communities is that children do continue in their Christian formation and subsequently join communities on their own. This has led in due course to the fostering of Catholic marriages and vocations to the priesthood and religious life." [Sacred Hearts]

86

vi. "I have found it to be a painful experience to discover my sinfulness and

my lack of love for my fellows. " [Sacred Hearts]

4 J 4 The sense and perceived benefit of 'community' is portrayed strongly in a number of the NC representations: "I was alone, depressed, divorced, unlovable and loaded with guilt; I struggled to keep going The community provided me with many friends and pre vented loneliness. Very deep and personal sharing is only appropriate in a community setting where one feels trust." Another explains: "Sharing is a special time in the community. We listen to the Word of God and 'echo' on what we have heard and whatever speaks to us in our lives at the moment; often this leads to problems at home or about idols - money pride, material things." The latter explanation of 'leads to problems', is assumed to mean a realisation that money, pride and so on were their personal problems to be resolved and helped by a better relationship with God through the Neocatechumenal experience.

[St Peter]

4 J 5 Another explains more generally: "As Catholics, christians and people, we all need constant catechesis andfor the opportunity to share life's difficulties on our respective journey's in the light ofGod's will for us", thence explaining: "The community meets this need and it saddens me deeply that we should be threatened by it. We are all striving towards our ultimate reward." In addition to recogni sing the need for Adult cateehesis, this writer explains how the 'sharing community' is of such assistance in life: "to feel the 't'armth and understanding that we are together on this journey " [St Peter]

4 J 6 Snippets from other NC representations are intended to convey their perceptions of spiritual and community benefits in consequence of the Neocatechumenal Way:

"Spiritually my life was in a mess - a sinner without hope"'. "my whole social life now is the Church"'. "lapsed brothers and sisters are brought back; a sister dominated by drugs has been brought back",' "many like me have received no catechesis since first Holy Communion age",' "now I know what the Church is teaching Ifeel very close to the Church and the Pope and especially to the Parish",' "it is a revelation to know that God loves me",' "the community has given me greater confidence - I can now read at Mass, speak at the Parish in Council and help in the hospital" [St Peter]

4 J 7 A former NC believes that: "The NC has done nothing other than provide a place for many ordinary and rejected people to worship God and to change their lives for the better." The writer poses a question: "How can this be wrong? - Jesus said.' 'if they are

for us, they cannot be against us'. " [St Peter]

4 J 8 i. "God gave me the grace to remain faithful to Sunday Mass attendance but

I was not faithful to Church teachings about contraception and

confession. I had ceased to regard myseifas a sinner at all."

[St Nicholas of Tolenti no]

ii. "My wife and Ipray the Divine Office each morning and I am able to pray with my children passing on to them a faith which is alive and concrete, giving them the power to resist temptations to abandon the

87

Church; these are so powerful. None of these changes would have happened but for experiencing the Church's love for me as a Mother, received by walking with the community." [St Nicholas of Tolentino]

iii. "The Mass was alive, the Word was broken open for me. Never before had I understood the wonder of it all. The Psalms are my delight. The Daily office a help to each day's events; forgiveness and joy through the Sacrament ofReconciliation; an answer was given to past pain. So much healing has been given, so much love received; to be able to forgive is a miracle especially with my past. " [St Nicholas of Tolentino]

lv. 'Catechists have taken us through the stages of baptism in the early

Church, enabling me to understand more fully the faith which God brought me into. Through catechesis, I have been given the Church's teachings, as Isee it reflected in the Catechism, and also see it lived out in others. The Word of God and the Holy Eucharist have become very important to me. Listening to the Word ;and experiences of others in the community enables me to hear God speaking to me in my daily life. Sharing the Word of God helps to give me discernment in my own life."

[St Nicholas of Tolentino]

4 J 9 For some in the NC Way, previously antagonist or indifferent to God, the catechetical experience is new and welcomed. For others in the NC Way, this is a re-awakening experience involving a greater awareness and an increased understanding about God, and the meaning of Faith together with all that it implies. This nonetheless raises the questions: "Why should and how does this method of mainly adult catechesis have a seemingly greater and a more effective personal impact in belief and consequent comm itment for some people than that derived by the more 'traditional path' of

- instruction from childhood through to adulthood?"

4 J 10 There are no 'obvious' answers though an eagerness to know about God, about salvation and a means to achieve this through self-discipline and commitment must be prompted by the Holy Spirit. This later 'awareness and learning process' clearly meets a need and is 'active' for some people' though these are a minority judging by the figures at each Parish compared to the initial responses to hear the 'Good News.' It seems that for NC members, the catechetical process over many years is quite acceptable though it might be that the 'duration of the programme' for 20 years or more is not known by them for a time. It has to be stated by the Panel, that NC members display a sense of spiritual purpose.

4 J 11 There is undoubtedly a 'conversion experience.' In some instances, this is more profound than in others drawing people towards God from the edge of society as it were; from drugs, prostitution to name but two facets. Prayer, especially the Divine Office, is important for the NC members as is their involvement in the Liturgies. Moreover, their 'experience 'is such that some are prepared to dedicate their lives as missionaries; the Spanish family at St Nicholas of Tolentino is an example.

88

4 J 12 Rather surprisingly, only a view of 'sadness' was expressed by NC members that they are no longer permitted to celebrate the Eucharist on Saturday. Of greater surprise to the Panel was an indication that the Eucharist is not celebrated during the week though this is permissible. It appears that the communities meet during the week for a Liturgy of the Word.

89

4 K THE LITURGY OF THE NEO-CATECHUMENATE

4 K In the Non-NC representations there are references to the NC liturgies, stated to be celebrated separately by the NC communities and mostly in a building outside of the Church. These celebrations are not made known in the Parish newsletter and are thus perceived to be secretive, exclusive and divisive.

4 K 2 Some representations are concerned about the liturgical form; frequent examples are that

of the Saturday evening Eucharistic celebration and the Easter Vigil for the NC

communities. There is reference to the unusual form of the Eucharist and though being

for the Sunday, it is perceived to be for the NC and not for 'ordinary' parishioners who

are not welcome. There are compliments nonetheless about the care known to be taken

in preparing for the Eucharist celebration and for the celebration itself. Criticisms are

made about Baptism by immersion. There are strong criticisms about the perceived

substitution of a Mass on Saturday evening for the Parish Community by the Eucharistic

celebration for the NC communities at St Nicholas of Tolentino and at Sacred Hearts.

Separate worship by the NC communities during Holy Thursday and Good Friday are

cited in criticisms but the celebration of a separate or an additional or a sole Easter Vigil

by the NC communities gives cause for strong criticism. Even after the edict of March

1994, the NC involvement in the Easter Vigil celebrations is perceived to be a means to

- offset the proscription.

4 K 3 Use of their own lectern, paschal candle, sacred vessels, crucifix and icons are perceived

- by Non-NC representors to be different from the norm indicative that the items of the

Parish are not suitable or much more pointedly, that the NC items are indicative of

exclusiveness or of a sect or a cult. There are quoted 'reactions' to critical views

expressed by the NC about 'normal liturgies' for the Parish Community because these are

considered to be less meaningful or less expressive than those of the NC Way. In some

instances, these critical views are attributed to the Parish Priests though these have not

been clarified by the Panel.

4 K 4 NC representations explain that since joining the NC Way, the liturgy has taken on new meaning and a new sense of vibrancy. They take an active part in the liturgy, recite the Prayer of the Church following a particular stage reached in the formation process of the NC Way, and recognise the Bible in a new way as the Word of God being: "addressed to them." They explain (to an extent) why they celebrate their liturgies separately, the preparation needed prior to the Eucharist celebration for those who are to 'Open the Word' (an admonition) prior to a reading. Their music is quite distinct - described in a less than complimentary manner by Non-NC representors as: "Flamenco Style."

4 K 5 Clarification has been sought by the Panel about the points raised. Our main source of reference is the paper: "Presentation of the Way" (1993) by Kiko Arguello; the 'NC Book' is also a source of reference. The principal liturgies are considered to assess whether the criticisms, particularly about exclusiveness, could be regarded reasonably as symptomatic of division in the context of the Parish.

(A) The Eucharist: Explanations about the separate celebration are given in the

90

Presentation Paper:

"We celebrate a separate Eucharist not because we think we are the pure ones, or that the Masses of the Parish are worthless. We have never thought ourselves to be better than others. We have come to this reality because ofthe need to save these people, so that they won 't leave again. Because we know that Christ loves them. And J know that J will have to give an account ofthese brothers if because ofa stupid mistake ofmine, they abandon God Christ has given his life for even one man."

"Because we saw that if after a conversion, we took people to the Parish Mass and it didn 't speak to them, they left.... we are speaking ofcountries where people have been Catholic for a long time and have abandoned the Church; in a way they are vaccinated Ifyou bring them again to the same Mass as before, since conversion is something that confirms you in grace but man has a crisis, he has difficult moments, moments of tiredness, and since young people of today are extremely sensitive about not doing anything false.

"An example: we had to take the 'Glory' away from the Mass for a long time because we found that young people who came from drugs, who came from atheism, as soon as they entered the community they found everyone singing 'Glory to God in the highest' while they were tired... they are not in a situation to sing to God they need to tell the brothers about their crisis but realise that this was not the place - this is for pure, for good people."

"We realised that the 'Glory' is the anticipation of the anafora, that it belongs to the Paschal season, and that people come tired. We saw that in the Eucharist they needed first to listen to the Word the singing of the Psalms that softened this young man enormously; that before the homily, in front of all the brothers, he could say: 'Brothers, I 'm a sinner, I 'm in crisis. Let him say it! So that the priest, afterwards in the homily can say to him: 'Courage my son! God loves you."

"And so the liturgy in a small community has such great strength that you can't be a hypocrite. In many places it has been enough to take the Mass away from us is for the community to morally decline. It is very difficult to make hypocritical signs, false signs, when they have been lived well and in community. Jt is an initial sacramental preparation."

4 K 6 This paper then describes that the Holy Father had received letters and accusations but he affirmed their celebration in terms of: "a sacramental laboratory. A group that takes the liturgy, that takes the Councit, that goes slowly." There is also reference to a discussion between Kiko and the Holy Father as to where the Eucharist is celebrated (in

the Parish Hall) and when because "0eople say that as long as we don 't go to the Sunday a Mass we are outside the Parish." The paper then provides the answer given by the Holy

Father: "what makes the Church isn 't the place but the Bishop.... The church is based on Bishops."

91

- 4 K 7 Based upon the explanations by the NC, the Panel understands that the separate

Eucharistic celebration is regarded as a fundamental part of the 'pastoral plan for a

community.' explained to provide the community's growth because it allows for a time

of 'sharing;' the latter, known as 'Echoes,' is a time of self-expression by a brother or

sister of 'how Holy Scripture has spoken to them personally.' The Panel is also advised

that were Non-NC to be admitted, this 'sharing process' by the community could give rise

to subsequent gossip by those not in the community.

4 K 8 This seems a plausible explanation. However, the Panel concludes that this celebration is exclusive because it is necessarily separate for the NC community. Nevertheless, there is an explanation in the Presentation Paper that the Congregation for Divine Worship has considered and has approved the NC liturgies.

4 K 9 The Church is sometimes used for the Eucharist celebration, on the eve of a Holy Day for example. We understand that there is then an altar placed in a central position, that the benches are re-positioned to face this altar on three sides; the altar is therefore a focal point close to the people. There is evidence to the Enquiry that such celebrations are not 'open to parishioners' even if they know, usually by accident ( a visit for example), that they are taking place. This is a situation of exclusivity added to which, the need to use the NC items for worship - the crucifix designed by Kiko, the icon of the Mother and Child by Kiko, the use of their own bread, the 'true kiss of peace' prior to the consecration are different to the norm of a Mass for the Parish.

4 K 10 A separate room is used in each Parish by the NC communities for their liturgical celebration. At St Nicholas of Tolentino, this room is in an outbuilding and is functional but sparse; at St Peter, rooms at first floor (the 'Upper Room') are used in a building forming part of the Church complex; at Sacred Hearts, a room (the Lampley Room) is used that lies between the church and the presbytery. In these rooms, there is a crucifix of Kiko design and the icon of Kiko design.

4 K 11(B) Easter Vigil: The 'Preparation Paper' explains the circumstances leading to the

- separate, all night vigil for NC communities:-

"The Second Vatican Council rediscovered the Paschal Tridium; the night as sacrament ofhuman lifr, the eschatological dawn etc."

"We have them (ie the NC) discover the paschal mystery, and this is the most important thing But a problem in Spain is that the weather is nice in Spring,' the people would go on vacation at Easter. How could we centre the spirituality of these brothers in Baptism, on the paschal night, if they went on vacation?"

"We had no choice but to take communities to a convivence and teach them what the signs are.' what it means to keep vigil for a night.... what baptism is - so that

- they realise the strength of the sacraments and now never go on vacation: it is

THE PASCHAL NJGHT"

- "The result was that the pastors ofMadrid complained that we went on our own

- 92

for the Pasehal Vigil. They were saying that we were doing a parallel vigil because we didn 't go to that ofthe Parish. But in the Parish, it begins at 6.00 in the evening and ends at 7.00 when it is still light; there are three readings and no baptism because the pastor says that if its longer no-one will come. But that 's not the Paschal Vigil!"

"The Archbishop (of Madrid) said that the charisma was given to Kiko and Carmen - and decided this was from God. He would like the Paschal Vigil to be the centre of the whole night but saw with sorrow that it is an evening Mass in the diocese (of Madrid). If a pastor is scandalized because you celebrate a second vigil, the empty churches of Madrid are offered to you to celebrate the Vigil the whole night."

"If the Bishop of Madrid had said in that moment: 'I will not tolerate anyone celebrating the Vigil outside the Parish' it would have been over. But the Bishop said something different. And thanks to Carmen, today in Madrid the Paschal Vigil is not an evening Mass; there has been a wonderful renovation. We celebrate the whole night, until five in the morning, waiting for the dawn."

4 K 12 The issue of a separate or a sole Easter Vigil for the NC communities in the three Parishes is immediate history because the edict of March 1994 by Bishop Alexander precludes such celebrations. Elsewhere in the report, the Panel considers the very difficult pastoral circumstances leading to the need for such an edict; it is necessary also to indicate in this topic that, in the Panel's view, the separate celebrations by the NC communities was divisive at the pinnacle of the Liturgical year.

4 K 13 Of specific significance is the expressed view by Kiko Arguello (quoted above) that, had the Bishop of Madrid said 'No,' that would have been the end of the matter. Bishop Alexander has already taken such a view. The Panel finds no substantive reason from the representations and the (public or private) meetings to suggest a different course. In fact, at our meeting with the NC National Team in September, the Easter Vigil celebration in the context of these parishes was not seen to be important in the view of Fr J Guzman. The point was noted by the Panel.

4K 14 Nevertheless that part of the edict relating to the Easter Vigil has been circumvented at Sacred Hearts by in effect, imposing a Vigil celebration more attuned to the NC than to the Parish Community. That was divisive and unwise given that, the effects of the edict were perceived to create a calmer atmosphere for the Parish; a greater potential for a 'live and let live' situation was seriously undermined. The situation in 1996 at Sacred Hearts appears to have been more acceptable to the broader congregation, explained to be because the NC influence was less pronounced. The Vigil circumstances in 1996 at St Nicholas of Tolentino and at St Peters are not known.

4 K 15 At our meeting with Canon O'Brien, he acknowledged that the sole Easter Vigil for the NC communities at St Nicholas of Tolentino was a mistake. The Panel acknowledges this admission and the gracious manner in which it was given. We also have to acknowledge his very pertinent reminder that the Easter Vigil is supposed to last until dawn. He also

93 a

points to the authority for this in the Clifton Diocesan Directory 1996. Under the title:

The Season of Easter (page 169) it is stated:

- "The Easter Vigil, in the night when Christ rose from the dead is considered the 'mother of all vigils.' During it the Church keeps watch, awaiting the resurrection of Christ and celebrating it in the sacraments. The entire

celebration of th is vigil shoL(ld take place at night, beginning after nightfall and en ding with dawn."

The last sentence is emphasised, to bring out the point made by Canon O'Brien; it cannot be refuted.

4 K 16 Given the probability that NC communities or individual members of the NC Way will remain in these parishes for the foreseeable future, the Panel considers it appropriate and proper that they be acknowledged (on a pro rata basis perhaps) in planning the liturgy for the Parish celebration of the Easter Vigil. In that regard, the Panel sees the value of a Liturgy Group if it can be formed.

4 K 17 (C) Baptisms: Set within the context of describing the Paschal Vigil, the 'Presentation Paper' turns to and explains the rite of baptism as used for the NC

- communities:

"We have many Baptisms by immersion, as the Council has said We didn 't invent this ourselves; the Council said that immersion better represents entrance into death and rising from death, the Resurrection."

"And so in the parishes we are building some beautiful pools, and the people in the pw'ishes are happy This was done in Paris; the Pasehal Vigil this year (ie 1993) was a complete renewaL"

"A pastor in London has renovated his church, putting the altar in the centre; he

- built a marble baptismal pool in the shape of a cross in the floor and he invited Cardinal Hume to participate in a Eucharist to inaugurate the parish."

