Monday, May 5, 2014

To Those Wanting To Know My Identiy.

I will put this very simply.  I go by the name Diana.  That is my name whether you like it or not.  I walk in the Neocatechumenal Way for 8 years.  And that is all you need to know.  This is a blogsite, not a courtroom.  A blog site is an online journal.  

Because everything is online and I cannot see your facial expression, sometimes clarification is needed.  Therefore, if you need something clarified, I would appreciate if you simply asked for clarification.  If you are going to proclaim something as hearsay or heresy, I would appreciate it even more if you would point out exactly which statement you consider a hearsay or heresy and explain why so I can provide you with the source or evidence.  If you feel that I have made an error, I do not mind being corrected.  Everyone makes mistakes and yes...I do have the courage to admit my errors.  On the other hand, slanderous remarks such as calling me a liar is uncalled for and uncivilized.  

The theme of my blogsite is Neocatechumenal Way, An Insider's View.  Thus, any topics directly or indirectly regarding the Way would be in this blogsite.    

As to my identity, it is not necessary for you to know where I work, if I work, if I'm retired, where I live, or even how many children I have.  It is not necessary for anyone to know my real name.     


  1. Diana, I see this that you wrote about Fr. Paul as a point of contention:

    "The Archbishop probably would have reinstated him had he not gone directly to the media and made his demands."

    Is this an assumption? A hearsay? Or do you have some reference to support this claim? Thanks.

  2. Dear Anonymous,

    I stated, "The Archbishop PROBABLY would have reinstated him had he not gone directly to the media and made his demands." That is clearly an opinion. A blog site is an online journal in which the author expresses his/her opinions, experiences, or observations. That is what a blog site is and has always been.

  3. Yes, can you please clarify the following, with respect to the reception of communion in the communities.

    When the Body of Christ enters your body, are you sitting or standing? Thanks

    Also, what is the difference between a "saint", and a "holy saint"?

    1. Dear Anonymous,

      I will answer your comment in a post since this has to do with the liturgy rather than other comments that came out as a result of my making this post, and I will pray that the comments remain civil.

  4. So this is an unreliable intuition. Please, treat like that! Fr. Paul would have been fool to trust this "probable" outcome when the opposite of what you say is just as well plausible.

    1. Dear Anonymous,

      According to Father Paul, the Archbishop met with him and the Archbishop apologize. In fact, this what the news report stated, and I included the weblink below:

      And although Father Paul says the Archbishop apologized to him, he says it wasn’t enough. 23
      "He did apologize but I’m looking more for a written letter of apology because also of the fact that I’ve been blacklisted especially in the states," says Father Paul.

      So, there you have it. Father Paul admitted that the Archbishop apologized to him. The Archbishop met with Father Paul and apologized to him in person. And what did Father Paul do after his meeting with the Archbishop?. He went straight to the media and demanded that he be given a written apology.

      As anyone can see from this news report, Father Paul did NOT accept the Archbishop's apology.

      And the Bible DOES say, "Blessed are they who are merciful and they will find mercy." By demanding a written apology, he never accepted the Archbishop's apology and therefore was not merciful. So, mercy was not given to him either. He was taken out as pastor of Santa Barbara Church.

      The "probable" can happen because I believe in God's words. He is true to His word. When God said, to be merciful and mercy will be shown to you.......well that will happen because it came from God. And the opposite is true.

    2. "By demanding a written apology, he never accepted the Archbishop's apology and therefore was not merciful. So, mercy was not given to him either. He was taken out as pastor of Santa Barbara Church"

      Let's dissect your statement about mercy according to dates and forgive me because there are many twists and turns to this story but i have the general gist and crux i believe.

      Archbishop demands removal of Fr. Pauls' self from Santa Barbara Parch through letter dated 7/16/2013

      Fr. Paul replies in writing (date?)

      Archbishop and Co issue a 2nd letter on 8/2/2013 That Fr. Paul isn't removed but "persuaded"

      Archbishop issues corrected paperwork e.g. His decree of removal 11/12/2013

      Video report from PNC about the Bishop's verbal apology dated/aired on 1/15/2014.

      Your reasoning about the deliverance of Mercy or the lack of deliverance to Fr. Paul is wrong because the chronology of evens belie your statement.

