Blog Song
▼
Friday, May 30, 2014
To The Priest Who Wrote The Following On Junglewatch.
This comment was brought to my attention by Cathy on May 30th at 11:36 a.m. A local priest wrote in Junglewatch regarding a comment that was published under a thread in one of my posts. His comment is found here. After reading his comment, it is apparent that his comment was not only directed to an anonymous poster, but to me as well. Therefore, this is my response, and..........if Father, you are reading this, please do not take it as an offense as it is not.
To the priest who wrote in the above weblink in Junglewatch:
Dear Father,
You stated: " But the one thing that a priest has to look forward to is the brotherhood with fellow priests and a strong relationship with our bishop" . At the end of your comment, you also stated:
" I am nearly to the point of tears at this very moment thinking about this situation. I wish I had the courage to tell more, and reveal my name. Unfortunately, I fear the retribution that may follow. I look forward to the day when I can be confident that my pastoral father loves me deeply and truly.
Lord, how I long to feel the warmth of his fatherly embrace".
As a priest and a servant of God, God calls you to seek fellowship with Him and to build a stronger relationship with Him. He calls you (and each of us) to be holy just as He is holy (Leviticus 9:2) God is all you will ever need. Christ said to give up mother, father, sister, and brother. He did not say to replace these people with your fellow priests and Bishop. With all due respect, Father, God always comes first. And when you put God first, He will take away your lonliness and bring you happiness. Your fellow priests and Bishop cannot bring you happiness. Only God can bring true happiness because He is the source of all happiness and joy.
You know the story of the Prodigal son. The younger son was lost and spent all his money, which his father gave him, on frivolous things. Finally, he went back to his father's home. And his father welcomed him back. He gave the younger son a feast and everyone celebrated.
But there is also the elder son. The elder son who never left home and was always with the father. The elder son who was faithful to the father, and who worked with the father side by side. This elder son became angry and jealous because the Father held a feast for the younger son And all that time that he was faithful and working in his father's house, his father did not even give him one feast.
With all due respect, Father, this elder son is YOU. The elder son wanted to be treated the same as the younger brother and be given a feast. Because he was not given a feast, this elder brother feels unloved by his father.
God loves you, Father, and if you had experienced this Love from God, it would not matter who rejected you (even if it was your own mother or father). In the communities of the Neocatechumenal Way, there are youths whose fathers had left them to be with another woman, but the Love of God fills them that not even the rejection of their own father destroys them. Rather, these youths have learned to see their father's weakness and suffering and forgiven him. If you had experience this Love from God, you would understand why the Apostles went to their deaths singing joyously even when everyone around them was mocking them. If you experienced the Love of God, it would not matter what negative words were said to you.
In the Holy Bible, the father said to the elder son, "Everything I have is yours." The father had always loved both his sons. Know first that you are loved by God, and all else will fall into place.
Very nice response and I know Father will take it to heart.
ReplyDeleteDear Anonymous at 5:37 p.m.
DeleteI hope that all priests take it to heart.
You must be a priest because you just sermonized on one?
ReplyDeleteDear Peter,
DeleteThat was not a sermon. That was my response to his comment. And I am not a priest.
How patronizing and inappropriate Diana!
ReplyDeleteDear Anonymous at 6:19 p.m.,
DeleteIn 1972 before the Knights of Columbus, Fulton Sheen stated:
"Who is going to save our Church? Not our bishops, not our priests and religious. It is up to you, the people. You have the minds, the eyes, the ears to save the Church. Your mission is to see that your priests act like priests, your bishops, like bishops, and your religious act like religious.”
Sometimes, our priests need to be reminded that "this desire and need for attention" is part of pride. Sometimes, they need to be reminded of the vows they took. They took a vow of chastity to conquer the desires of the flesh. Some priests (though not all) have taken the vow of poverty to conquer the desires of money and wealth. All priests took the vow of obedience to conquer the desires of being first. This is what Fulton Sheen meant.
Priest are ordained to be servant not to be worshiped or exalted.
Deleteas we reserve exaltation to kiko in our Seminary
DeleteDiana, you so praise and exalt the RMS seminarians and priest. You put them also on a pedestal justx as you put the Archbishop and the Ways of the NCW. Double tongue!