- "Cardinal Hume is a Benedictine; the liturgy is very close to his heart. He was surprised by the signs: The Word in the middle, the table of the altar, the baptismal pool, how the people sang how they participated in London. And he

- changed his attitude of the Way"

"The liturgy touched him because the liturgy is something wonderful for us."

4 K 18 The above extract, near to the end of the 'Presentation Paper' by Kiko Arguello, is necessarily repeated not only to emphasise the sacramental and liturgical appropriateness

- of Baptism by immersion but also to convey the NC message that the Liturgy is so important for them. The Panel understands and applauds such an attitude; it cannot reasonably be criticised in our opinion.

- 94

4 K 19 Whilst appreciating that some Non-NC parishioners might be shocked when witnessing (perhaps for the first time) Baptism by immersion, particularly that of a baby, the sacramental significance of this rite might not have been realised. From direct observation by a Panel member (July 1996) as well as reference to the submitted photographs of a Baptism for a baby, the impression gained is one of considerable enthusiasm by the immerser (not surprisingly perhaps) though perhaps in excess for those not knowing what to expect. That observation is intended as serious.

4 K 20 The Panel is aware that the provision of a 'Baptismal Pool' is not so unusual nowadays and that consideration has already been given to the possibility of such a provision at St Nicholas of Tolentino in Bristol.

4 K 21 The Panel is not privy to the perceptions by Cardinal Hume about the 're-ordering celebration' at Ogle Street (we believe) in London as reported in the paper. We

nonetheless conclude that if, as described, Cardinal Hume did celebrate the Eucharist in N the form customary to the NC and without any qualms as to the appropriateness of this

rite, it is not for the Panel to offer perceptions. We understand that Bishop Alexander was the chief celebrant at a Eucharist celebration at St Patrick's in Bristol during Lent 1983 for the NC communities then existing in Bristol, also that a Vicar General has likewise presided at a Eucharist celebration for the NC communities at a Parish.

Bearing the above paragraph in mind and our earlier deliberations about the Eucharist celebration by the NC communities, allied to the knowledge (from photographs in the 'NC Book') that the Holy Father has been a chief celebrant for the Eucharist in the NC rite, any additional comments on our parts about 'form' or 'rite' would be superfluous. It is not a matter for us but might be a subject for consideration were an investigation to take place about the 'Theology of the NC Way.' We cannot but conclude that the 'Liturgical Acts' by the NC at the parishes are of themselves divisive.

95

- 4 L VULNERABILITY AND ADVERSE PERSONAL EFFECTS OF NC

4 L 1 Reference is made earlier (under NC Catecheses) to the genuinely held concerns of people from the three parishes about the disturbing style and questionable form of presentation used by the NC Way. But strong concerns are also expressed that it attracts people who are inherently vulnerable or who have psychological or similar problems, that it draws people into a NC community at times of intense vulnerability - family bereavement or marriage breakdown are cited as examples, also that pressure is brought to bear on people who might be uncertain as to whether the NC Way is appropriate for them.

4 L 2 Although it has not been possible to meet the individual representors in order to clarif" points raised or indeed to seek verification that the individual personal accounts are realistic without deliberate exaggeration, the Panel takes a considered overview that these are genuine. Most are not vindictive or offered merely to express a strong grievance against the NC Way; some are rather wistful. "I was in the 'Way 'for some eight years. I found it difficult in many ways particularly as my non-Catholic husband had many misgivings and considered it something of a threat. It gave me lots of sharing in my' doubts and worries " later stating: "In the end I was 'rejected' from the movement because I did not wish to go on the required weekend away on the second scrutiny. To

- stay in would involve 'walking' with a different group of people which I could not do. There are things that I miss very much " later: "There was a dwelling on our sinfulness and faithlessness and uselessness which I felt was not good for people of some certain dispositions. It could be very depressing at times."

4 L 3 Other representors convey unwelcome scenes of adverse personal effects, some clearly more profound than others. Had there been isolated examples of say an individual in each Parish, this could be regarded as unexceptional. But there are examples of persons in or formerly in each of these parishes who have experienced adverse affects, in varying degrees, attributed directly to their membership of the NC Way. The Panel accepts that this is so.

4 L 4 After attending part of an initial catechesis, a representor from the medical profession explains that the arguments or reasons then put forward for joining the NC Way were profoundly psychologically disturbing, tantamount to the manipulation of individuals with a: "sense of spiritual blackmail" and thus appealing to the vulnerable and/or the over-scrupulous. Just as Kiko Arguello acknowledges that people of less than normal

- outlook (described disparagingly as 'idiot' and so on) will be attracted (paragraph 3.41

(i) above), there is local acknowledgement by the NC that such people are in their communities. Without details, the numbers involved cannot be suggested even on an

- approximate basis by the Panel. We are nonetheless aware that the 'disadvantaged' are members of the NC communities at the three parishes. This was manifest at each of the meetings.

4 L 5 Whilst the Panel cannot fault the NC Way in drawing 'vulnerable' or 'disadvantaged' or 'damaged' people to a potentially caring Catholic environment in a small community, we share the more fundamental concerns of representors about the effects upon such people

- 96

of the NC process itself: the method of catechesis, the severity of the scrutinies for particular individuals with 'open sharing' before the whole community, the long duration of the process and the apparent need for a strong commitment in time and perhaps finance. That apart, it is apparent to the Panel that the NC within the Parish does not have the specialist capabilities to cope with those who are seriously disadvantaged. It is even more worrying that others are left to pick up and attempt to mend the broken or further broken pieces.

4 L 6 Representors draw attention to some counselling facilities for those who need specialist help after their NC involvement. These providers have not been approached by the Panel for clarification though we acknowledge the beneficial service, including that within the Diocese from whom a representation has been received. This refers to the hurt experienced by the NC and Non-NC parishioners, particularly at Sacred Hearts, and the assistance given in dealing with their calls for help. There is also a representation from a Marriage Guidance Counsellor explaining that assistance has to be given in the marriage context because one or both spouses are in or were involved with the NC Way; for reasons of confidentiality, this representor does not go into detail. The fact that there are people who need to obtain spiritual or another type of counselling in consequence of previous or prevailing NC involvement should speak for itself.

4 L 7 Notwithstanding the spiritual benefit derived by those in the NC communities who are not 'disadvantaged' or 'vulnerable', and who have themselves been 'repaired' via the NC in community, there are those no longer in the NC Way but touched by it and with scars. The Panel is in no doubt that such people exist though it is not possible to quantify them. It also seems doubtful whether the NC itself could indicate precisely how many or where they might now live because it does not have a system of knowing how former members are coping. There is nevertheless some disturbing evidence that people are pressured into joining the NC Way and particularly at vulnerable times in their lives. The Panel has reason to believe from particular representations that the pressure in some instances was tantamount to intimidation. That cannot be justified under any circumstances within the Church.

4 L 8 One of the representations from a former NC, describing in full terms the experience of

the NC Way during a three year period, ends in conciliatory tones: "I would like to

suggest that the movement is not allowed to recruit new members, meet or say Mass on

church property but perhaps could be allowed to continue within individual homes

supporting their own priest remote from normal Parish lfe." Earlier in this

representation, the former NC states: "I wish to ask the Bishop to restrict the activities a

of this movement." In the light of the representations relating to this and other topics, the

Panel sees considerable merit in such suggestions.

97

-4 M ADVERSE REACTIONS TO NEO CATECHUMENAL WAY

4 M 1 In their letters to each member of the Panel (noted in 4A), the NC National Team welcome the Enquiry, hoping that: 'a better knowledge of the NC Way will clear up any misunderstanding or bad feeling.' This letter seems to infer that 'bad feeling' exists; the Panel treats it on that basis and, as such, is grateful for the acknowledgement. We note a reference in the letter that: "when a new reality appears in the Church, it always arises perplexities and persecutions. St Ignatius of Loyola was happy when such investigations were held.." The Panel notes earlier (paragraphs 2.29 and 2.30) apparent awareness of disharmony by the Holy Father in regard to the NC Way.

- 4 M 2 As for the Diocesan situation, Canon O'Brien explains helpfully to the Panel that initial

reactions to the NC introduction at St Nicholas of Tolentino were of anger. Therefore in

1980, there was initial antipathy at the Parish which grew and became more pronounced

- to the level of real hostility, as those not in the NC Way but opposed to it saw no

flexibility in response from their Parish Priest. Some detailed facets are explained to the

Panel by Canon O'Brien and are reported earlier (at 4 E). Noted in the latter but repeated

here to assist in understanding particular situations at this Parish, a representor explains

that: "there is a strong sense of loyalty to Canon 0 'Brien."

- 4 M 3 Apart from a representation expressing relief that the NC had departed from St Patrick

(noted in 4 D above), there is no substantive information about reactions there except that

of Canon English and this was not favourable; it took some time before he realised a need

for 'personal change.' The NC Way was discontinued at St Bernadette during 1984

because the Parish Priest had serious misgivings (noted in 4 D). It was also discontinued

at Holy Cross at about the same time. In both instances, Bishop Alexander was made

aware that this happened and might have been apprised of the reasons.

4 M 4 Whatever the known adverse perceptions, it seems to the Panel that Bishop Alexander was not deterred from his original hope that the NC Way had something to offer (noted in 4 C) and in 1985 or thereabouts did not resist the NC introduction at St Peter in Gloucester. Nonetheless, it would be wrong to suppose that resistance to the NC Way there was not demonstrable initially because, having attracted some 250 people to the introductory talks, this whittled down to about 100 and thence to form two communities. There is evidence from representors of initial and continuing adverse reactions to the NC Way at St Peter's.

- 4 M 5 Early known resistance to the NC Way in the Diocese, including the discontinuance at

St Edmund, might not have been of perceptible concern for Bishop Alexander in this

early period given that positive advice would be offered by Fr Trafford as his Private

Secretary and perhaps confidante. Visits by the 'NC Itinerants,' at least the second when

breakfast was provided (noted in 4 C), have bolstered the hopes for the NC Way in the

Diocese. So far, it seems that papal affirmation for the NC Way had not been given; it

was in the offing five years away or so.

4 M 6 There is evidence to the Enquiry of disapproving rumbles, seemingly not very overt, at the prospect of a new Parish Priest at Sacred Hearts with a known involvement as a NC,

98

though the intensity by Fr Trafford prior to arrival might not have been known and might not have been realised for a long time; it is not inconceivable that this investigation report will reveal this NC involvement for the first time to many parishioners at Sacred Hearts. This will add to the increased knowledge about NC involvement gained by more parishioners at the meeting on 29 June; whether that adds to the anti-NC momentum is conjecture.

4 M 7 Not a point of conjecture is the critique about the NC Way produced and promulgated in

1987 by the Vicar General with responsibility for pastoral matters, Mgr J C Buckley, which raises question marks and expresses concerns about the NC Way. This stimulated responses to him from within and outside of the Diocese, as well as from abroad; these have been submitted to the Panel.

4 M 8 The general tenor in these responses from the clergy was not of approbation but of disquiet tending to strong disapproval of the NC methodology. As an example, a Diocesan Bishop stated: "Almost the whole of my experience has been negative. The people concerned are extremely zealous and hard working but they seem to be totally single minded The most serious weakness in the movement is their separation of the community from the rest of the Parish so that at the major feasts particularly they will have their own authentic (SIC) celebration quite distinct from the Parish celebration." Reference to 'single-minded' and 'separation of the community' in the context of celebration are of interest to the Panel. A priest from another diocese wrote via his Bishop; "I was originally part of the community here, left it within afew months. No priest who was here in the lifetime ofthe comm unity became fully part ofthat comm irnity. This means that some six priests were 'anti-pathetic' to the character of the comm unity. Neither yoiirselfor Bishop... ever demonstrated any positive approval of the movement." and "Their attitude to the Parish undoubtedly was one of indifference except only' in so far as it ministered to their community's need£ "This point about 'indifference' is noted by the Panel.

4 M 9 This critique by a Vicar General preceded the papal letter of general approval by three years or so. The messages to or advice given to Bishop Alexander in 1987 seem to have been conflicting. On the one hand, Mgr Buckley was showing disapproval whilst on the other hand, Canon O'Brien with Canon English and Fr Trafford as strong adherents of the NC Way, Fr Trafford particularly so, would doubtless offer alternative counsel. The latter would have been strengthened in consequence of visits to Bishop Alexander by the NC National Team and/or the NC Catechists; submitted details show that such visits were regular. We understand from Bishop Alexander that these visits conveyed a positive message and outlook about the NC Way; that is to be expected.

4 Ml 0 What might or might not have been expected was the very strong adverse reaction to the NC introduction at Sacred Hearts in Charlton Kings. There remain serious uncertainties in the Panel's minds, as to whether Bishop Alexander had been made aware by Fr Trafford of his intention to introduce the NC Way there. Many of the Non-NC representors from Sacred Hearts remember and explain their reactions to this introduction. The Panel is in no doubt that there was anger, resentment, perhaps even bewilderment that the new Parish Priest perceived so quickly a need to involve their

99

Parish with a 'radical method of Catholic formation.'

4 Ml 1 The seeds of resistance of the NC Way here seem to have been sown shortly before or not

long after the arrival of Fr Trafford at Sacred Hearts. This is intimated in representations from the Non-NC. A person who attended the initial catechesis and an NC supporter perceives the initial situation in this way: "It was unfortunate that some parishioners had decided they would not tolerate the NC even before Fr Tony came to the Parish. I really feel that Fr Tony was not given a chance by the minority." On the other hand a Non-NC representor explains: "when Fr Trafford became PP, it soon became obvious that he had varying ideas which would tend to alienate many of his parishioners from their devotion to his Church." Another states: "when Fr Tony arrived in January 1987, he commented on the complacency shallow faith and lack oflove he was finding in the Parish. I found this very hard to accept as a true picture..."

- 4 M12 Initial antipathy towards the NC Way by a small number of parishioners might have become accentuated when the aforementioned perception about the Parish Community became more widely known, as it surely was, whilst the initial catechesis by the NC itself will have added coals to the fire of resistance and probably resentment. The Panel is in no doubt that this catechesis conveyed the wrong type of spiritual message to the great majority of those (said to be about 200) who attended, probably adding to the sense of hurt experienced slightly earlier by adverse perceptions about their depth of faith. It is perhaps not surprising that an initial resistance was becoming more of a groundswell of antipathy by more and more parishioners who remained at Sacred Hearts. Others decided to attend Mass elsewhere.

4 Ml 3 The Panel accepts the following description from a Non-NC representor about the

- resistance gaining momentum on an Inter-Parish basis:

"One early result of the arrival of the NC movement was a sense of meetings, born offriendships made earlier, between members ofcongregations from each of the three Parishes. It was recognised that, whilst each Parish was going through a different stage in its response to the NC, there was help for each of us in discussing our shared reaction to the movement. We took the view that there were ways in which the NC seemed to be changing Parish life and worship. We shared concerns about these changes. We felt that we could to some extent learn what was to be expected in each Parish as time went by seeing what had already happened in Parishes where the NC had been developing for longer. We realised that any resistance to the movement in one Parish would be supported at least, by knowing how friends in other Parishes were managing

This group, loosely based on a core of about a dozen people spread between three Parishes but including perhaps twenty others who have attended meetings from time to time has been both an effective therapy through discussion and

prayer, and a source of strength; links have been made between parishes in the diocese and friendship enriched. This is a good thing that the NC has done."

4 M14 Bishop Alexander is aware, as we are aware, that numerous meetings by those opposed

100

to the NC or those not in favour have taken place not only within the Parish of Sacred Hearts attended on at least one occasion by a Vicar General, but inter-Parish meetings have taken place from time to time at the offices of the Diocesan Tribunal - the office of Mgr Buckley (VG). It is understandable that Fr Trafford should perceive the 'opposition' to be well orchestrated, though it does not necessarily follow that such orchestration has or is taking the wrong course. The Panel is aware that members of the 'core-group' at Sacred Hearts, and the other parishes, have met Bishop Alexander to rest their case.

4 Ml 5 Strong reactions about the NC Way in one region of the Diocese were seemingly discussed at the 1988 Diocesan Synod; this is noted elsewhere in the report. The Panel concludes that Bishop Alexander must by then have known about the indicated problems but was no doubt receiving advice to stay the course as it were - to continue with the NC Way on a trial basis (noted in 4 D above). In April 1990, there were discussions about the introduction of NC Itinerant families to St Nicholas Parish (noted in 4 G above) and acting upon advice, this occurred later in that year. Another major factor, no doubt of weight to the cause of the NC Way, was the emergence of the general letter of approval by Pope John Paul II in August 1990; this doubtless gave impetus to the trial.