      And here is why,

      Fr. Paul was already persuaded/terminated/ decreed/booted/locked out of the Dededo Parish before any apology, verbal or written, was delivered. Hence the idea that he would have been afforded had he just accepted a verbal apology is moot.

      ~Catholics United~

    3. Diana,

      You really don't know all the facts, and the interview does not confirm if the apology was sincere or conditional. For all we know the Arch might have said - I apologize for the hardship you have endured, but I demand that you just shut up and go away quietly. Would that change your opinion?

    4. Dear Anonymous,

      If you had read the news report and listened to the video in that news report in the weblink I provided, Father Paul admitted that the Archbishop's apology was for the slander he made in Manila. Whether the apology was sincere or conditional is not known, but Father Paul who was there did not mentioned whether it was insincere or conditional. Instead, he admitted that the Archbishop's verbal apology was not enough for him.

    5. Dear Anonymous at 7:25 p.m.,

      Why are you going back only to July 16, 2013 when the issue started in 2011? Father Paul was told in 2011 to terminate an employee who was labeled a sex offender. From 2011 to July 2013, he was given approximately 2 years to comply. The July 16, 2013 letter was issued only when the Archbishop discovered that the employee was still seen working in Santa Barbara.

    6. C'mon Diana,

      It's documented that Fr. Paul complied by terminating Mr. Lastimoza when the Archbishop told him to; it's documented. You can find documented facts on jungle watch; just go read it, be open and objective.

      Please stop putting out false information and unsupported opinions.

    7. Dear Anonymous at 9:41 p.m.,

      If you had read my post on "Resolving Disputes Within The Church", I stated under that thread that this whole Apuron/Gogifan affair may have started out as a misunderstanding at first. As I said in my comment, I believed that Father Paul obeyed the Archbishop, but because the man was still seen working on Church grounds, the Archbishop (or whoever reported to the Archbishop) may have mistakenly thought that the man was not terminated.

      The time that the Archbishop called for a private meeting to apologize is a time and opportunity for the two Catholic brothers to air out the problems between them. Going to the media is not the answer. If the problem still persists, then Father Paul can move forward to the Vatican as he has a right to do so. But it was not necessary to go to the media.

  5. Ai, i believe i preempted in asking your forgiveness on the chronology of events? yes?

    By extending the logic of your argument then; Are you saying the Archbishop already forgave Fr. Paul sometime earlier than what was aired on PNC in 2014? Hence Fr. Paul discarded any possibility that mercy would have afforded him?

    I pray for our Archbishop to discover that there can be grace in humility. i pray for our churches to be returned to their natural state, the one my grandparents helped build with limestone, where my parents were married in, where i was baptized in, where i was confirmed in, where my father's casket laid, where i was married in.

    the kiko icons are nice and all. but i'm not paying my sunday donation for new spanish paintings, my monies remitted to a foreign organization.

    I truly believe in the awesome humbling power of the hung crucifix with Jesus suffering for our sins. Not in the glorification of a spanish man who copies byzantine works.

    He creates some nice pieces i have to admit but his practice of etching in his name and his partners into the artwork, like "kiko", "carmen", "mario", as if it were some subliminal juvenile homage much akin to scratching your name with your fingernail into the wood grains of the kneeling pews.

    I mean, looking at the artwork with the name etchings, who are we venerating, the subject of the piece or the names of the three floating in the background?

    Did Michael Angelo make his name prominent in the Pieta so that it would draw our attention from veneration of the subject, this is the difference between traditional church artwork and kiko's.

    Please return our churches to Guam!!!

    Pope Francis on Feb1st, 2014 said to respect the culture in which you find yourselves, please respect our culture then and leave the kiko icons out of Guam.

    Sorry, i digressed there.

    ~Catholics United~

  6. Dear Anonymous,

    For what reason is the Archbishop supposed to forgive Father Paul? Anthony Apuron is the Archbishop and he has given a directive, which is to terminate an employee who was labeled a sex offender. Father Paul is the priest and is obligated to obey the Archbishop. If Father Paul was obedient to the Archbishop, there was nothing to forgive. If Father Paul was disobedient, then it should be Father Paul to be asking the Archbishop for forgiveness.