DeleteSomething is coming down and the NCW will be humiliated!
Dear Anonymous at 7:13 p.m.,
DeleteI do not put the RMS seminarians, priests, NCW, or the Archbishop on a pedestal. However, I do defend them because they are part of the Catholic Church. I defend the Catholic Church of which I am also a part of. The only one I worship is God.
You presume too much. And what, you went to the Pinoy Catholic website and saw the Fulton Sheen quote, and thought "that's perfect justification for me to judge this priest's motivations and heart"?
ReplyDeleteDear Anonymous at 1:57 p.m.
DeletePlease calm down. You are over-reacting. I only wrote him a letter.
Diana, I guess you're going to have to go to The Pinoy Catholic blog to set them straight. They're claiming that "In a few weeks, another self-proclaimed Messiah will descend and plague the country, and it is no other than KIKO ARGUELLO, founder of the Neocatechumenal Way."
DeleteThe blog is also starting "The Neocatechumenal Way Cult Series"
BTW: Have you heard that Cardinal Tagle did NOT invite Kiko Arguello to the Philippines, despite what the Archbishop's Catholic "Newspaper" claimed on May 18? I think that's what Tim Rohr was referring to when he said he would make sure that things would get worse. I wonder if the Archbishop will issue an apology to the Cardinal for allowing that lie to be printed. What do you think?
Dear Anonymous at 8:26 p.m.,
DeleteKiko was invited to the Philippines by the Cardinal. After the Philippines, Kiko will be traveling to Japan. He was also invited by the Japanese bishops.
Anon 8:26PM Tagle did invite Kiko to Manila, otherwise why would go ti the Philippines. Pope Francis send his regard also to Cardinal of Takamatsu regards the way that is why Kiko is flying there also for a visit.
DeleteTell JW audience . Cheers and be glad!
Diana, are you positive that Kiko was invited? Did you see the actual invitation or read an article other than the one from the Umatuna that validated the claim? Or is it something that your catechists told you and Anon @ 9:56PM?
DeleteI did a Google search, thinking that there would be coverage of the invitation in some publication from the Philippines. Nothing.
BTW: I did as suggested and went to www.umatuna.org and did a search for "Tagle." Only 2 articles from 2011 showed up. The May 18 article written by Jennifer Dulla about the "Pilgrimage to the Philippines" which opens with "His Eminence Cardinal Luis Antonio Tagle, D.D., Archbishop of Manila, has invited initiators of the NeoCatechumenal Way; Kiko Arguello, Carmen Hernandez, and Fr. Mario Pezzi, a priest of the Diocese of Rome to hold a Vocational Meeting with the youth of the Philippines on June 6" is nowhere to be found. I found my old Umatuna and see the article, so I know it is supposed to be on the Umatuna website.
So I also searched for Jennifer Dulla. The search came up with 4 pages of articles, going all the way back to 2011 until May 4, 2014. Would you believe that nowhere in the 4 pages are the articles she wrote for the May 18 edition? What could have lead to the disappearance of all the NCW articles from May 18?
Just to be sure I looked through the archived articles of May 18 and found (1) the Archbishop's Reflections and Perspective, (2) Mangilao Squires Celebrate Chamorro Culture, (3) Mercy Action Marianas, Ltd. Helps Students Through Scholarships, (4) FDMS Phoenix Company Holds Change of Command, (5) 2014 Run for the Son, and (6) Catholic Social Service Presents "Onra I Espiriton Taotao."
What happened to all the NCW articles from May 18? Inquiring minds want to know. But then, Anon @ 9:56 PM, I guess you don't have such a mind. Cheers and be glad!
Dear Anonymous at 11:31 p.m.,
DeleteSince April, the NCW already knew that Kiko Arguello will be visiting the Philippines at the invitation of the Cardinal. While those in Junglewatch are estimating the cost of the trip per person, those in the Way already know the exact amount per person. We also know that after the Philippines, Kiko will be traveling to Japan. He was also invited by the Japanese bishops in Japan.