4 Ml 6 It seems to the Panel that Bishop Alexander was being pulled strongly in opposite directions; by the NC Way with three priests from the Diocese as adherents, two of whom were Canons, and by the 1990 letter; on the other side by those becoming more and more concerned or opposed to the NC Way because of the experience gained in the parishes. These were being supported or guided by a Vicar General (Mgr Buckley); his role was one of pastoral and theological concern it seems. As noted previously, it seems to the Panel that Bishop Alexander was leaning towards those within the Diocese who wished for an end to the NC trial.

4 Ml 7 The pastoral situation at St Nicholas of Tolentino had by 1992 deteriorated due to the strongly held views for and against the NC Way there. Representations from PASCH (a group strongly opposed to the NC at St Nicholas) show that in the Spring of 1992 and in July 1992, letters were sent to 'NC Presenters' and to 'NC Communities' raising questions about and challenges to the NC catechesis. These asserted that a NC cateehesis had been deliberately misrepresented as a continuation of the RCIA. The RCIA situation is considered separately below. However, from information provided at the Non-NC meeting, it seems that this catechesis challenge followed a 'coup-de grace' situation concerning the Easter Vigil in 1992 when only the NC celebration took place at St Nicholas.

4 Ml 8 There are other possible perceived ramifications borne in mind by the Panel; such as the discontinuance of the Mass for parishioners on Saturday evening at St Nicholas of Tolentino and at Sacred Hearts, indicated in Non-NC representations to have thereby all owed for Eucharist celebrations by NC. It is a matter of fact that such NC celebrations took place; it seems probable to the Panel that the Mass for the Parish was discontinued for this reason and with increased probability leaning to certainty at Sacred Hearts. These actions on behalf of the NC communities merely added coals to the fire. Canon O'Brien acknowledges to the Panel that the Easter Vigil situation was a mistake; we appreciate such a concession.

101 a

4 Ml9 It seems to the Panel that 'the pot was near to boiling point' in late 1992 and early 1993 when, as if to bolster yet again the NC Way cause in the Clifton Diocese, there appeared another papal letter of support for the NC Way by Pope John Paul II; this is included and considered in Section 2 above. Little wonder that by now serious pastoral problems in at least two parishes, St Nicholas of Tolentino and Sacred Hearts, seemed itself to become more and more difficult to resolve. The Panel notes form the minutes of a meeting in July 1993 that Bishop Alexander still sought an amicable solution to the problem. It appears from these that Bishop Alexander was not apprised of the improbability that a 'side by side' role for the NC Way in a Parish could be achieved.

- 102

- 4 N TilE SITUATION JUST BEFORE AND AFTER MARCH 1994

4 N 1 Bishop Alexander and other 'interested persons' of the Diocese will know the

- significance of March 1994, because it might be regarded as the 'watershed' of the NC

Way in the Diocese, bringing to an end the 'trial-period'. The initial 'trial' at two parishes

in Bristol had not been the subject of any agreed pastoral guidelines because, as the Panel

notes previously, none could reasonably have been expected. The evolving situation of

differing approaches, outlined earlier (at M above), did not lend itself to the provision or

formulation of guidelines; the 'evolution' was on an ad-hoc, basis, changing frequently

it seems.

4 N 2 But in July 1993, an important meeting with Bishop Alexander took place. As noted previously (at paragraph 2.32 and 2.33) the purpose was 'to try and reach a common understanding and mind about the NC Way'. The hope was that the three priests involved would pull back the NC activities in their parishes in order to lower the tensions. By reference to the minutes of this meeting, the accuracy of which is not in question by anyone, and by explanations given to the Panel at individual meetings, the Panel is aware of the circumstances at the time. We do not repeat the points noted earlier (at 2.32 and 2.33) but it is quite evident that Bishop Alexander, even then had not realised but much more likely he had not been apprised about NC objectives for the parishes.

4 N 3 Put another way, Bishop Alexander had not been disabused of an idea that the NC Way

could be fitted harmoniously into the 'Parish System' as he knew it. He still hoped, even

at such a difficult and sensitive stage with the chequered history noted previously (at M

above), that there could be a common approach also that the NC Way could be

accommodated and so on. Why he was not advised frankly that the idea itself was

- anathema to the concept of NC activity in a Parish, as revealed so helpfully in the

Presentation of the Way paper by Kiko Arguello (section 3 above), is not known. Nor is

it clear as to how much each priest knew about the stated objectives to impose the

'Pastoral Plan of Kiko' rather than that of the Bishop (at paragraph 3.25).

4 N 4 Suggestions by Bishop Alexander that three facets of the NC process should be

terminated:- Eucharist celebration on Saturday evenings for the NC communities, no

separate Easter Vigil for them and no further recruitment must have been regarded as a

- most unwelcome way forward for three priests following the NC Way, indicated to be so

important in their own personal spiritual fulfilment. The Panel understands perhaps, to

a degree, why the priests could not accept such a solution to ease tensions within their

parishes and, there and then, could not co-operate with Bishop Alexander as indicated

formally in the general letter of approval: "so that it may be implemented according to

the lines proposed by its initiators, in the spirit of service to the local ordinaiy and in

communion with him in the context of the unity ofthe local Church and the Universal

Church."

- 4 N 5 The minutes of the meeting, and the points of clarification to the Panel indicate that the

priests wishes to seek the views of their NC communities. They were not prepared to decide for themselves because of the need for consultation. The Panel has explored the

- situation between that meeting and March 1994 and in that regard, we are very mindful

103

of representations indicating that the priests were not in a position to decide because the consultation' entailed views from the NC National Team and from Kiko Arguello, if not from other leaders of the NC Way. The Panel has good reason to accept the validity of the assertions. The issue raised by numerous representors about perceived NC Authority and the control perceived to be exercised by 'outside persons from the NC' on their Parish Priests is considered elsewhere by the Panel.

4 N 6 Suffice to state here that the three priests were in a most difficult position post July 1993. The Panel has little doubt that their loyalties, as between Bishop Alexander and their position to him as the 'providi cooperatores' (1)apal guidance at Section 2 above, 2.31) and their loyalty to the NC Way (Catechists, advisers or whatever), were in question; they perhaps were in an invidious situation though this does not overlook the fact that their primary loyalty should be with the Bishop. Again, it seems reasonable to imagine their difficulty after such a long commitment, since 1980 for Canon O'Brien and Canon English before their NC involvement is called into question; and for Fr Trafford, the same timescale yet this included a year spent away from the Diocese as a NC Itinerant. The Panel notes earlier that, amongst other things, his missionary zeal seems to remain.

4 N 7 The Panel is also mindful of Non-NC representors comments about 'split loyalties', dual authority' and the like. One in particular encapsulates the views of others: "The NC will akvays be potentially divisive element in any Parish into which it is introduced even if only a small number ofpeople join. This is because it is completely selfcontained and self-sufficient, believing itself to be the most authentic manifestation of the Church. Ii therefore seeks to take over whole Parishes and where it can, groups ofParishes." This writer does not indicate from whence the view in the final sentence is obtained, but it is one shared by many other representors.

4 0 8 This (opponent) representor continues: "Its proponents acknowledge virtually no accountability to anyone outside ofthe movement. Once a Bishop gives them permission to operate within his Diocese, they carry on as a law unto themselves and it becomes difficult for the diocesan authorities to restrain them or bring their activities to a close

without the most stringent use of authority. It is highly regrettable and to many of the a laity a cause for scandal that on the one hand the movement is supported and blessed by

the Pope and by certain highly placed curia officials, and yet on the other hand is not subjected to any apparent ecclesiastical control. They seem to have manipulated persons and institutions so that they appear to be exempt from the stringent control exercised over Bishops, clergy, religious orders, theologians, colleges and other institutions. Even more seriously the movement within the Church as a whole deals directly with the Pope and with Rome. This means that both Rome and the movement go over the heads of the Bishops, thus weakening the episcopal structure of the Church and ignoring the collegiality of the Bishops." This is a serious claim but one in the Panel's opinion, that incapsulates the impression gained from the submitted representations with related documents about 'authority.'

4N9

It seems to be known and perceived by some parishioners at Sacred Hearts, no doubt in the other two Parishes at least, that the 'spirit of co-operation' was not present in July

104 a

1993 and in the period prior to the edict. One of the opponents to the NC draws attention to a meeting between the three priests and the Papal Nuncio concerning the NC. The Panel is not privy to the points raised with the Papal Nuncio and whilst these priests may have exercised a right, the fact that such a meeting was deemed by them to be necessary indicates further a strained relationship with Bishop Alexander. It is manifestly a sign of division rather than one signifyng the spirit of service or unity. The Panel appreciates the concern of the priests and their earnestness about the NC but concludes that these were misguided priorities.

4 N 10 They were misguided because, in the Panel's assessment, these priests were behoven to and under the strong influence of the 'NC organisation' - specifically, the National NC Team at the time. Though questioned by the Panel as to whether this 'team' had met Bishop Alexander in the period between July 1993 and March 1994, the 'team' could not recall this. Fortunately, in addition to the information provided by Non-NC representors

- that such a meeting took place in October 1993, Bishop Alexander has provided the Panel with confirming evidence within a letter sent by him subsequently to Archbishop Cordes. This evidence allied to other questions of clarification by the Panel lead to a clear conclusion that the national NC Catechists of 1993 were unwilling to exercise their strong influence, their 'perceived authority' in the spirit of service to the local Ordinary so as to preclude the need for 'stringent authority' exercised necessarily in seeking to

- overcome perceived disunity at Sacred Hearts Parish and at two other Parishes.

4 N 11 The Panel is in no doubt that the edict of 15 March 1994 was essential in seeking to bring about a semblance of order and unity at the three parishes, however difficult that might prove to be and to accept by all involved. It gave a clear signal of intention to exercise Episcopal authority and that the priests, however much they disliked the proscription, were required to follow it. Before noting the effectiveness of otherwise of the proscription, it is perhaps necessary to explain the Panel's use of the word 'edict' because this might not canonically be the correct word; to remove any doubts, this means the letter sent by bishop Alexander to the three parishes on 15 March 1994.

4 N12 For the sake of completeness and record, this letter is reproduced:

105

Tuesday 15 March 1994

My dear brothers and sisters

I am writing to you about the situation in your parish in regard to the NeoCatechumenate, a movement which has the strong support of the Holy Father.

However, I have had letters from other parishioners suggesting that the NeoCatechumenate has led to divisions in the parish. Naturally I am anxious that as far as humanly possible there should be harmony and co-operation in the parish family.

This is also the Year of the Family when we all seek a way to foster good relationships.

I am therefore asking the Neo-Catechumenate Communities for a twelve-month period a

not to start any new Catechesis, nor to celebrate their Saturday Vigil mass, nor their own

Easter Vigil Ceremony.

I trust that this spirit of co-operation on their part will be matched by a willingness on the part of other parishioners to work for unity and harmony in the parish.

With all good wishes and prayers

+Mervyn Alexander Bishop of Clifton

4 N 13 The Panel draws attention, again for the record, of the view expressed in this letter about papal attitudes to the NC Way "...the Neo-Catechumenate, a movement which has the strong support of the Holy Father" Therefore in March 1994 and notwithstanding such support, Bishop Alexander exercised Episcopal authority to restrict NC activities in the three parishes. This letter did in fact mark the end of a perceived 'trial period' for the NC at the parishes, later to apply for the remainder of his time as a Bishop. In the light of information provided in representations by NC and Non-NC, it appears to the Panel that the 'edict' or 'proscription' is not sufficiently precise because it has not been observed 'in the spirit' of its purpose.

4 N 14 To illustrate the effectiveness of the March 1994 stipulations, an extract from a

106

representor is given: "In theory, we now have a period when the NC activities are restricted I and fellow-parishioners were hoping that this would bring an atmosphere of tranquillity. We had no real objection if they wished to meet for study, private though

- it was. Resentment began to fade and a growing air of tolerance ensued - until the Easter Vigil last year. It seemed they still intended to have influence, and the result was a revival of anger."

4 N 15 In the Panel's assessment, the quoted representor has probably conveyed a reasonable scene about the Parish after the edict. The general response at the Non-NC meeting was

- of agreement when this representor's assertion about 'tranquillity' was put to them by the Panel. There was even a suggestion that Fr Trafford seemed to be more relaxed and happier following the edict. But that impression seems to be misplaced given his later expressed view to the panel about the merits or the absence of such in regard to the strictures, the perceptions of considerable pressures upon Bishop Alexander to make the edict (views expressed similarly by the other PPs), and about perceived adverse effects upon the role of the NC Way. Such views relate also to those about the edict in his representation.

4 N 16 Although some opponents of the NC explain the consequences of the edict in less than edifying tones, others are helpful in explaining that it brought about some tranquillity in

- the parishes; there was less of the 'them and us' and very pointedly, the NC members could actually be seen at Mass on Sunday. The Panel is satisfied that the 'edict' was mostly effective but the spirit of the proscription was circumvented at Sacred Hearts for

- the Easter Vigil 1995, also there have been 'additions' to the NC communities at Sacred Hearts and at St Peter; the circumstances are explained and relate because of family relations or 'earlier involvement in the NC catechesis' perhaps as tentative as attendance

- at the introduction or initiation talks (however known). In the Panel's view there is a need to more precisely define the restrictions so as to prevent the repetitions of actions that can be construed reasonably as 'circumventions.' Who prompted these is not known. But they

- rather make the point of the representor that stringent 'Episcopal Authority' is essential if the NC Way is not to be permitted to continue in the Clifton Diocese.

4 N 17 Canon English indicates orally to the Panel that the March 1994 edict is obeyed. Given an intention behind the edict, to preclude an annual catechesis for the Parish as a whole following an announcement about this at Sunday Masses, the Panel accepts unequivocally this assurance of obedience by Canon English; this assurance of obedience is also given to the Panel by Canon O'Brien and Fr Trafford. We note the response by the communities at the meetings about their 'sadness' because they cannot celebrate the Eucharist on Saturday evenings but, as noted earlier in considering the NC Way, this fundamental celebration of the faithful is not proscribed during the weekdays and is apparently celebrated on the eve of Holy days but behind closed doors.

107

4.0 DECLINING MASS ATTENDANCES

4 0 1 Parishioners not in the NC Way, including those known to be opposed to it, assert that the presence of the NC Way is demonstrably adverse to a Parish merely by reference to changes in Mass attendance figures between 1995 (last official figures) and the date when the NC was introduced to their Parish; 1980 at St Nicholas of Tolentino, 1985 at St Peter and 1987 at Sacred Hearts. In also seeking to show that this is a reasonable and valid approach, official figures are also submitted for the Diocese as a whole and/or for a neighbouring Parish; comparative reference is also made to the Deanery situation for St Peter. Surprisingly, Mass attendance figures are not referred to in the representations from the Parish Priests, though the matter has been brought to their attention by the Panel.

4 0 2 The Panel accepts that reference to Mass attendance over the relevant periods at each Parish is a tangible and an acceptable indicator of adverse reaction to the NC Way at a

Parish. This reaction may stem for a number of specific reasons, one mentioned in the a representations is the discontinuance of a Saturday evening Mass (at St Nicholas of Tolentino and at Sacred Hearts) to allow for Eucharist celebrations for the NC communities there. The explained sense of grievance, hurt and preferential treatment is accentuated in a number of the representations because the discontinuance is stated to have taken place without any consultation with parishioners.

4 0 3 A representor explains: "As far as I am concerned the main difficulty has been the cancellation ofthe Saturday evening Mass, which I understand was in order to make way for the 'private' Masses exclusive to a handful of NC at which other members of the Parish were not welcome. I prefer to go to Mass on a Saturday evening" This representor asserts that the Mass on Saturday evening (at Sacred Hearts) was "always packed and uphfting with several hymns" thence going on to describe an anticipation that the Mass on Sunday evening might instead be well attended but was disappointed. The circumstances on one occasion are described: "At the time it was due to start, there was only a small handful of people present. I was informed that the PP had 'gone off somewhere with the NC' and that a supply priest was to say Mass. We sat in the dark

church beyond the start time because nobody could find the sacristy key to switch on the lights. There were no hymns." That adverse perception is probably to be expected.

404 The Panel is satisfied that the discontinuation of the Saturday evening Mass for the Parish, yet the Eucharist celebrations remained until the edict in March 1994, signifies to parishioners that greater importance was given to the NC communities at Sacred Hearts than to the Parish needs as a whole. Moreover, this can be perceived as 'liturgical displacement' for the benefit of the NC. Regrettably, in view of the specific guidance by the Holy Father in 1985, the Panel concludes that this 'displacement' was at variance with the view then stated: "ft must be very clear, that the communities cannot put themselves on the same plane as the Parish Community itself as a possible alternative."

4 0 5 Presented in a comprehensive but helpful manner, an 'informed' representor from St Peter's gives Mass attendance figures going back to 1983, noting first a fall in attendance

of 38% between then and 1985 but not attributing this to the NC Way presence (the -reasons are explained by someone else and are understood by the Panel). The representor

108

- suggests that 1985 be taken as the base, refers then to a 12.5% decrease in Mass attendance for the Diocese as reported for the period between 1982 and 1994 (from 45.167 to 40, 427) and thence poses the question: "why has there been a defection of

- 43% (ie 608) in that period There are a number of reasons; one is the general decline in Mass attendance. ft seems that a good number have gone to other Parishes in the Deanery because compared to 1983, the increase there is 300 by 1985 and 500 by 1986

- with another increase in 1990."

4 0 6 Over and above the general decline for the Diocese (10% or 12.5%) this representor asserts: "A major crisis of confidence in the Parish Community could have caused the remainder" (ie between 12.5% and 43%) going on to identify constituent problems for this crisis of confidence as follows:

v. "The NC doctrines, attitudes and practices...;"

vi. "the scandal ofthe NC emergence in a large orthodox Parish where it is supported implacably by a devout senior priest who says 'I need it '

vii. "by the continuance of the NC, until recently blocked by the Bishop despite numerous protests by parishioners...;"

viii. "By the scandal of the Bishop having to publicly, in effect, disown it."

- In fairness to Canon English, the Panel has asked him about the very considerable reduction in Mass attendance since 1985.

4 0 7 The Panel has regard to his explanation that people attend Mass at other parishes, perhaps because the liturgical celebration there is more acceptable or attractive; the suggested alternative places are: Tuffley, Matson, Brockworth and Prinknash Abbey. Even so, the move away from St Peter's since 1985 is thought by the Panel to be serious, not mainly attributable to the choice at other locations; the change is not a trickle. Whilst changes in the population will be a factor, the Panel accepts that the NC attitudes as perceived by other parishioners and practices (the previous separtion) are likely to be a cause, as is the probable interpretation by parishioners that the NC Way does not enjoy the public support of Bishop Alexander evidenced by the edict of 1994 with the consequent publicity at the time.

4 0 8 Some parishioners have clearly decided to seek alternative spiritual pastures, where the NC Way is neither a distraction or a perceived threat for them; Canon English recognises candidly that the NC Way is not for everyone at St Peter's. The full extent of the move away from St Peter due to the presence of the NC Way is not possible to quantify without a survey, but it is undoubtedly a factor and could be one of significance.

4 0 9 As for the situation in the 'relevant period' at St Nicholas of Tolentino, a representor takes 1983 as the base year in comparing Mass attendance in this Parish with the comparative change to 1994 as recorded for other parishes under investigation and the

- Diocese as a whole. The submitted information is:

109

1. St Nicholas of Tolentino down from 405 in 1983 to 265 in 1994, a loss of

34%;

ii. Sacred Hearts down from 700 in 1988 to 497 in 1994, a loss of 29%;

iii. St Peter down from 1425 in 1985 to 817 in 1995, a lOSS of43%.

The representor's indicated figures for Mass reduction in the Diocese over the period 1983 to 1995 ranges from 10% to 12.5% depending upon the start dates. The table below is produced to assist; this and the percentage figures tend to bear out assertions by numerous representors that: "Many people have left the Parish as a result of the NC Way"

4 0 10 At the meeting for Non-NC in St Nicholas of Tolentino, it was suggested to the Panel that currently just under 100 people are at the Family Mass when there is a NC 'convivence' and 120 to 145 when a 'convivence' does not occur. The validity of these figures, postdating the official figure of221 in 1995, has not been verified but they are or should be a cause of concern. The official figures tend to substantiate views in representations that parishioners have diverted to other parishes for Sunday Mass.

4 0 11 Some of the expressed views are: "A very large gro zip ofour friends have left - they are dissatisfied with the atmosphere;"... "Many parishioners feel overlooked and are reluctandy attending other churches;"... "NC are nice people but many parishioners have moved to other parishes for worship or are lost to the Church;"... "If one takes an overview ofthe influence ofthe NC gro zip during their years at St Nicholas one cannot help but notice the divisive effect they have had - many parishioners have left the Parish to attend ni ore 'mainstream' traditional Catholic Churches in the neighbourhood - such as St Mary on the Quay St Patrick and St Bonaventure. This is obviously very sad and perpetuates the situation even further.

4 0 12 Though the above quotations might be unsupportable in defining 'many' for example, they appear to be genuinely held views. They indicate an awareness that people have departed from St Nicholas of Tolentino and who now attend elsewhere; there are suggestions that some might no longer attend at any Church and there could be substance in the claim. Again, a survey might check the validity or otherwise. Whilst some of the fall in Mass attendance might be attributed to a general malaise about the obligation for Sunday, or attributable in part to the movement of population away from the 'Parish Area,' the expressed views offer a reasonably acceptable explanation to the Panel that parishioners have and are voting with their feet as it were.

4 0 13 It is realised by the Panel that some parishioners now celebrate at St Bonaventure though the figure is not known. Responses have been received about possible 'people diversions' to St Joseph at Fishponds and to St Patrick at Redfield. There is uncertainty as to whether 'new faces' in the congregation at St Joseph's are attributable to the presence ofthe NC Way at St Nicholas of Tolentino. An assessment made at St Patrick's suggests 25 to 30 who regularly worship there but were formerly at St Nicholas. We wonder whether an

110

element of this might be caused by the 'New Church Building' attraction at St Patrick.

4 0 14 The Panel has borne in mind a claim that St Nicholas of Tolentino is no more than a 'Mass Centre' and is aware of the strong rebuttal to this by Canon O'Brien. The Panel has discussed with Canon O'Brien the question of the recorded changes in Mass attendance, noting his explanation about population changes, changes to the character of the area generally and the fickleness of people in differing weather conditions. These might well be reasons but the Panel is far from convinced that the presence of the NC Way at St Nicholas of Tolentino for the past 16 years or so is not a contributing factor; probably one

- of significance, in the sad reduction at Mass there on Sundays.

4 0 15 To what extent the discontinuance of a Saturday evening Mass there, as another factor, cannot be assessed but some representors point to this loss and to the provision of a Eucharist celebration for the NC communities. The Panel is not led to a conclusion that this was felt to such a pronounced extent as at Sacred Hearts, but it nonetheless occurred as a matter of fact.

40 16 All in all, the Panel concludes that the changes in Mass attendance figures at the three parishes under investigation are very much greater than the Diocesan change. Whilst it is not possible to conclude with any exactness that the NC Way presence at the parishes

- is a prime cause for the significant losses, there is a very strong probability in our considered opinion that such is the reason. Taken as an indicator of 'animation' or 'revitalisation,' the Mass attendance figures regrettably show the opposite to be the case.

- The strong concern about 'Parish decline' by the representor from St Peter's is most certainly justified.

111

DECLINING MASS ATTENDANCES

              1979   1982   1983   1984    1985   1986   1987    1988   1989   1990    1991   1992   1993   1994    1995  % CHANGE  DIOCESE  

ST NICHOLAS   621   ||      405            402    385     371    315    325     321    327    309    285     265    221     '83 -     12%    
                                                                                                                          '95  45%           

  ST PETER                  2529   1573   ||      1200   1187    1200   1240    968    988    917    900     969    817     '85 -     11%    
                                          1425                                                                            '95  44%           

   SACRED                                               || 600   700    676     636    656    480    522     497    442     '87 -     10%    
   HEARTS                                                                                           *(329)                '95 -26%           

 ST GREGORY                                              1417    1462   1511   1503    1593   1569   1540   1643          '87 -'94           
                                                                                                                           +15.95%           

  DIOCESE           46,167                              44,998  44,166 44,310 42,984  42,174 40,492 39,792 40,427                            

|| POST NC INTRODUCTION DIOCESE: 83 to 95 - 12%

* INDIVIDUAL COUNT 87 to 95 - 10%

112

-ADULT CONVERSION: ROLES OF RCIA AND NC WAY

4 P.1 It is apparent to the Panel that there are competing claims and competition between the

- NC Way and the RCIA where these exist in a Parish. These features are demonstrable at

the three Parishes but in differing degrees influenced by the particular circumstances. The

degree of competition difficulty or even potential conflict arises first by the attitude of the

- Parish Priest towards the RCIA concept and method if he is an adherent of the NC Way;

secondly whether there is an Assistant Priest in the Parish who has an interest and is

permitted to be involved in the RCIA but is not NC: thirdly whether the leader(s) of the

- RCIA takes a passive stance or otherwise towards the Parish Priest who is NC and who

at best is disinterested or at worst has antipathy towards the RCIA.

4 P.2 Our overall conclusions about each Parish are:

St Nicholas of Tolentino: The RCIA does not function here at present nor has it done

so for the past 3 or 50 years. It has a chequered history with seriously difficult times due

in part to the leading but opposing personalities involved. We believe that the Parish

- Priest has reservations about the suitability of the RCIA; for this reason allied to his own

adherence to the NC Way, the RCIA is not encouraged sufficiently.

St Peter: The RCIA exists and seemingly operates in a generally satisfactory manner. The

Parish Priest who is NC does not take an active interest in the RCIA. We do not conclude

that the RCIA is discouraged and importantly, there is an involvement by the Assistant

Priest who is not an adherent of the NC Way.

Sacred Hearts: The RCIA exists and has done so since 1986 but it is not a star attraction;

- it has a low key role. The Parish Priest has strong if not very strong reservations about the

suitability of the RCIA but indicates that there is a difference in concept between the NC

Way and the RCIA. The latter is short term and superficial in his view whereas the NC

is a process of evangelization over a long term.

-- 4 P.3 There is some limited evidence of 'crossing to the other side,' mainly from the RCIA to

the NC and described in less than charitable terms as 'poaching'. There are two known

instances of people joining the NC Way after the RCIA. Because the terms used for

- various stages in both are very similar, there is confusion; and there is evidence that this

lack of distinction leads to conflision in the Parishes and most importantly, in the minds

of those seeking to learn about the Church. There is a dichotomy at St Nicholas of

Tolentino and at St Peter, where the NC Way was introduced prior to the formal

introduction of the RCIA to the Clifton Diocese in 1985/86.

- 4 P.4 A representor draws attention to the Pastoral Letter for Advent 1985 by Bishop

Alexander in which the purpose of the RCIA is explained and the hope expressed that all

the Parishes of the diocese will have the RCIA. The pastoral letter has a helpful

- explanation: "This Rite for the Christian Initiation of Adults goes back to the early'

centuries of the Church;" and: "The RCIA means that the whole Parish accompanies

newcomers in their journey offaith. In this way the whole group can rediscover the

dynamic truths ofthe Gospel with their loving demands for our dedication and service."

113

The letter indicates that a five day summer school for clergy and laity was to be held so that: 'each Parish may have a real understanding of what needs to be done."

4 P.5 For the sake of completeness and record, the Pastoral Letter is reproduced.

Dear brothers and sisters in Christ,

Advent is full of hope. Children of all ages get excited in looking forward to Christmas. People are instinctively at their most generous at this time of year and in this way they can give hope to others in the Third World and in the Fourth World. I know that you will

do all you can and you will experience yet again the truth of the saying in Scripture: "It -is more blessed to give than to receive." (Acts 20:35).

Today's Scripture readings remind us of hope in the past, in the present and in the future. We look back to the prophet Jeremiah and the promises that urged the People of God to look forward with confidence to the coming of the Saviour.

With St Paul we pray that our hearts may be confirmed in holiness. We are called to make more and more progress in the life that God wants for us. So we are to have active hope for our own spiritual growth together with our brothers and sisters.

With St Luke we ponder on the Second Coming of Christ. We have hope because we know that there is a purpose at work in our world, in spite of all the evil that threatens. We are told to pray at all times for the strength to stand with confidence before the Son of Man. We see that hope and prayer are closely connected.

But there is another text that comes to mind and it is St Peter saying: "always have your answer ready for people who ask you the reason for the hope you have; but give it with courtesy and respect." (1 Peter 3:15) We see that we are called to talk to others about the faith and hope which are God's gifts. Really, we're not very good at this, are we? To have your answer ready does not mean having a cut and dried response, but is does mean ready to try to give an answer.

I believe that there is a way that can help us to grow in our understanding of our faith and hope so that we are better able to answer such questions. It is also a way that can bring a greater sense of mission to our parishes. I am referring to the Rite for the Christian Initiation of Adults (The RCIA for short). Some of you will have heard about this. It has already made a very big difference to some parishes. It is hoped to have the RCIA in all the parishes of the diocese.

The Rite for the Christian Initiation of Adults goes back to the early centuries of the Church. It is a process that was carefully worked out to celebrate the various stages in the growth towards act active membership of the Church. It is a way of reaching full and active membership of the Church. It is a way of reaching out to those who do not belong to any church. One of Our Lord's parables reminds us that we are meant to be his messengers, bringing his urgent invitation to others.

114

- There are many people on the fringe ofthe Church, those who have Catholic relatives and friends for example. Some attend Mass but have not yet felt the Lord calling them to full membership. Then there are all the Catholics who are not fully practising. Some are just a little casual, some have moved a long way from Catholic belief and practice. Some of this is no doubt the fault of the rest of us. We have not been welcoming or understanding or helpful or sincere.

Then what about all the people in our society for whom religion is a closed book? In various ways we try to approach them on an ecumenical basis, through evangelistic campaigns,joint missions and through the use of the media. But a Christian has to belong to a definite community and so it is right that we should offer to them the opportunity to understand the faith and hope that the Catholic Church proclaims, and to experience the Christian love that the Holy Spirit gives.

The RCIA means that the whole parish accompanies newcomers in the journey of faith. In this way the whole group can rediscover the dynamic truths of the Gospel with their loving demands for our dedication and service.

The Rite for the Christian Initiation of Adults is an official document of the Church. It reminds us that we have to put right the initiation or foundation of our Christian life before we can really make progress. We need to instruct each other, worship together, be a real community and share in the apostolic mission. Only then are we really the Church.

- So I am asking you to learn about the RCIA. Our Diocesan Religious Education Centre is doing a lot of work on this subject. This approach is also concerned with the religious education of children and young people as well as with the preparation for the

- Sacraments. It does not take away from the importance of Catholic Schools because they have their own essential part to play. The clergy and religious are having special meetings about the RCIA. Next July there will be a five-day summer school for clergy and laity so that each parish may have a real understanding of what needs to be done.

During Advent please pray for the success of this year of study and action, that we may all be strengthened by the power of the Holy Spirit in our calling as disciples and apostles.

May God bless you all and renew his gift of hope in you.

+ Mervyn

- Bishop of Clifton

- (Given at Clifton on the feast of St Martin of Tours and appointed to be read in all the Churches of the Diocese on the First Sunday of Advent 1985).

- 115

4 P.6 The Panel notes from a representation that Bishop Alexander attended this summer school throughout and we accept the suggested interpretation of his presence as indicative of how seriously he wanted the RCIA to be taken. The evidence to the Enquiry shows that

the RCIA is not taken sufficiently seriously in two of these three Parishes largely because of the Parish Priest's reservations about the process and particularly when they compare it to the NC Way, to which they are so committed and which assists them in their journey of faith.

4 P.7 There are assertions that the NC is hostile to the RCIA but at the NC meeting at St a

Nicholas of Tolentino, Fr J Guzman of the NC National Team stated to the Panel: "I am

happy with the RCIA if it works well." Helpful as that is, we regard the response as

ambiguous because and perhaps most importantly, this acceptance of the RCIA runs

contrary to the NC philosophy that non-members are not catechised. Moreover

experience over the years (at St Nicholas of Tolentino and at Sacred Hearts) shows that

a "work well objective' and its likely achievement are so dependent upon the attitude of

the Parish Priest towards the RCJA in the first instance, an attitude influenced

understandably by his own involvement as a NC. Where there is a lack of encouragement

by the Parish Priest or some antipathy, the RCIA will not work well, as at Sacred Hearts a

or will fail as at St Nicholas of Tolentino.

4 P.8 These conclusions from the evidence to the Enquiry tend to support a considered view given formally to the Panel by the Director of the Clifton RE Centre. Amongst other things he states: "Up to the time that the NC communities ceased to nurture new members, there was frequently considerable friction particularly in the Parishes of St Nicholas and ofihe Sacred Hearts." Suggestions as to the causes are given, one of which is: "The NC employs terminology identical to that properly belonging to the RCIA, that is to the Church '5 official Catechumenate restored and authorized by the Decree of the Congregation for Divine Worship in 1972." It will be noted that this occurred some 18 years prior to the general letter of approval by Pope John Paul II for the NC Way given to the Vice President of the Pontifical Council for the Laity.

4 P.9 The Panel was also reminded by the Director of a statement issued by the Episcopal Conference of England and Wales, and by that of Scotland (April 1987) about the RCIA:

"This Rite is the exemplar and rule for all Christian Initiation and we therefore commend it to the attention of all Parish communities." Therefore a weighty seal of approval was given by the Episcopate to the RCIA process of Christian Initiation which has to be borne in mind in the context of the NC Way at a Parish

4 P.10 Where serious friction exists between the proponents of the NC Way and the RCIA at a Parish, there is a probability that this will be sensed if not observed directly by those

enquiring about the Church; that presents a bad and unacceptable image to an individual a enquirer.

4 P.11 Bad as that might be, it will unfortunately be aggravated on a broader scale by any adverse perception of the NC Way gained by the media, however justified or otherwise that might be; the image of the Church is affected in the public's eye. The affects may be irreparable in the minds of potential enquirers and this defeats the aim to evangelize

116

irrespective of the favoured method. It is not therefore so surprising to find that the RCIA is not particularly successful at two of the three Parishes.