Right now, you already have the news report from the Pinoy Catholics that Kiko Arguello will be visiting the Philippines. It is not yet in the news report that after the Philippines, he will be visiting Japan. We know because we received the word from Kiko who told it to the Archbishop and the Team Catechists here in Guam. If you do not believe me, that is not my problem. In time, the news report will come out that Kiko will be visiting Japan. Just remember that you heard from the NCW first before it hit the internet and the news.
OK, if you say so, DIana. As you can see, I tried to find out about the invitation on my own before asking you. I was guessing that, like the Pope's intended visit to the Philippines, there would be some kind of coverage about the invitation from Cardinal Tagle.
DeleteBut that still doesn't answer my final question: What happened to all the NCW articles from May 18? Your response still doesn't explain why all of Jennifer Dulla's May 18 articles about the NCW are now missing from the online archives of the Umatuna. You seem to have access that the rest of us don't have. What are your thoughts on the missing articles? WHY are they missing?
Dear Anonymous at 12:47 p.m.,
DeleteWhy are you asking me about the article in the Umatuna? I do not have anything to do with the newspaper. Why not call Umatuna and ask them?
"Why are you asking me about the article in the Umatuna? I do not have anything to do with the newspaper. Why not call Umatuna and ask them?"
DeleteReally, Diana? Really?! Are you seriously using that as your retort? Of course Anon at 12:47 is not claiming you have anything to do with the Umatuna! However, the connection is within your statement about the supposed invitation, and the Umatuna's "reporting" of the same supposed invitation in which that article has now been deleted from its website.
The fact that the Umatuna has now scrubbed said article from their archives without explanation and at the discovery of a request seemingly from Manila to retract the statement, Anon's questions from 12:47 pm are relevant to your assertion of a supposed "invitation." They are asking you to clarify your insistence in light of the Umatuna's reaction.
Instead of being obstinate and knee jerk in your response, take the time to honestly find out the truth . Don't be so deep in the trenches, that you can't see above ground level.
Dear Anonymous at 5:45 p.m.
DeleteI am not using that as a retort. It's the truth. I do not have anything to do with the Umatuna. So, if you want to know why the article is no longer there, go ask them.
As for the reporting of the invitation, people in the NCW already knew about that. We already knew about Kiko coming to the Philippines since April. We also know that after the Philippines, he will be stopping in Japan to meet the Japanese bishops. It was during the month of May that announcements have been going out to the brothers asking who will go on the Manila trip to see Kiko in the Philippines because the Philippines is only a three hour flight from Guam. All the arrangements were already made with the hotels and airlines since last month. Many of the groups are leaving this Wednesday on June 4th. A few are taking a later flight the next day, June 5th.
How embarrasing if the letter from the Cardianl to J. Dulla is true. Continual loss of credibility, at least there isn't much left to lose.
DeleteDear Anonymous at 9:00 p.m.,
DeleteYou haven't even seen any letter and already you are judging it to be true. I thought all of JW audience need documents first before they make any assumptions and judgments.
Why be obtuse? Nobody asked you why the Umatuna deleted the article because we already know why. They're asking you why you keep insisting on the original story when even the Archdiocese newspaper has retracted by removal. You keep responding as such to distract from the real question.
DeleteThe request for you clarification on the revelation that Kiko was not invited to Manila by Cardinal Tagle as and the now scrubbed article stated is legitimate and does not require you to know the inner workings of the Umatuna. If it is misinformation that you and your catechist received, you should acknowledge that at the least.
So what if Kiko has planned to go to the RP, Japan or anywhere else for months? That's all irrelevant. The fact that someone was less than truthful about an invitation is the issue. Kiko and the neo were not "invited" by Cardinal Tagle as reported and you have asserted.
So far, your responses are only exercises of deflection. The Umatuna has somewhat, if weakly, acknowledged this falsehood by removing the article from existence. This should give you pause for concern and to rethink the premise of an invitation and the context for sending so many people to Manila based on a lie. What say you?
Dear Anonymous at 9:37 p.m.,
DeleteActually, they have been asking me why the Umatuna deleted the article. Just read the thread above you, And if you already know the answer as to why they deleted the article, then why do you continue to ask? Do you know for a fact the reason why the article was deleted from the website or did you just come up with your own assumption?