4 P.12 Difficulties have arisen in the parishes where the RCIA and the NC co-exist. In Gloucester, a fundamental point was raised as to how the parish could have 'parallel catechumenates.' One of the more obvious problems arises from the use of the same terminology and similar rites and stages. This is not surprising given that the NC is described as a 'Post-baptismal catechesis', and follows very closely in its ideas and aims to the ideals laid out in the 'General Instruction' of the RCIA and in particular to the section entitled 'Preparation of Uncatechised Adults for Confirmation and Eucharist.' In other words, two different 'catechumenates' offer a path to faith, bring people to a closer knowledge and relationship with Jesus Christ, and yet do not share the same methods. This useful phrase ('parallel catechumenates') highlights how confusion is caused.

-. 4 P.13 Because the RCIA and the NC Way can be described as 'parallel catechumenates,' the Panel thinks it beneficial to highlight the main differences and why these methods are irreconcilable. In various commentaries about the RCIA, the experts write about the need

- for 'Adaptation.' This important point was emphasised at the two summer schools held in the Diocese to promote the implementation of the RCIA. The Rites, the Catechesis, the time needed for each candidate, has to suit the specific need of those to be catechised. This adaptation includes an appropriate length of time given to each catechumen or candidate. Those leading a group in a Parish are careful to bear in mind each and every personal faith journey.

4 P.14 On the other hand, the NC method is on a much more rigid basis not only by first presupposing that a person has no faith (paragraph 3.25 xvi) but it extends for many years

- (20 or more) before a person is perceived by the NC catechist to have 'mature faith.' That assessment of an individual's suitability to progress through the long NC method is governed by outsiders, the NC catechists from outside the Parish or the Diocese. As noted previously (paragraph 3.27), our investigation reveals that no-one in the United Kingdom has yet received the 'White tunic' to indicate mature faith and a renewal of baptism.

4 P.15 The representations show that people have been hurt and therefore have been unable to continue on the NC journey. A particular representor from outside the Diocese explains how, for six years, entry to the Church was denied via the NC Way but was achieved quickly after meetings on a one-to-one basis with a priest who was not NC. The impression gained from this representation is that the person longed to be a Catholic for a number of years.

4 P.16 In 1986, Bishop Alexander made plain his wish that the RCIA be established in every Parish of the Diocese whereas the edict about the NC Way in March 1994 made plain that there should be no more catechesis for the NC. Whatever the opposing arguments and the comparative views given about the RCIA and the NC Way, the decisions by Bishop

- Alexander in 1986 and 1994 mean that the RCIA is the preferred method to be used in helping people to the Church and towards God rather than the NC Way. Where the RCIA process is not encouraged strongly by the Parish Priest who is a Neocatechumenate, the Panel concludes that this runs contrary to the papal guidance of August 1990 because

- 117

such a stance, taken from a NC position, is not in the spirit of service to Bishop Alexander. That stance is demonstrably contrary to unity in the local Church where guidance is given towards the RCIA process and against the NC method of evangelization.

118 a

4 Q SACRAMENTAL PREPARATION PROGRAMMES

- 4 Q 1 A reference is made in the Non-NC and NC representations to the sacramental

programmes with concerns from the Non-NC that the composition of the catecheti cal

teams for First Holy Communion and Confirmation is being or has been changed to

include more NC members. A NC representor describes it thus: "Within a Parish, they

like to take over all pastoral and catechetical activity if they can. They do not normally

work with others in Parish activities. To do so is to weaken their own mission. Their

comm unities are quite exclusive and operate as secretly as they can. They co-exist rather

uneasily with other Parish organisations. Their justification is that they constitute the

authentic Church; they are 'The Way.'

4 Q 2 On the last point, another Non-NC representor explains: "They believe they have a

- superior grasp ofthe faith and thus a married NC couple head the confirmation group

using their own material and not an approved programme. Some NC members are catechists on the first Communion Programme and seek to influence this - this is strongly

- resisted" and "There is a suspicion that they are waiting to take over but we are determined not to let this happen." In the Panel's view, the suspicion is likely to have some substance because the NC pastoral plan is that members of the NC communities should take on a role in the Parish after reaching a certain stage in the NC formation process.

4 Q 3 This is made plain in the Presentation of the Way paper by Kiko Arguello (1993)

considered earlier at paragraphs 3.25 and 3.32 in particular: "As the communities grow

infaith, there comes a moment in the Way in which the whole comm unity has to work in

- the Parish;" thence: "In the parishes we take care of the catechesis for children,

marriage preparation, visits two by two from door to door." As if to illustrate the reality, that the initiator's stated objective is being fulfilled at Sacred Hearts, a NC representor explains helpfully: "I see members of the communities active in all sorts of ways - as Ministers ofthe Eucharist, as readers, as group leaders, as catechists, out ofproportion

- to their numbers -sol do not recognise the 'exclusive-isolationist' tagput on them."

4 Q 4 Inadvertently perhaps this Non-NC representor makes the point namely, that involvement by NC members does become out of proportion to their numbers at the Parish, though this occurs after the requisite period of 'formation.' Prior to this, NC is not involved in Parish catechetics; the NC member has to be ready - has to be formed sufficiently within the NC community. The Panel understands the aim.

4 Q 5 Most of the NC who write about their involvement explain that this is part of their aim

to serve the Parish; the Panel appreciates this and finds it laudable. In one of these NC

representations, a husband and wife explain that they: "have been urged to be catechists

for the confirmation programme because young people are constantly searching for

fulfilment and true happiness but cannot find it." This NC Member recounts personal

anti-social behaviour as a teenager and how the NC was transforming. Another explains

that seven of the community are involved with the confirmation programme, affording:

a great opportunity to speak to the young people and to listen to them."

119

4 Q 6 But a different interpretation is placed upon NC involvement by an opponent of the NC who explains that: "the NC is now becoming involved in the confirmation programme because they say that young people are not staying in the Church. The emphasis (1)y them) is that the schools have failed. " The Panel regards the latter considerations to be outside the Enquiry.

4 Q 7 An opponent perceives that the NC wait for an opening to appear in a catechetical area and they infiltrate' going on to ask: "But do we know what their beliefs are? Do we have any knowledge oftheir founder's teachings?"

4 Q 8 By contrast and almost as if in answer, a NC representor explains: "Considering the relatively few people in the communities (approximately 55 out of 800+ Sunday communicants), there is a high level of involvement in all aspects of Parish hfe; this includes altar servers, Eucharist Ministers, Catech ists for Confirmation and first Holy Communion, readers, church cleaners and Parish Fete." There follows an assertion that:

"Within those in the Parish who are committed Catholics, people have been encouraged in the ir faith by the example they see of God 'sfaithfulness within the communities." This representor then perceives that: "Orthodox Catholicism is also helped when people and families find life in the teachings of a Pope whom we love but whom many consider to be 'conservative' at best and completely out oftouch at worst."

4 Q 9 In the Panel's opinion, the last mentioned perception raises a question as to whether the NC Way is not 'Orthodox Catholicism' but, as recognised by some members (including Canon English) and seemingly by Pope John Paul II, it is Catholicism expressed or lived in a radical way. In offering suggestions about the future, an opponent of the NC Way refers to a hoped for return to 'Orthodox Catholicism.' The Panel considers that such points relate to the more fundamental aspects of Catholic theology, as between 'conservative' or otherwise, which is beyond the scope of the Enquiry. Nevertheless, these expressed differences in perception about 'The Faith' might need to be considered as part of a 'Theological Enquiry about the Neocatechumenal Way.' The issue of 'NC Theology' is not of significance to parishioners in general but the Panel realises that some parents are aware and are concerned about NC members involvement in preparations for first Holy Communion and Confirmation.

4 Q 10 We draw attention to explanations and concerns from Non-NC representors. The first from a parent explains: "I am concerned for my children's spiritual welfare. At the moment I am able to observe and influence what they are being taught but when they reach First Communion and Confirmation classes, lam uncertain what influence the NC will have and more especially how open they will be about it. IfI cannot trust those who will be instructing my children, I shall have to remove them to people who I can trust which would mean moving from the Parish." A person from outside of this Parish advises the Panel that: "so many children have not made the ir first Holy Communion or have not been Confirmed Some have decided not to have the instructions because of the strong presence of NC members on the catechesis groups. Parents have been offered the opportunity to have their children instructed here."

4 Q 11 Another Non-NC representor conveys specific impressions from a recent First

120

- Communion programme. Whilst the writer makes plain that the programme itself is not criticised, there is strong criticism about the attitude of the (NC) priest: "Some parents on the programme were clearly spiritually enthusiastic; some had returned to the Church through their children. Often they could not understand what he (the priest) was saying. Fears raised were often ignored or dismissed leaving people frustrated. One such example concerned Reconciliation. Many freely admitted that they had not been to confession for years. Some had lapsed but attended the Communion programme so that their children could decide their own futures." This representor then explains (in detail) the unsympathetic response perceiving the priest's attitude to stem from the uncompromising NC approach. There is a consequent perception by the representor: "It had a devastating effect on those parents still listening."

4 Q 12 The Panel appreciates that this perception of 'no compromise in matters of faith' is probably quite accurate. However, this is a personal matter for the priest but by the same token, personal reactions in potentially ultra-sensitive situations of catechesis for children at non-Catholic schools, by choice or in a mixed-marriage situation, ought to be borne in mind.

4 Q 13 Questions posed about NC teachings by those from the communities who help in sacramental preparation programmes are not resolved. There is insufficient information in the Non-NC representations about 'NC teaching' to convince the Panel that NC involvement in these programmes would necessarily act as a deterrent for parents, always provided that the programme had been approved by the Diocese; there is uncertainty about this. In one instance, at Sacred Hearts, the confirmation programme is indicated not to be 'approved.' That might need to be clarified later.

4 Q 14 An Ex-NC explains in a representation: "It was always made clear that once 'trained,' new members of the community would run the various teaching programmes within the

Parish. Programmes where once a variety of outlooks and experiences were valued and welcomed." The Panel does not doubt the authenticity in the first sentence of this quote bearing in mind the stated objective by the initiator of the NC Way that NC members are

- intended to become Catechists within the Parish. However, it seems unfair and unnecessary in the Panel's view to displace a person from a programme team merely to afford an opportunity for a NC member, unless the person 'in post' is not satisfactory.

4 Q 15 The pattern of introducing NC members to Sacramental programm teams has already been established at St Nicholas of Tolentino where, on the information submitted to the Enquiry, the Cateehetical and Liturgical Teams are almost entirely NC members. Changes at Sacred Hearts to include NC members in the programme teams, seems to be mirroring the established dominance at St Nicholas. Were Bishop Alexander to establish a 'Pastoral Plan' for each Parish, it seems to the Panel that such matters as involvement in sacramental preparation teams would be borne in mind.

Summary: General concerns are expressed to the Enquiry by parents about the involvement of NC members in the teams preparing children and young people for First

- Holy Communion and Confirmation. Tentative conclusions are made that the general adverse perceptions about the NC Way by parents can be a deterrent to participation

- 121

though the extent of this cannot really be assessed via this type of Enquiry. More detailed -investigations at a Parish level might provide the answers.

There is encouraging evidence to the Enquiry that sacramental programmes for their children help some parents in their (restored) journey. On the other hand, there is strong evidence that the NC members are gradually included as part of the sacramental preparation teams of a Parish; this is especially noticeable at St Nicholas of Tolentino. It is not unreasonable to conclude generally that this serves to deter some parents; there is some evidence that parents will seek assistance elsewhere.

122

4 R EDUCATION AND YOUTH PILGRIMAGES

4 R I There are four facets to this topic referred to by Non-NC representors. Concerns and/or reactions about the Youth Pilgrimages are raised in representations from Sacred Hearts and St Peter; it does not seem to be a feature of importance from St Nicholas of Tolentino though the Panel is aware that NC members from that Parish attended International or European events. An article in 'Catholic Life' (November 1995) is submitted to the Enquiry for information; it describes the pilgrimage to Lorreto in 1995. The important facet at St Nicholas of To lent ino is the Primary School where the NC involvement as a member of the staff is a perceived concern. However, the involvement of the media here is perceived as a serious disadvantage to the school's image.

4 R 2 Education: A Non-NC representor from St Nicholas of Tolentino (of status in the Parish)

opines that sacramental preparation by NC members is a cause of concern among some

parents who do not wish their children to be involved with the NC Way. The perceived

reasons being mainly due to adverse media interest about the NC Way in the Parish.

Another Non-NC representor, a parent, was concerned in November 1993 about her

- daughter's preparation for First Holy Commumon because the programme would be led

by a NC catechist; the NC teaching is the concern. This family is explained to be

'temporarily in a different Parish' to overcome this perceived difficulty.

4 R 3 This does not seem to be an isolated intention to seek assistance elsewhere. In response

to a written request by the Panel, a neighbouring PP explains approaches by parents from

St Nicholas about possible school placements. He declined to help though aware of 'the

difficulties experienced there.' The Diocesan Schools Commissions has provided

- background explanations and details to the Panel. There is an almost even split between

'Baptised' and 'non-Baptised' pupils. Parents of some baptised pupils are not practising

Catholics but wish their child to have a Catholic education. There is an 'Admission

- Committee' which assesses prospective pupils. There is a statutory requirement that

places must be filled, irrespective of faiths or beliefs, but there is a safeguard provision in

the admission policy.

4 R 4 Details to the Panel reveal that two foundation Governors are NC members, one of these is Canon O'Brien; The Chairman is Non-NC; the NC involvement in the governing body is a very small minority. All of the seven full-time teachers (as at May 1996) are Catholics; none are NC; five have Catholic Certificate in Religious Studies or the equivalent. The OFSTED report is submitted to the Enquiry; the report details the religious activities at the school showing dedication by Canon O'Brien. The denominational Inspector considers the sacramental programmes for years 3 and 4. The main report notes that this is a caring school with a dedicated staff faced with a number of difficulties. Amongst other things, it indicates the fully cornmitted Catholic management and teaching staff as a particular strength.

4 R 5 A professional assessment by the (new) headmaster is helpful to the Panel. Guided by this, the Panel is fairly satisfied that the main reason for pupil departures (approximately 6) stemmed from the seemingly questionable and sensation seeking media coverage about the NC Way at St Nicholas; this is the suggested cause by the Non-NC representor in the

- 123

first instance. This coverage prompted some parents to seek placements elsewhere. Whilst there is an underlying concern about the NC Way at the church. this had not shown itself as a real problem until the media drew attention in a less than fair way. The Panel does not conclude that the NC Way presence at St Nicholas of Tolentino is harmful to the image of the primary school.

4 R 6 The Panel did not anticipate that an issue about Education would be raised in the context ofthe NC Way at Sacred Hearts. However, Fr Trafford explains in the written submission that soon after arriving in the Parish, he perceived education as an obsession in Cheltenham, thence stating: "But Catholic Schools are largely, irrelevant and most parents are not even prepared to go and look at them." There is clarification by him that scholastic/academic achievement has a higher priority for families than a Catholic education. The predecessor PP indicates in a representation that: "Education was a top priorlty in the area with their needs (at that time) being well served by the White Friars and the LSU sisters." The Panel has learned that following an amalgamation of these, there is now an mdependent school known at 'St Edwards'.

4 R 7 Other representors indicate their roles as a Governor or as a teacher at the Catholic Schools. There is reference to NC members of the staff at the schools. references also to the amount of time or conversely the lack of interest taken by Fr Trafford about St Benedict's Catholic High School. He was previously a Chairman of the Governors but no longer has a governing role. The Panel has sought clarification about this because the claims are that he is too involved with the NC Way. We are quite satisfied that the

criticism about non-involvement as a Governor does not stem from his NC involvement: -the criticism is wholly unjustified.

4 R 8 Nevertheless, Catholic education generally in Cheltenham is a thorny topic and authoritative advice about this has been sought from the Diocesan Schools Commission in order to clarify whether the NC Way is itself a player in this. The advice given to the Panel is that Education is a substantive issue for Catholic people in Cheltenham because there is a conflict as to whether academic achievement is more important than 'Catholic development' in a Catholic School which does not offer the prospect of such high academic standards. Relative to Sacred Hearts, St Benedict's is on the wrong side of the town; sixty five per cent of the children (11 - 16 years) are Non-Catholic there. It is stated to have a good reputation for behaviour and social principles with a good proportion of practising Christians: the children of Ministers from other denominations are indicated to attend this school. 'Sixth -form' pupils attend St Peter's High School in Gloucester: this

school has a very good academic reputation.

-4 R 9 Fr Trafford presents a gloomier view about younger adults and the family situation:

"Older and very faithful parishioners are deeply hurt and disturbed that their children are far from the Church, divorced etc. In fact the general situation of family life was and remains, a deep concern to me." He perceives a need to address: "A generation which knows nothing of fidelity, love and their fruits, a generation for which marriage (and a fortiori priesthood) seems an absurdity - and family fairy-tale." There is a consequent assertion that: "Such a society needs a radical solution which can present them with the Good News of love which saves, in a Church which gives the food they need."

124

4 R 10 The Panel notes this perception of the NC Way as a 'radical solution' to the problems of society but we are not led to a view that the presence of the NC at Sacred Hearts is the panacea to a much broader question of Catholic Education in Cheltenham, that broader question we believe is beyond the remit of the Enquiry. However, we have regard to specific points or concerns raised in representation about NC teachers at Catholic Schools. One representor refers to the RE teacher and to the lay-chaplain at St Benedict's both of whom are NC. Whilst there is no elaboration to suggest a real difficulty another representor (a parent of children at St Gregory's School) has reservation about sending these children to St Benedict's because of the NC involvement there.

4 R 11 Apart from one other representor who writes in a more general way, expressmg concern

- about: "the religious education of the young," the previously mentioned parental concern seems to be an mdividual rather than a widespread adverse perception by parents about the presence of NC members at St Benedict's. In any event, the Panel has sought professional views in that regard and is advised that no complaints or adverse cornrnents have been made to the Head Teacher of St Benedict's about the NC teacher and the chaplain. there are no pressures or interference. We are satisfied that the image of St

- Benedict's Catholic High School is not impinged because a member of the staff. albeit RE teacher. and the lay-chaplain are NC.

4 R 12 Youth and Youth Pilgrimages: Unlike some strong adverse reactions at Sacred Hearts about the youth pilgrimages, none of the Non-NC representors from St Peter's comment upon this activity. There are appreciative and laudatory comments from the NC members who have attended such pilgrimages. One indicates involvement at two of these gatherings. the first at Denver in 1993 and the second at Lorreto in 1995. each made

- possible via the NC Way. this person (more advanced in years than 30) was a helper. In addition to making plain the benefit for the youth that the NC Way is perceived to give, this person states: "I do not know of any young people from Gloucester who were not in

the NC Way who responded to our Holy Father's invitation."

4 R 13 From the NC meeting at St Peter and on the individual basis. with Canon English. the panel learnt that the 1993 event was the 'World Youth Day' to which all the youth of the world were invited to meet the Holy Father. We understand that those attending from St.Peter's were from the NC Way, that the Parish community as a whole was not aware of this but the pilgrimage to Loretto in 1995 was indicated in the Parish Newsletter. The Panel also understands that the finance for these pilgrimages was on a personal basis, with the assistance of appeals, and accepts an assurance that Parish finances were not used. This is not an issue in the Parish.

4 R 14 As for Sacred Hearts, differihg views are given in the representations about the general situation for the Youth of this Parish with emphasis upon participation by the young members of the NC at international pilgrimages attended by the Holy Father and by contrast, by the non-participation of those who are not m the NC Way. In addition to the submitted copies of correspondence to the Apostolic Nuncio outlining the exclusion of Non-NC young people on pilgrimages for the Catholic youth of the World or of Europe, a deep sense of resentment is portrayed in two representations about this exclusion and

125

about the way in which the Parish was advised at the very last moment that youth pilgrimages were about to begin. The representations explain that these international gatherings were held in Poland (1991) Denver (1993). Manila and Lorreto (1995).

4 R 15 The Panel has sought clarification about 'these' for example whether there was any advance notification, by reference to the Diocesan Youth officer. It seems that the event in Poland was not drawn to the attention of the diocesan clergy. However, the Clifton Youth Service news Letter of May 1993 indicated "World Youth Day takes place 11-15 August 1993 in Denver, Colorado, USA when young people from all over the world will celebrate their faith with Pope John Paul II. A group of young people from Sacred Hearts Parish, Charlton King, Cheltenham are going with Fr Tony Trafford. We look forward to hearing all about it on their return!!!" The participation by the youth of Sacred Hearts was therefore made known to this Parish and the Diocese by the Youth Service some 3 months before the event but this was not promulgated to parishioners.

4 R 16 The meetings at Sacred Hearts confirmed that these bi-annual pilgrimages are for the Catholic Youth in general. However, the NC had made arrangements on a national basis

for their young members to take part because it was stated (by the NC National a

Catechists): "The Diocese was not interested." Information given to the Panel shows that twelve from Sacred Hearts attended the rally at Denver in 1993, all were from the NC communities. Nineteen went from the Parish to Lorreto in 1995. three or four were not from the NC communities. Suggestions are made in some representations that Parish funds were used to finance or to subsidise these pilgrimages but this is refuted. The Panel accepts explanations that the costs for each individual were met in a number of ways not involving Parish finances.

4 R 1 7 Despite an apparent relaxation whereby Non-NC were able to take part in 1995, representors explain that this inclusion seemed to be very much at the behest of Fr Trafford. At least two were not permitted to be part of the pilgrimage but wished to do so. As explained in the representations, the manner in which these two young people were 'not invited' or 'not selected' was unfortunate to say the least. The Panel sought explanations about this 'Non-NC selection' and accept the proposition that, if young person is not known well enough by the Parish Priest, there is an understandable reluctance to accept and to take responsibility for such a person. There are potential difficulties for a pilgrimage leader but the Panel remains unconvinced that the two people in question were unknown.

4 R 18 The Panel has considered the other explanation put by the NC namely that a time of spiritual preparation of formation is necessary for an individual to derive more fully the benefits of a youth pilgrimage. The consequent assertion is that the NC, as a community provides this necessary preparation. Laudable and appropriate as that might be, it is rather undermined by a representation from a young NC pilgrim that: "I only went to Italy to smoke and to have a laugh." In fairness this representor continues: "I started to listen to the readings and to understand them, and let them speak to me instead of swtitching off as I used to do at Sunday Mass." The Panel is mindful that this explanation comes from only one of twelve or so young NC but the preparation in this case seems to have been seriously wanting and not a determinant as to suitability for pilgrimage involvement.

126

4 R 19 Another informative comment from a young NC at Sacred Hearts explains: "A youth group for the young people was started. I went along. I was one of 5 people there - where are all these young people, who are not in the community, who did not meet other young people on the pilgrimage and were hurt by this? They were not at the youth club meeting each other." Whilst the Panel well understands the point that a youth club at Sacred

- Hearts attracted only a nominal number, exclusion from a youth pilgrimage open to all Catholics is urilikely to induce a visit to a youth club related to the Parish. The Panel is quite satisfied that a genuine sense of grievance was caused and might have been avoided with a little more care.

4 R 20 The submitted article from Catholic Life (November 1995) explains that: "Community members in London arranged five coaches this year to take around 250 pilgrims to the event from all over the country - there were very few other British participants." This article ends with a rather piquant comment by a younger member from a community at St Nicholas of Tolentino: "It's a shame more people don't go; it is a quite special experience." It seems to the Panel that young people outside of the NC communities

- would partake if encouraged to do so but such encouragement for example by means of initial advertisement from the Diocesan Youth Officer, had not been offered with alacrity at Sacred Hearts for next year's event in Paris.

4 R 21 Commenting in a general manner about the youth of Sacred Hearts. a Non-NC representor asserts: "Our youth are sadly neglected. This is possibly more highlighted by

the fact that the NC take such good pastoral care of their own youth." The Panel agrees with the perception of the care for the younger NC members, exemplified by arrangements enabling young adults to partake in Catholic pilgrimages via the NC organisation. It is not

- possible for us to conclude that such care by the NC community/organisation serves as a strong inducement to join by some of the youth in the Parish, though it is likely to be a factor. Parental influence is a much more probable factor given the tone in some

- representations that the NC was disliked or even hated by the young members but eventually they were enlightened.

- 4 R 22 Whilst the Panel cannot conclude that many of the young people (say teenagers) at Sacred Hearts Parish are in the NC Way, there is nonetheless an impressive number who seem to follow parental example with a commitment to prayer and involved worship. There is evidence in representations that, having been a young NC at Sacred Hearts. this NC involvement continues elsewhere - in London and Manchester for example, so that the commitment for some remains after leaving home. There is also limited evidence of NC

- marriages by community members but no evidence that these were 'arranged'. Wbilst noting a later (post-meetings) representation of an opposer that: "the NC youth are about to rebel", there is nothing to support such a supposition.

4 R 23 On the other hand, a Non-NC representor offers a note of warning: "I consider the impact on the younger people within the Parish to have been confusing; instead of a focussed, united image presented to them by their elders, they see division and discord." If that is so, then 'division and discord' is unlikely to encourage them in their faith conceivably causing some to perceive futility in this Parish and the Church generally, so that they see no future or no strength in the faith.

127

Summary: To the surprise of the Panel, there are representations about NC Involvement in the field of Education and in matters relating to 'younger Catholics' (the 'Youth'). Because of the generally adverse perceptions by these Non-NC representors, concern is expressed about probable or potential NC influences in the 'formation' of their children. These have been considered by the Panel under: Education, Youth and Youth Pilgrimages. No firm conclusions can be drawn as to the real extent or the real concern by parents but it is present and cannot be ignored; it is a negative image that does not help the overall image of the Parish.

On the other hand, the evidence shows that the young members of the NC Way are valued, are assisted in the more diflicult years of life as 'teenagers' and as part of that encouragement, the NC Way strives to ensure that they take part in Youth Pilgrimages where they see and hear the Holy Father's messages about their roles as members of the Church. In the Panel's opinion, the NC Way interest in the Youth is generally laudable if only it were not so exclusive to their members.

128 -

- 4S SECRETIVENESS AND EXCLUSIVENESS

4 5 1 Many of the Non-NC representors comment about the 'functional characteristics of the NC Way" within their Parish. It is described as secretive and exclusive for a variety of reasons. 'Secretive' because their weekly and monthly activities are not announced or

- indicated in the Parish newsletter; no-one can be sure who might or might not be a member so that mention of the word 'Neocatechumenal' is whispered lest the conversation about the NC Way is overheard or worse still, that the word is not

- mentioned at all as a safeguard. Few parishioners know with any certainty who the NC members are or where they meet or when and for what purpose; they are sometimes 'sighted' aboard or boarding a coach to take them outside of the Parish for their 'convivence.

4 5 2 'Exclusive' because non-members are not normally permitted to be involved. Also the NC communities tend to meet outside of the church itself; the room is described as the 'Old Canteen' by representors from St Nicholas of Tolentino; as the 'Upper Room at St Peter's and the Lampley Room at Sacred Hearts with a claim that the latter has been appropriated by the NC communities though it is intended to be a facility for the Parish as a whole. On the few occasions when the NC communities celebrate in the church itself, representors explain that the benches are turned to face an additional erected altar

- with accompanying NC features such as the brass crucifix and the icon (both designed apparently by Kiko Arguello); the locked door on those occasions of celebration, for the Eucharist, is a matter of aggravation in the minds of some Non-NC representors. They do not know or understand why this should be: "In the Church."

4 5 3 Overall, these characteristics are stated to engender suspicion, gossip or even scandal. One representor describes the situation: "The secrecy has in itself developed an atmosphere of uncertainty which leads to mistrust. Inevitably the Parish is rife with

- gossip/misinformation which is divisive." Another representor explains with some apparent authority and experience that: "over the years, secrecy can have an insidious effrct on people and organisations, often without their being aware of it. There is suspicion exclusiveness, division and sense ofan 'elite 'at my Parish; I have found these barriers huriful within the Church." The Panel regards these comments to stem from a person of clear perception, and finds the words 'barrier' or 'division' or 'elite' to be so unacceptable in the context of unity. Unfortunately such words are to be found in so many other letters from the parishes; they seem to be genuinely held and by their consistency and repetitiveness they convey to the Panel much more than a ring of truth.

4 5 4 In addition to the 'fanctional characteristics' of the NC Way, some representors explain what might be described as their 'spiritual exclusiveness' typified perhaps by this

- representor: "The objectionable way in which they arrogate to themselves an exclusive mission, claiming to have authority to define what is the true Church and the true Gospel, and having the right to declare where there is and where there isn 't love, and to discern who has and who has not had the gospel preached to them, is reflected in some oftheirpractices." These are very serious criticisms, not tested in ajudicial sense but the gist is to be found in other letters from Non-NC representors particularly in regard to the absence of love or faith or only of limited faith. Such criticisms have also been made by

129

a person formerly in the NC Way for 11 years and interviewed by the Chairman.

4 S5 Unfortunately there is another facet to the exclusive and secret and elite features as described by representors. This of course relates to the NC Eucharist, to the separate Easter Vigil, to the separate celebration on the eve of a holy day and to their separate celebrations during Holy Week. Representors explain a perception of division on such special occasions; for example: "As we watch and pray after celebrating the Lord's Supper, the NC celebrate and are heard;" another refers to their separate celebration on Good Friday. The Panel has sought clarification from the NC communities about their Holy Week celebrations because it is difficult to understand why such "non-unifying celebrations" are necessary when the Parish as a family is shown to be together as a whole, as an impressive body of people in worship particularly on Good Friday: "May they all be one."

4 5 6 The reasons given to the Panel seem to be those of self-justification as a people intended to be apart though we recognise the dedication shown, the depth of worship experienced, also that this affords growth between brothers and sisters. But representors do not perceive this to bring the Parish together as one before the Lord. We well understand the explanations about the need for privacy during the 'sharing' periods at NC liturgies. Lest there is subsequent gossip and the risk of scandal. But this too has inevitable connotations, giving the wrong type of signal to those who do not follow the NC Way; this added to the secretiveness in our opinion creates suspicion however unjustified that might be. The 'insidious' perception by the above mentioned representor might not be an inaccurate or an unreasonable description in the circumstances.

4 S 7 As noted earlier, there is an assertion that: "It is very damaging for the Church and for the Pope that the NC Way is labelled as a 'Cult' or as a 'Sect' when this is a charism which is deeply and wholly ofthe Church. Such things need authoritative refatation." The Panel accepts the representor's clarification response at the NC meeting; we do not regard ourselves as sufficiently authoritative though we have nevertheless been invited by some opponents of the NC Way to consider a thirteen page paper by Jean Vanier (l'Arche) about 'New Movements.' There are numerous relevant points within this informative paper though it has to be stated, there is no supplementary guidance to substantiate the authority of the author. Whilst therefore we recommend this paper to those of the Church who could be accepted as sufficiently authoritative to refute any claims, we wish merely to note a few of the points in this paper.

4S8 The relevant place to start seems to be: -

"After Vatican II, which was not a council ofdefending, imposing and excluding, but a council of mercy of listening and of including, it was clear that the Holy Spirit would explode within all the people of God and that lay movements would spring up: the prophecy of Joel would be actualised.

"After this

Ishallpour out my spirit on all humanity.

Your sons and daughters shall prophesy,

130 -

- Yozir old people shall dream dreams,

And your young people see visions.

Even on the slaves, men and women

- Shall Ipour out my spirit in those days.

I shall show portents in the sky and on earth,

Blood and fire and columns ofsmoke."

Joel 3: 1-5

"At the same time, ofcourse, the Council caused a certain havoc amongst those who needed clear structures, the church as afortress, who needed to obey leaders rather than listen and trust the Spirit. There was also the danger that those who rejected structures and authority in the name offreedom ofthe Spirit were doing so more out of their own psychological needs and fears of authority. To follow the Spirit of God we need to be purified on many of these needs and fears; we need to die and to reborn in the Spirit of Jes us.

4 S 9 This paper then considers the Signs of the Spirit after first stating: "Time will tell whether a movement is faithful, whether it is growing as the Spirit wants. There are signs, however, which indicate that a movement is evolving in the ways of God. It then asks:

"What are some of these signs?" Much then follows in answers and for the sake of completeness as well as record; these are recorded.

i. "A movement is called to follow the mind of the Church in its openness

and closedness. I am touched by the way John Paul II inspired by

Vatican II is concerned by both identity and openness. The new

Catechism of the Catholic Church is an important document which spells

out its identity. The meeting in Assisi in 1986 when the Pope met and

prayed with religious leaders from all parts of the globe was a sign of

openness, just as his visit to the synagogue in Rome and his visits to

Morocco and Tunisia. His insistence on ecumenical dialogue and the

need of Christians to do everything they can possibly do together in order

- to farther the cause of unity is a sign of openness. If a new movement is

following the mind of the Church in its identity and openness, it is a sign

that it is of the Holy Spirit. But openness does not come once identity is

assured. It is implied in the identity. Mission is part of the identity of a

disciple of Jesus.