Diana,
DeleteI'm Anon 9:00...I did not say it was true, I said "if" it is true. Your so fast to blame. And ya, why do you always deflect? Do you think your viewers are to dumb to notice. You rarely address commenters valid points.
Anyways, your most likely Dulla, or a combination to include her.
DeleteDear Anonymous at 12:54 a.m.,
DeleteAnother assumption??? I am not Jennifer Dulla nor am I in any way connected to the Umatuna.
Dear Anonymous at 12:53 a.m.,
DeleteYou are very quick to count your chickens before it hatch. If you are not certain as to why the article was taken out from the Umatuna, I would not make any "if" assumptions either. Nowhere in any of my comments did I ever make such negative assumptions as to the reasons why they took out the article? I simply said that I don't know the reason, which is true. Those who want to know the reason should be calling the Umatuna.
Diana, here is the "thread" of questions I raised:
Delete1) 6/1/2014, 8:26PM: Have you heard that Cardinal Tagle did NOT invite Kiko Arguello to the Philippines, despite what the Archbishop's Catholic "Newspaper" claimed on May 18? I think that's what Tim Rohr was referring to when he said he would make sure that things would get worse. I wonder if the Archbishop will issue an apology to the Cardinal for allowing that lie to be printed. What do you think?
There are 2 questions: "Did you hear?" (a Yes/No question) and "What do you think?" (Opinion)
2) 6/1/2014, 11:31PM: Diana, are you positive that Kiko was invited? Did you see the actual invitation or read an article other than the one from the Umatuna that validated the claim? Or is it something that your catechists told you and Anon @ 9:56PM? AND
Would you believe that nowhere in the 4 pages are the articles she wrote for the May 18 edition? What could have lead to the disappearance of all the NCW articles from May 18? AND
What happened to all the NCW articles from May 18? Inquiring minds want to know.
This time there were 6 questions: You answered the first three, “Are you positive Kiko was invited? Did you see the invitation? Or is it something catechists told you?” by informing me that the NCW knew since April about Kiko’s visit at the invitation BUT you didn’t say HOW you knew, just that you KNOW. That answered Question 1 but not 2 or 3.
I asked the next 2 questions “Would you believe?” and “What could have lead (should have been LED) to the disappearance?” seeking your opinion and/or conjecture.
The final question “What happened to all the NCW articles?” was seeking your opinion and directed at Anon @ 9:56PM since he decided to join the convo.
3) 6/2/2014, 12:47PM: What happened to all the NCW articles from May 18? What are your thoughts on the missing articles? WHY are they missing?
These 3 questions were (again!) seeking your thoughts/opinion. You have been very generous in sharing your thoughts and opinions, particularly whenever people bring JungleWatch topics into your blog. I also prefaced my last two questions with the admission that “You seem to have access [to the inner workings of the NCW] that the rest of us don't have.”
That you interpreted my “thread” of questions as though I expect you to know the REAL reason why those articles went missing is surprising. I was asking for your INSIGHT, your OPINION, your THOUGHTS, your CONJECTURE.
(continuation)
DeleteI’m sorry you got so defensive. Maybe you have been privy to the “chatter” in The Jungle about how several well-placed sources in the Philippines have denied that Kiko Arguello received the “invitation” I asked about in my 11:31 PM comment of 6/1.
Your throwaway comment “I thought all of JW audience need documents first before they make any assumptions and judgments” ignores the fact that there are NCW adherents in the “JW audience” and we know all too well from their comments that all they rely on is word of mouth from their catechists or from Kiko. They have no need for documents while the rest of us value some kind of documentation.
Yesterday there was a post that read: “The chancellor of the archdiocese of Manila fr. Jun sescon has informed me this evening that the archdiocese of Manila DID NOT INVITE kiko to the archdiocese. Thank you. Cc to mr Tim rohrs email for files.” (emphasis mine) Clearly, Tim Rohr has documentation.
There were other comments claiming that Jennifer Dulla, Tony Diaz and Sister Marian all received “a letter from Cardinal Tagle stating that he DID NOT INVITE KIKO AND THE GUAM CONTINGENT and he wanted the record to be clear on this point,” (emphasis mine) and that “a copy of the letter is circulating out in the street.”
Even now, there is a comment stating that the Archbishop wants to meet with an Anonymous priest who posted: “I can confirm on a very high authority that cardinal tagle did not invite kiko to the archdiocese of Manila. Period full stop. Matter close.”
Believe it or not, Tim has been saying that it was really a team of catechists and not the Archbishop who initiated the lie about Kiko’s invitation.
Again, I’m sorry that you got so defensive when I sought your thoughts, per the tag on your blog that indicates you have an INSIDER’S view on all things related to the NCW.
Dear Anonymous at 10:23 a.m.,
DeleteI see.....so you are HEARING that there's a letter circulating that Kiko was not invited and this was commented on JW. And then a person commented on JW that says: I can confirm on a very high authority that cardinal tagle did not invite kiko to the archdiocese of Manila. Period full stop. Matter close,
And then you say: Yesterday there was a post that read: “The chancellor of the archdiocese of Manila fr. Jun sescon has informed me this evening that the archdiocese of Manila DID NOT INVITE kiko to the archdiocese. Thank you. Cc to mr Tim rohrs email for files.” (emphasis mine) Clearly, Tim Rohr has documentation.
So, these are comments you read from someone who got the information from someone else who got it from Cardinal Tagle? I would think that Tim Rohr would prefer a statement from Cardinal Tagle himself.
Why so defensive, Diana? You chastise me for referring to the “chatter” on JungleWatch while you yourself continue to rely on what you HEAR from your catechist and Kiko. You have totally ignored the fact that I actually started the “thread” back on 6/1 at 8:26 PM by asking 2 questions. You answered both with: “Kiko was invited to the Philippines by the Cardinal. After the Philippines, Kiko will be traveling to Japan. He was also invited by the Japanese bishops.”
DeleteYou have never told me HOW you know that Kiko was “invited” by the Cardinal. Was is because you SAW the invitation? or because you HEARD about it?
Be that as it may, the REAL reason for my comment today is to congratulate you. Although your blog hasn’t reached the worldwide prominence as JungleWatch has, your blog will now be known to MILLIONS in the Philippines. Check it out:
http://thepinoycatholic.blogspot.com/2014/06/breaking-news-loony-cats-to-evangelize.html
Dear Anonymous at 10:02 a.m.,
DeleteFirst of all, I'm not feeling defensive at all. In one of my comments above, I already stated, "Kiko was invited to the Philippines by the Cardinal. After the Philippines, Kiko will be traveling to Japan. He was also invited by the Japanese bishops. " That is all you need to know. And it does not matter to me whether you believe me or not.
And for your information, my blogsite has reached worldwide prominence even before my comments were posted on Pinoy Catholic. Haven't you noticed that I put up a translate button on my blogsite? That translate button was there long before my statements were copied and pasted on to the Pinoy Catholic. I placed it there ever since I noticed that the viewers to my blogs were from Estonia, Ukraine, France, Seychelles, Lithuania, Peru, and many other non-English speaking countries.
By the way, I checked out the website you posted and this is what it stated:
"They claim that it was Cardinal Tagle who invited them to come to Manila! But THE CHANCELLOR who is into Mass ad-lib says the Cardinal DID invite the Loony-cats. Is Fr. Sescon also ad-libing this?"
LOL. Your "blogsite has reached worldwide prominence" because you put up that "translate button"? You claim to have viewers from 6 foreign countries and "many other non-English speaking countries." That's easy to say, as long as there's no proof.
DeletePut up the Live Traffic Feed like what JungleWatch has to see just how much "worldwide prominence" your blog actually has. Or would it be too painful to know that your viewers aren't as far-flung and worldwide as JungleWatch? OUCH
Dear Anonymous at 10:27 a.m.,
DeleteI've said this before, and I will say it again. If you do not believe what I say, that is not my problem. That is YOUR problem.
So why are you not curious about the article? Why do you not question it? Is it because it does not help your agenda. I can' wait to her your off response.
ReplyDeleteDear Anonymous at 8:29 a.m.,
DeleteWhat is it about the article that I am supposed to question? If I was curious as to why it is no longer on the Umatuna website, I would simply call the Umatuna. In my comment above, I already stated that Kiko was invited not only to the Philippines but even to Japan. I stated that the Japanese bishops invited him. The same is true with the Philippines.