- ii. "If a new movement is growing in communion with the local Bishop and

the local Church, collaborating with other movements and sensitive to

inculturation, not closed in upon itself and its own specific culture, then

- it is a sign ofthe Spirit."

iii. If a new movement is announcing a good news to the poor, if it is

- committed in some way to the poor, allowing itself also to be evangelized

by the poor, then again it is a sign of the Spirit. The prophecy of Isaiah

that Jesus read in the synagogue of Nazareth shortly after his baptism and the retreat in the desert defines not only the mission of Jesus but the

- 131

-__

mission of every follower of Jesus, of every Christian community, of every movement in the Church.

iv. Maybe the most complex element in the discernment whether a community is evolving well is the quality of love for the weaker members of the group, and the special love which permits those who feel called to move on, to receive the help they need and to leave peacefully; without feeling guilty. Sectarian groups tend to hold on to their members; they do not let them go easily It is as if for a person to leave the group is synonymous with leaving the church or leaving God. There can also be a form of manipulation or seduction to bring members into the movement. Numbers in a group is necessarily a sign that the group is of God. Some people seek sectarian and powerful groups that bring security. Jesus did not create a powerful group. He calls people to wholeness, to humility and to holiness. He invites them to live the beatitudes, particularly poverty in spirit.

v. A movement closed in itpon itself having its own priests and

psychologists with the community can become dangerous if the priests

and psychologists are bound by loyalty to the movement, if there is no

other outside authority available. Everything is decided by the leaders

who tend to become word of God. There is a real risk of the group and its

vision, its laws and spirit, becoming all powerful, unable to see its

shadow areas or to accept any form of criticism. In such situations some

members get crushed; this can be justified by seeing the Holy Spirit on

one side and the devil on the other. In such movements common sense can

become quite uncommon, psychological and human evaluations reiected

and only the words of the founder are upheld. A movement that is

evolving in the ways of the Spirit is called to become open to allow a

members easy access to wise men and women who do not belong to the

movement. A dictatorial spirituality cut off from a good anthropology has

no basis in the good news of Jesus. Such closed situations which can

cause great harm to individual members, preventing their growth to

freedom, is not only found in new lay movements, but also in religious.

Such serious crisis find their origin in a particularly dominating form of

authority, in an ecclesiology which tends to be triumphant and a

spirituality where law has primacy over communion and love, where

power appears more important than the sermon on the mount.

Having said this, let us not judge too quickly. Time will tell. Let us

remember that each movement with its particular goals fulfills a

particular need in the Church at a particular time in history. Each one

oscillates in different ways between respect of tradition and clarity of

faith on one side and mission to all peoples all over the world, revealing

the mercy and goodness of a forgiving God on the other. The second

aspect implies a constant renewal of attitudes and language, from the

definition of the Church as fortress to the loving attitude of a spring of

water flowing over all of humanity - as the Spirit in the beginning of time

132

hovered over the chaos. Movements can begin, perhaps always begin, in

a sectarian way, but they are called to evolve. They must open up to the

mind of the Church and to new ways of God revealing his love of the

world The Holy Spirit leads them gently but firmly on a path which

implies cooperation, humility, openness, insecurity and a certain death of self. If they refuse this path of insecurity, then these movements

although they may have initially been inspired by God, will die out; after a time of prosperity, they will disappear. It is what Gamaliel said in the Act of the Apostles:

"Keep away from these men. Let them alone;

For if this plan or understanding is of human being,

- It will fail.

But if it is of God you will not be able to overthrow them. You might even be found opposing God!" (Acts 5)

4 5 10 In the context of this Enquiry relating to three parishes of the Clifton Diocese, the above extracts give much food for thought, particularly the second explained sign. As indicated at paragraph 4 5 7 (ii) above, the Panel does not regard itself as sufficiently authoritative to explore the statement further but others of the Church might wish to do so.

- 4 S11 This nevertheless leads to another extract submitted to the Enquiry by the NC National Team from 'The Ratzinger Report. An exclusive interview on the State of the Church;" it is a translation from the authorised German manuscript and is dated 1985. The extract is from Chapter 3: "At the Roots of the Crisis: The Idea of Church" and under the subtitle - 'The Hope of the movements; 'the part identified for the Panel states:

"What is hopeful at the level of the universal Church - and that is happening right in the heart of the crisis of the Church in the Western World - is the rise of the new movements which nobody had planned and which nobody has called into being, but which have sprung spontaneously from the inner vitality of the faith itself. What is manifested in them - albeit subdued - is something like a Pentecostal season in the Church. I am thinking, say, of the charismatic movement, of the Cursillos, of the movements of the Focolare, of the Neo-catechumenal communities, of Communion and Liberation etc. Certainly all these movements also give rise to some problems. They also entail greater or lesser dangers. But that happens with all living beings."

4 5 12 The above also gives much food for thought, submitted by the NC National Team to demonstrate that whilst there might be problems with 'New Movements,' this is not unexpected and no less an authority than Cardinal Ratzinger recognised this in 1985. No doubt Bishop Alexander will consider this extract carefully but the Panel wishes to draw specific attention to a few matters that seem quite germaine in the context of the Enquiry. First there is an authoritative voice of the Church who identified the 'neo-catechumenal communities' as a 'Movement,' an identity disclaimed by the initiator; secondly if the NC Way is thus to be regarded as a 'Movement,' the extracts noted above from the paper by Jean Vanier could assume increased significance and particularly in regard to the second explained sign of the Holy Spirit; third, there was an awareness again (in or before 1985)

-~ 133

of problems' with the movements perhaps not dissimilar from those experienced at the -

three parishes of the Clifton Diocese; and fourth, it could be thought that these parishes

have experienced dangers to a greater or less degree in consequence of the NC Way since

1980, 1985 and 1987. -

4 S 13 We have explored the possibility of whether the NC Way might be modified, as noted elsewhere in the report, in order to become more flexible and 'sensitive to inculturation' (ref: Jean Vanier, above) but the answer from the NC Way is that this charism of the Church cannot change. Therefore returning to the points at issue and to the question: "Is there sufficient tangible evidence before this Enquiry; to reach a conclusion the NC Way is secretive and exclusive?" in our opinion the evidence leans very heavily to an

affirmation - Yes. Moreover the Panel is also of the opinion that this exclusiveness is not -necessary for those wishing to know more about God and the Church. Previously, as a

topic (4 P) we consider the issue raised in representations about the role of RCIA in a Parish with an NC Way. The RCIA is subject to adaption, it is open to all and is recommended by the Bishops of England and Wales.

134 -

-4 T NC 'AUTIIORITY' AND 'CONTROL'

- 4 T I Frequent reference is made in Non-NC representations from the Parishes about 'NC

Authority.' In particular concern is expressed in varying degrees about the 'control' seen

to exercised over their Parish priests by the NC National Team from outside the Clifton

Diocese. There is concern that 'their priests' subject themselves to instruction, guidance

about the NC Way in their communities and for themselves to these so called 'outsiders,'

some of whom are lay -people. Examples are cited. Concerned parishioners wonder why

this happens and why it is permitted to happen.

4 T 2 A broad and rather sweeping claim is made in a representation about this; it is referred to earlier in the report (at N). On first reading it is very provocative and alarming. However, as noted earlier it seems to encapsulate points made in other representations about NC Authority and is therefore repeated. The representor asserts: "Its proponents acknowledge virtually no accountability to anyone outside of the movement. Once a Bishop gives them permission to operate within his Diocese, they carry on as a law unto themselves and it becomes dfficult for the diocesan authorities to restrain them or bring

- their activities to a close without the most stringent use of authority. It is highly regrettable and to many of the laity a cause for scandal that on the one hand the movement is supported and blessed by the Pope and by certain highly placed curia officials, and yet on the other hand is not subjected to any apparent ecclesiastical controL They seem to have manipulated persons and institutions so that they appear to be exempt from the stringent control exercised over Bishops, clergy, religious orders, theologians, colleges and other institutions. Even more seriously, the movement within the Church as a whole deals directly with the Pope and with Rome. This means that both

- Rome and the movement go over the heads ofthe Bishops, thus weakening the episcopal strz£ctztre of the Church and ignoring the collegiality of the Bishops."

4 T 3 The Panel has not sought facts from the representor to substantiate a variety of points in such a broad assertion. Nevertheless, there are points in it that do not, in reality, seem to be exaggerated. We are not privy to any claimed special relationship between the NC Way and 'Rome,' unless of course this is intended to mean the Holy Father who as the Bishop of Rome, has experience of the NC communities there; this is explicit within the NC published book. Earlier in this report, the Panel considers and offers interpretation to parts of the 1990 letter of general approval by Pope John Paul II for the Neocatechumenal Way. We highlight the guidance in the letter that the NC Way: "be implemented according to the lines proposed by its initiators (Kiko Arguello and Carmen Herna'ndez), in the spirit ofservice of the local Ordinary and in communion with him in the context of the unity of the local Church and in the Universal Church."

4 T 4 We interpret (paragraph 2.19 above) the latter part to mean that the NC Way should function as and where the Bishop would wish so that it does not have the potential to become a cause of disunity within a Parish. There is also the earlier (1985) specific guidance by Pope John Paul II to priests who are NC but who are: "always the representative of and the p'rovidi cooperatores' with the Bishop to whose authority you should feel particularly united," thence reminding them: "In effect, in the Church it is the right and duty of the Bishop to give directives for pastoral activity (cf Canon 381) and

135

everyone has the obligation to conform to these." That on the face of it seems to be straightforward.

4 T 5 However from the Presentation of the Way (1993) considered earlier by the Panel (paragraph 3.23 et al), it seems as if the NC presence in a Parish is not so straightforward in terms of responsibility and accountability. The pertinent points, identified previously (3.25, xvii and xviii), are restated in part for convenience:-

xvii. "....Has the parish been transformed? Then we have finished our mission and we can go. There you have your communitiesforyourparish andfor your Bishop; now you can follow the pastoral plan of the Bishop, not that ofKiko."

xviii. 'The priests say: And those movements which have their own pastoral

programme? What happens to the Bishop's pastoral plan?....I don't

govern any priest."

4 T 6 Earlier (at paragraph 3.33) the Panel wonders how the transformation of a Parish by the NC "in accord with the pastoral plan of Kiko rather than that of the Bishop" accords with papal guidance given in December 1985 about Episcopal authority. To that can be added the later guidance in the 1990 letter of approval that the NC Way be implemented:

"in communion with him (1ocal Ordinary) in the context of the unity of the local church..." There are obviously contradictions as between the authoritative guidance by the papacy about the 'modus operandi' and accountability of the NC Way and the originator's (Kiko Arguello) explained form of operation only 3 years ago.

4 T 7 Similarly and again noted previously (at paragraph 3.20), the Initiation Talk (by Kiko

Arguello) points out that "Badges are not worth anything here; no priests, nor monks,

nor nuns, nor Bishops" leading the Panel to a view that the traditional hierarchical -

arrangement within a Diocese is thus regarded by the NC as inconsequential. The reality

in the Clifton Diocese since the beginning of 1980 tends to bear out that explained

approach. There is an absence of any clear explanation by the NC to Bishop Alexander -

of the intentions at the parishes of St Nicholas of Tolentino in Bristol, at St Peter in

Gloucester and at Sacred Hearts in Cheltenham. The 'pastoral plan' by Kiko is not

revealed; Bishop Alexander is not aware of such a plan. -

4 T 8 Yet the self-contained NC communities at the parishes, the first established at St Nicholas of Tolentino during 1980 is supervised with the exercise of power by outsiders - the so called NC National Team headed by a priest (presently Fr J Guzman), without any officially recognised responsibility or canonical focus within the hierarchy of the Clifton Diocese. It seems to the Panel that the NC power in the three parishes is self-created there by the NC National Team, otherwise known in the diocese as 'NC Responsibles,' and is exercised by them with the Parish Priest in a sub-servient role in matters relating to the Neocatechumenal Way. As with the others in the 'NC Community,' the Parish Priest who follows the NC Way is subject to the power exercised by the NC National Team. The Panel has no doubt about this; it was demonstrable during our relatively brief involvements at the parishes.

136

4 T 9 By way of illustration and hopefully substantiating an indicated stance of openness and impartiality without having any preconceived ideas or prejudices about the NC Way, the Panel arrived in good time for the first meeting with the NC communities at the Dunstan Centre on 27 April. Members of the Panel noted the TV media interest at the entrance but this seemed to be of no real consequence, though we were aware of reported earlier difficulties due to media involvement at St Nicholas in regard to the primary school. Not long before the meeting was due to commence, the room was virtually empty. The Panel was invited to meet Canon O'Brien in the presbytery; this seemed odd. There was no

- explanation and the Chairman felt that the Panel's position of independence could be in jeopardy.

- 4 T 10 The Chairman had not realised that the meeting itself was in serious jeopardy due to the media presence. Arriving at the presbytery, the Panel members were invited to a lounge and after a while, we were introduced by Canon O'Brien to this 'London Team;' this introduction and the circumstances were quite unexpected; just as unexpected as the 'visit' by the NC Team to the homes of Panel members on the preceding evening.

4 T 11 Fr Guzman made plain that: "We will not collaborate with this investigation about the NC ifthe Press is permitted to the meeting." The impression given to the Panel was that the meeting would not occur unless the wishes of the 'NC National Team' concerned about media involvement, was respected. The tense situation was resolved by the Chairman; the media representative left the scene. Thereafter the NC members entered the room, rather as if in procession and as if a green light had been displayed; these descriptions are not intended to be disparaging but to illustrate the impression gained by the Panel prior to and occasionally during the meeting that Canon O'Brien might not be the master of his domain. This is but one example observed by the Panel.

4 T 12 A number of Non-NC representors refer to a Parish meeting during 1992, called apparently to clarify the concerns of some parishioners about the NC presence and activities at Sacred Hearts. Whilst noting the descriptions of its eventual vexed tone, the most important message in terms of 'authority' is that this meeting conveyed a strong impression to parishioners of sub-servience by their Parish Priest towards the attending NC Catechists. This particular incident, and a similar one made known to the Panel at St Nicholas of Tolentino in Bristol, gives cogent credence to parishioners' genuine concerns that their Parish Priest is subject to strong outside control, that he is subject to torn loyalties and to the extent that loyalty to Bishop Alexander sometimes takes second place to their loyalty for the NC Way.

4 T 13 Sadly in the Panel's opinion, such loyalty does not seem to be mirrored by the National NC Catechists who, at the meeting with the Panel on 9 September, appeared to distance themselves from the NC involvement and progress of three Diocesan Priests at their Parishes. The Panel cannot help but wonder whether in the words of Pope John Paul II "they (the 3 Priests) have been deceived" (Main report, paragraph 2.27.v). We also wonder whether, at times, sight was lost of the specific guidance given by the Holy Father in 1985 and especially: "whatever service has been entrusted to you, you are always the

- representative ofand the p'rovidi cooperatores' with the Bishop to whose authority you should feel particularly united." (Main report, paragraph 2.27 vi).

- 137

4 T 14 It might be the case that the National NC Catechists, strong in their desire to promote the NC Way, had themselves lost sight of the unequivocal papal guidance given in 1985 though, as noted in the main report, this is within the published 'NC Book' for all to see. The National NC Catechists, otherwise known as the 'NC National Team' or the 'National NC Responsibles', did have some accountability to ensure that such understood guidance was not only widely known but was understood and accepted by any NC at Sacred Hearts, at St Peter and St Nicholas of Tolentino. By oversight or otherwise, the Panel concludes that this accountability was found wanting and seriously so over the period since 1980.

4 T 15 Records submitted to the Enquiry show that the NC National Team and local catechists visited Bishop Alexander over the years from 1980; the last recorded occasion is in February 1992. However we are given to understand that such visits did not provide explanations or elaboration to build upon existing limited understandings about the aims or objectives about the NC Way, about any 'NC pastoral plan' for these parishes; nor have these been illustrated to the Enquiry. Despite requests that details about the catechetic programme or methods be submitted for scrutiny and approval by Bishop Alexander, these requests have not been acted upon.

4 T 16 The Panel concludes that there has been only nominal accountability to Bishop Alexander about the involvement and actions taken by the NC National Team in the years since 1980 with the NC communities at Bristol, Gloucester and Cheltenham. On the other hand, the Panel concludes that there is accountability to Kiko Arguello about these parishes.

4 T 17 Even allowing for a sense of the 'theatrical,' the printed Initiation Talk by Kiko (section

3 of main report) indicates that: "Badges are not worth anything here; nor priests; nor monks, nor nuns; nor Bishops" leading to a literal interpretation (noted at paragraph 3.20 of main report) that: "the traditional hierarchical arrangement within a Diocese is thus regarded by the NC as inconsequential" and thus "seriously at variance with the Holy Father '5 guidance to the NC about Episcopal authority and obedience." That earlier stated conclusion by the Panel, following assessments of submitted documents about the NC Way itself prior to assessing specific representations by parishioners, gives credence to the representor's view that: "They seem to be exempt from the stringent control exercised..." The reality has been demonstrable in this Diocese; stringent control is necessary and will be a recommendation by the Panel.

138

4 U POSSIBLE FUTURE SOLUTIONS

4 U 1 Suggestions are made in the representations about the future in the parishes; these range from do nothing to do something but not drastic to take strong action as quickly as possible in order to bring peace and unity back to the Parish. A few of these varieties are noted and commented upon by the Panel; all the suggestions have been borne in mind.

4 U 2 A Non-NC representor from Gloucester suggests that whatever resolution to the problem,

- it must be done in love, reconciliation and honesty. The Panel regards this as a

commendable approach which Bishop Alexander will no doubt consider in the

knowledge that whatever the decision taken after many prayers for guidance, it will be

a disappointment for some people because there are differing hopes about the future and

expectations from this Enquiry. In reaching a decision, we believe that the pastoral well

being of the Parish as an entity and the 'Parish Community' as a whole should be the

main vision for the future, however potentially difficult or painful that might be.

4 U 3 In our opinion, the background leading to the edict is a very useful reminder and starting point in considering the future, bearing in mind three very important questions:

a Was the edict of March 1994 necessary?

b. Has it been entirely effective in providing an improved or a satisfactory

- pastoral situation at the Parishes since 1994?

c. Are there any real signs of change in attitudes by and towards the NC Way that could auger well for the future?

The answers to these questions we believe are (a) Yes; (b) No; (c) No

4 U 4 Whilst there can be no doubt that the edict was necessary, there is also little doubt in our

minds that it has not resolved the pastoral problems at the Parishes since March 1994.

- There are numerous indications in that regard; these below are not necessarily listed in

any order of importance and some are of very recent origin:-

1. the claim pressed upon Bishop Alexander and accepted under Canon 212;

ii. the requests from a number of sources that an Enquiry be held;

iii. the response to the Enquiry itself;

iv. the variety of expectations from the Enquiry

v. a greater awareness by parishioners about the NC Way presence in the Parish in consequence of the Enquiry itself - the meetings and some media reports to serve as a reminder;

vi. the strong concerns by Parishioners about the future of these Parishes as

- 139

expressed in their responses;

vii. the perception by some parishioners that a continuance of the NC Way in

the Parish serves as a threat to the Parish as 'they know it,' to quote an

expression by a NC representor;

viii. the 'indicated' pastoral plan of Kiko Arguello to transform a Parish;

ix. The 'transformation objective' as perceived by some parishioners;

x. the NC involvement in sacramental preparation programmes as envisaged

by the initiator and explained in the Presentation Paper; N

xi. the continued suspicion and mistrust by some parishioners towards the

NC Way; how many cannot be quantified but might be considerable in a

consequence of the Enquiry itself;

xii. the continued secrecy about and separate activities of the NC which is a

perceived to be divisive in the first instance;

xiii. the aggravation caused by the Youth pilgrimage organised only for NC

members at the parishes;

xiv. the indicated conflision in the minds of some parishioners as to why there

is tension or an adverse atmosphere within a Parish stemming in part from

gossip and the like;

xv. the unreversed trend of declining Mass attendance at the parishes

probably in consequence of the other identified indication;

xvi. the seemingly unshakeable stance by each PP that the NC Way is so

important in their own journey towards salvation and therefore for people

in general though the stance might not be quite so resolute in each of the

priests;

xvii. the continuing issue and competing claims of whether the RCIA or the NC is the most suitable form of conversion and entry to the Church notwithstanding the Bishop's endorsement for the RCIA;

xviii. the adverse signals given to or the knowledge by those outside about this internal disagreement that will act as a deterrent so that nothing is achieved in the end; more importantly, a potential enquirer is or might be lost;

xix. the unresolved and long-standing question about the acceptability of NC

Catechesis used for the NC community;

140

xx. the continuing 'NC Authority' control and influence exercised by persons outside of the Diocese without any canonical focus or accreditation;

xxi. the adverse and yet justifiable perceptions by parishioners of an external influence and 'NC Authority' over their Pastor other than that of their Chief Pastor and the apparent acceptance of this dual authority;

xxii. the question in the minds of parishioners as to where their Pastor's primary loyalty lies;

xxiii. the Easter Vigil celebration in which greater emphasis was given and preference shown to the NC than to the Parish Community as a whole;

xxiv. the absence of a 'representative' forum in the Parish where matters of

- concern can be discussed and solutions considered;

4 U 5 Added to the above might be a realisation by Bishop Alexander that his hoped for 'side by side' acceptance of the NC Way in a Parish, to function satisfactorily with Catholic Associations or groups, has not been achieved and is not achievable. The latter is a firm conclusion by the Panel in the light of the information about the NC Way (the Presentation of the Way paper) together with the indicated experiences since 1980.

4 U 6 Bearing the above in mind, it will be obvious that the Panel cannot recommend a 'do-nothing' decision. In our opinion, that would not help to safeguard the future of each Parish nor call a halt to or a slowing of their decline. It would not be unifying.

4 U 7 As for doing something that is not drastic, the Panel has considered a suggestion by a

Non-NC representor that, amongst other things: "the NC should be studied and guided -

- and ifnecessarv corrected rather than discontinued." This 'study and guide' concept is

a very good idea; is it possible for the "lines of the initiators" to be modified so as to

make the NC Way acceptable to more parishioners? We have explored this route but it

is a cul-de-sac; there is no real sign or likelihood of one in the immediate future that the

'lines' could be modified except to the extent that an Easter Vigil celebration for the NC

communities seems no longer to be so important. The Panel therefore concludes that

there is no prospect of significant change by the NC itself perhaps to reflect the

'English/British culture.'

- 4 U 8 A Non-NC representor suggests that the provision of a Regional Centre for the NC

communities might be a suitable solution by catering separately for their needs overseen

by a 'NC Chaplain' who is not the PP of Sacred Hearts or the PP of the other parishes.

Another Non-NC representor wonders whether Canon O'Brien will soon retire and might

therefore respond to the idea of becoming an NC Chaplain at such a centre. We have

explored the centre idea, not with Canon O'Brien but with Fr Trafford. It is clear, from

his response that such a concept would not be acceptable to the initiator; "the NC has to

be in a Parish."

4 U 9 The Panel does not propose to recommend the idea of a Regional Centre because it is not

- 141

favoured by the NC; there is therefore no merit in pressing this solution in such circumstances. It would not in any event offer a necessary solution in the short-term on the assumption that a suitable building could be found and purchased without difficulty. Such flinding would necessarily fall upon the shoulders of the Diocese given that the NC indicates a lack of their own finances.

4 U 10 This financial point arose with the NC National Team not in the context of a proposed centre but whether hypothetically, the NC would purchase St Nicholas of Tolentino were it to become a 'Neocatechumenal Parish.' In addition to an answer that it would not be purchased, the query has no doubt prompted a subsequent written response from the NC National Team that: "the very idea ofa Neocatechumenal Parish is meaningless." The Panel does not know whether this view stems from an initiator of the NC Way (ie Kiko Arguello) or more to the local situation, whether it is a view known and shared by each of the priests involved.

4 U 11 Be that as it may, it is the Panel's considered opinion that the existing NC communities should be permitted to remain within these parishes. Not only would this retention be a

solution 'in charity,' mentioned by the Panel at the meeting in Cheltenham, but it seems a to be the only realistic way forward for the souls involved, in the immediate future at

least. An outright proscription of NC activities, as suggested by some representors, seems too stringent and harsh; we very much doubt whether Bishop Alexander would agree to such a strict mandate. We imagine also that the Bishop recognises the value of their communal life, bearing in mind the views given to the Panel: "I have always realised the

importance ofsmall communities within a Parish." -4 U 12 The Panel is in no doubt that such retention of existing NC members, without any

recruitment whatsoever, would have to be on the basis of a 'Pastoral Plan' for each Parish. This would necessarily be from Bishop Alexander in exercising his Episcopal right and duty, and it would need to be accepted in obedience by each of the Parish Priests after prior consultation with them. Such a pastoral plan is vital, of that we are in no doubt and must be produced with care but with the utmost expediency; it could not obviously be produced overnight as it were, but resources must be found with that in mind. We suggest a time limit for the Parish Plan formulation and adoption of no more than 1 year (following a decision to accept the idea) with a view to implementation within 1 year of the adoption at each parish. These admittedly are arbitrary periods but are put forward by the Panel in the belief that they are realistic and just as importantly, as a message of intent to the Parish as a whole.

4 U 13 We suppose that Bishop Alexander, acting no doubt with the benefit of advisers, will have pastoral views as to what is needed at each Parish after consultation with Canon O'Brien, Canon English and Fr Trafford. The Panel nevertheless offers suggestions in that regard.

4 U 14 First, it is very important to know whether each priest is apprised of and accepts without any reservation the specific guidance given by the Holy Father in 1985 about the compatibility of a priest as the Pastor of a Parish and his personal NC involvement. In particular, that the NC communities cannot be accorded the same status as a Parish

142

Community in toto, also that a priest is not called solely to serve a particular group of people even though this NC involvement as a member of a community is regarded as necessary for his own renewal and spiritual journey. In other words faced with such authoritative guidance from the Holy Father, which Bishop Alexander will doubtless wish to follow as the Chief Pastor of the Clifton Diocese, each priest in effect would be invited to renew his stated commitment to the Diocese and Bishop Alexander as all priests are invited to do so on Maundy Thursday.

- 4 U 15 It follows that any questions relating to 'dual authority' or 'divided loyalties' for the Parish Priest would be obviated by the provision of a 'Pastoral Plan' determined by Bishop Alexander. He would invoke his God-given authority to control and oversee the teaching of the Neo-Catechumens in a similar way as he oversees the teaching in Catholic Schools. In that way, any concerns or doubts about the theology and doctrinal teaching by a catechesist should disappear provided also that each catechist be commissioned by

- Bishop Alexander and the instruction is given on his behalf. The Panel is not in a position to know whether any training would be necessary for the catechists to serve the NC members or how many of the existing NC catechists from the Diocese would be prepared to continue on this Diocesan controlled basis; that would be a matter for resolution in the consultation process assisted by the Parish Priest in our opinion.

- 4 U 16 The Panel has not sought to enquire about the likely response of each Parish Priest to our idea for a pastoral plan by Bishop Alexander prompted principally after considering all the evidence but specifically by a realisation in the 'Presentation of the Way' paper by Kiko Arguello of reference to: "his pastoral plan rather than that of the Bishop" noted and commented upon previously (paragraphs 3.25 items xvii and xviii, 3.33). But this leads back to their commitment as a secular priest of the Diocese.

4 U 17 It is extremely difficult for the Panel, onerous and perhaps more than Bishop Alexander expects of us, but we believe it necessary to offer some views about the priests' possible predicament. We realise that the Chief Pastor will know his presbyters far better than the Panel, the lay members of the Panel in particular. However we are troubled mostly about Fr Trafford, arising from views and concerns stated by parishioners that the 'NC influence' upon him is so pronounced. There are numerous comments of approbation about his dedication to the sick, aged and housebound. He is perceived to have strong and less than admirable characteristics but he is not different in that regard than anyone else. He nevertheless seems different in a spiritual sense. The impression gained from the representations, including his own and from our meetings (public and private) is of a priest with considerable spirituality, love of God, love for the Church and so on; he is concerned about the NC situation.

4 U 18 The Panel is in no doubt that Fr Trafford retains a very strong desire and determination to evangelize, with a very strong commitment to bring outsiders to the Church and to know God though via the NC Way. There are cogent comments from some parishioners about this NC outlook and about the time with and preference for the NC Way at the Parish. Having been made aware of his NC experiences in his earlier years as a priest (ie 1979 to 1987), the NC impact and influence upon him is hardly surprising; his outlook seems to be so NC-orientated. He seems also to be unmoved, perhaps more resolute in

143

the face of hostility by parishioners to the NC Way. Given his mission approach directed to those outside of the Church, it appears to the Panel that there might be an inherent conflict of spiritual interest for him; perhaps a flindamental incompatibility arises for him now in a secular vocation. We surmise to an extent but deliberately though not without some objectivity so that Bishop Alexander and Fr Trafford might consider our views intended to be constructive for the future.

4 U 19 It will clearly be a personal matter for Fr Trafford to decide whether or not he will be able satisfactorily to relinquish completely such long-held ties with the NC Way and to accept a pastoral plan for the Sacred Hearts Parish by Bishop Alexander. No doubt he will perceive the situation in the spirit of service to the Lord, his love for the Church and his stated obedience to Bishop Alexander. The particular situations of Fr Trafford (as for the other PPs) and of the communities at the parishes have been very difficult parts of our task but they have to be faced, squarely in our opinion for the good of Sacred Hearts Parish. A serious pastoral situation has to be resolved for this Parish bearing in mind the papal guidance about its fundamental importance. With this and the above in mind the Panel intends to recommend accordingly.

4 U 20 Lest it might be thought that the Panel identifies a serious pastoral problem only at Sacred Hearts in Charlton Kings, the situation at St Nicholas of Tolentino in Bristol seems to be much less tense because the leading lay opponents to the NC Way have moved away. There is nevertheless a need to restore this old Parish so as to have a broader pastoral image for the 'Parish Community' as a whole. The pastoral situation at St Peter does not seem to be such a problem at present, but there might be some impatience by parishioners there to ensure that sight is not lost of a 'Parish Community' in Gloucester.

144

4 V CONCLUSIONS; CANON 212 AND RECOMMENDATIONS

4 V After considering all the written representations, the points of clarification at the (public and private) meetings, the Panel reaches these overall conclusions:

a. The presence of the Neocatechumenal Way at St Nicholas of Tolentino, at St Peter and at Sacred Hearts has not brought new vitality to anlinate these parishes. Regrettably, the opposite is the case. These parishes lack unity and have declined pastorally as a Parish Community within the Clifton Diocese since the introduction of the NC Way;

b. the presence of the Neocatechumenal Way in these parishes does not make visible the sign of the missionary church. Rather, it conveys a sign of strong disunity. The

- communities have undoubtedly brought some people to the Church for the first time, have helped other people back to the fold and renewed the faith of others, but the Panel is of the view that the Parish Communities as a whole have suffered in consequence;

c. the Neocatechumenal Way at the three parishes does not and has not always operated in the spirit of service to Bishop Alexander or in communion with him in the context of the unity of the Clifton Diocese;

d. there is no discernible prospect of 'inculturation' for the Neocatechumenal Way within the Clifton Diocese;

e. the pro scriptions of March 1994 should not be removed or relaxed but should become more precise so as to limit the size of the communities to the prevailing level;

f. there is a pressing need that each Parish be united as a whole community and with that in mind, a pastoral plan should be produced by Bishop Alexander as a matter of expediency;

g. exercising a right and duty by virtue of Canon 212, Christ's faithful were justified to do so. However, we do not conclude that each PP has caused any individual harm but we do conclude that the methods of the NC Way have done so, also that experience over the years at each Parish shows convincingly that the presence of the NC Way is harniflil to it's pastoral vitality and unity.

- 4 V 2 The letter of appointment on 29 December 1995 makes plain that this is a Preliminary

Enquiry but in the light of the above mentioned conclusions another Enquiry might be

necessary, especially to examine the methods of the NC Way as applied in the Clifton

Diocese, bearing in mind also the reported indications of clalins that the NC Way is the

oniy way to salvation.

4 V 3 The Panel has noted the explanations by each Parish Priest that such proclamations would be 'liereticar; the responses are recorded at paragraph 2.24 of our Report. It is not for us,

145

but for Bishop Alexander and his advisors to assess whether such responses are adequate in the circumstances. The Panel also draws attention for an Enquiry' to study the theology, of the NC way as applied in the Clifton Diocese. That again is a matter for the Bishop and his advisors.

146

"May they all be one.

Father, may they be one in us as you are in me and I am in you

so that the world may believe it was you who sent me."

John 17:2].

As the Panel of Enquiry these words of Our Lord have been at the forefront of our minds when considering whether the Neo-Catechumenal Way has caused harm in the three parishes of the Clifton Diocese. Our first priority has been the spiritual good of all involved. However, our

- Enquiry has concluded that the NC has damaged the spiritual unity of the three parishes. All our recommendations are with a view to restoring the unity of each parish community within the Diocesan family.

Our recommendations which follow can only be fully understood the light of the Report which attempts to give the gist of the main aspects raised in the representations and at the public and private meetings. They fall into four broad categories:

1. The unity of a Catholic Diocese demands that there be one Chief Pastor who guides the life of the Church. The Parishes and the Neo-Catechemunal communities should receive their pastoral guidance from the Bishop, or those appointed by him. This should remove any need for those outside the Diocese to continue their involvement.

2. The Edict of 1994 should remain in force, thereby limiting the membership of the Communities, and uniting the parishes in the Sunday Eucharist, and what is most important, the Easter Vigil. We recommend that all Catholics strive to accept the RCIA as the authentic way of evangelisation in parish life.

3. The unity of the parishes demand that everything be done in an inclusive way. In other words, the catechetical programmes, youth involvement, parish groups and committees should never be exclusively Neo-Catechumenate, and should be representative of the parish as a whole.

4 Each parish has been affected in a different way by the presence of the NC. However, we conclude that a new start is needed in each parish community. Whether this means that the Parish Priests remain in their respective parishes for the benefit of the parish community and themselves, or whether they are required to move on to another parish in the Diocese, is a matter for the Bishop to decide. In coming to a decision about the future we urge that the wellbeing of the whole parish community be paramount, bearing in mind our Report.

The Panel would once again like to express its gratitude to all who have helped with this long and arduous task. The Panel recognises that all who have tried to help have done so for the best motives, for the good of the Church, for the good of the respective parishes and communities. We ask that in receiving these recommendations all involved should strive for the good of the whole Diocese under the guidance of Bishop Alexander and that no-one should act out of a sectional interest.

147