Tagle , I repeat invited Kiko and the team. Why would Kiko go and invite the whole asia would not accept him. Think?
DeleteDiana,
DeleteYou still did not answer my questions.
Anon 7:46,
Go ahead and keep telling yourself that. There is proof that Tagle did not invite him. Both of you are blind and ignorantly loyal cult member.
Dear Anonymous at 10:48 p.m..,
DeletePlease go back re-read my comments under this thread, then you will understand why I do not question the article. What proof do you have that Tagle did not invite him? All you have a few comments on JW from anonymous posters saying there's a letter circulating around, but haven't even seen the letter, but only heard about it. In my book, that's what you call a "rumor."
Not rumor, I know.
DeleteDear Anonymous at 5:38 p.m.,
DeleteYou gave me the Pinoy Catholics websites that says the opposite of what you are claiming. Are you saying that you know more information about their cardinal and chancellor than the Filipinos who live in their own country?
So you do frequent JW. Nice. I would take Tim's word over you, Kiko and the Archbishop. And please, don't try to twist my words to sound like I worship Tim...your predictable. The fact is that he has integrity, and he has not lied or failed to provide proof. Go ahead, preach to me with arrogance and self righteousness.
ReplyDeleteDear Anonymous at 11:40 p.m.,
DeleteActually, I go there once in a while because a lot of things he says is a repeat. I don't post in Junglewatch at all, but many of Tim's followers brings his stuff to my blogsite such as the Pinoy Catholic website. I did not get that from viewing JW. An anonymous poster brought the Pinoy Catholic website to my blogsite. I know you don't worship Tim. You just see him as a saint.
Looks like you were caught in another lie. Kiko was not invited by Cardinal Tagle and the Cardinal made absolutely sure that this misinformation is no longer is skewed. The letter (the one you so openly mocked did not exist) is apparently as real as the nose on the pope's face. Good luck spinning this one!
ReplyDeleteDear Anonymous at 5:35 p.m.,
DeleteI stand corrected. And I am glad that the Archbishop came out with the letter from the Cardinal. I thank the Archbishop for getting the truth out so that our catechists and members not be misled any further.
Wrong again, Diana. The Archbishop maintained his silence and did not come out with the letter. He did not get the truth out. Tim Rohr revealed it on JungleWatch because there was no retraction or apology in the Umatuna. Tim was giving the Archbishop the chance to correct that error and he stayed SILENT.
DeleteDear Anonymous at 6:57 p.m.,
DeleteI do not know how Tim Rohr managed to get a letter that was addressed to Jennifer Dulla. Since Tim published that letter in his blogsite then you are correct that he was the one who revealed the truth. It is then a good thing that the article that was written by Jennifer Dulla was taken out of the Umatuna website. Many of the brothers in the Way (Jennifer included) thought that the cardinal invited Kiko when actually it was the reverse.
I don't know either, Diana. I don't know how Tim Rohr gets the documents or recordings that validate what he posts. I'm just thankful that finally the truth came out. It took awhile, but the truth always has a way of revealing itself.
DeleteDear Anonymous at 7:46 p.m,
DeleteI also do not know how Tim Rohr managed to get a letter that was personally addressed to Jennifer Dulla. At any rate, I stand corrected.
EXTRA! EXTRA! READ ALL ABOUT IT!
ReplyDeleteLUIS ANTONIO G. CARDINAL TAGLE, ARCHBISHOP OF MANILA SENDS PERSONAL LETTER TO JENNIFER LOUISE DULLA DENYING INVITATION TO KIKO ARGUELLO, CARMEN HERNANDEZ AND FR. MARIO PEZZI ...TO HOLD A VOCATIONAL MEETING WITH THE YOUTH OF THE PHILIPPINES ...
Read it here:
http://www.scribd.com/doc/228402169/2014-05-29-Tagle-to-
Dear Anonymous at 6:02 p.m.,
DeleteI stand corrected. You are correct. It appears that it was the reverse. It was the Neocatechumenal Way in the Philippines who invited the cardinal to meet with Kiko rather than the other way around. We were wrong.