    The Archbishop, on the other hand, realized that the statement he made in Manila was wrong and met with Father Paul and apologized to him in person. After that, Father Paul went to the media and told the media that the Archbishop's apology was not enough for him. In other words, his apology was not accepted, and Father Paul demanded a written apology instead.

    I forgive you for digressing. :-)

  7. @AnonymousMay 5, 2014 at 9:29 PM
    Many occasions I was criticize of our Church how there is no sense of dignity or beauty. The past Popes asked the following Artesan like Michael Angelo, Rafael, Donatello, it was asked by Pope Julius II (1503-1513) As seen today, the Vatican Museums are a complex of different pontifical museums and galleries that began under the patronage of the popes Clement XIV (1769-1774) and Pius VI (1775-1799). Many times I visit the Churches here on Guam has no beauty. No life. The Church is United but YOU folks who made this cut between the thin line of hate and jealousy. I love the artistry and I love the real ornamental arrangements that are put in the Churches now. Before it was plastics and covered with dust. We are all doing this for GOD. This is for our father to make our sanctuary of our worship with beauty and dignity. We are all LOCALS here that join this Charism. I commend you and your Parents who dedicated your life to the Church but how bout those who are suffering out there? Who did not see God the way YOU did. Like me, one great example. I left the Catholic Church because there was nothing going on for me. I judge the Church and the hypocrisy that promote. I know whatever I say to you, you will not waver! I left the Catholic Church and with this Charism I discovered the beauty of the Catholic Church all over again with this Charism. Everyone has their own free will whether the WAY is for you or not. No one forces it in your throat. I discovered my baptism and I discovered Jesus Christ within the Catholic Church thru the Holy Spirit because of the Neocathecumenal Way. For me this Charism save my life to fall in-love all over again with the Catholic Church. Everyone has their own free will but I know I'm doing the WILL of GOD. I'm no perfect man but a poor man to be with GOD one day. Cause I discovered in this Charism that GOD exist with my suffering. You can explain to me all the GRIM and Liturgical rules but try tell that to a PERSON who is suffering. It's impossible. To go to mass or the Church you need Faith in GOD. Good for you that you have faith within the Catholic Church but how bout those who don't find hope with the Catholic Church anymore? This Charism save me from my suffering that I almost kill myself literally. Now I'm back with the MOTHER CHURCH and with her United to her WOMB (THE CATHOLIC APOSTOLIC CHURCH)


    1. "Many occasions I was criticize of our Church how there is no sense of dignity or beauty" you're a priest, a person of the cloth?

      Respectfully, this is my opinion only,

      i would say that it was/is the Bishop's job to reach out to help those in the villages of Guam who need spiritual help. He could've decreed it to his brother priests, the sisters, to go out, to further reach to those fallen. To reach out to those non-catholic.

      What the Bishop did however was something we call "transference".

      It's like buying an insurance policy for your car. You need to operate your car but there is a risk of operating it, hurting yourself, hurting others, so you buy insurance. With insurance you "transfer" you offload the risk, the work, the worry to someone else, to another party, the insurance company, in this example.

      This is what the bishop has done, he has transferred his duty of saving souls, of reaching out to those who turned away from God, to pagans, into the hands of the Neocatechumenal Way.

      Although the intentions are good, it is replete with issues. It was one thing for the Bishop to allow the NCW but quite another thing to be a part of it. Because as you may know the NCW engrosses you, takes over your lifestyle. It has taken over the Bishop.

      Sadly, It looks like this will be Apuron's legacy. An Island divided. So help us Lord.

      ~Catholics United~

    2. Dear Anonymous at 10:09 a.m.,

      As the Pope said, it is not only the job of the priests to go out and evangelize. That duty belongs to every baptized Catholic. If the Archbishop had asked the congregation to go out and evangelize, how many would actually do it? The vast majority of us are inexperience in evangelizing from door to door. The Mormons and Jehovah Witnesses are better at it, and they don't seem to fear rejection or having the door slammed in their faces. From experience, I can tell you that the first time I went door to door evangelizing was a scary feeling. I allowed my more experienced partner to do most of the work while I acted more as a spectator. Today, it does not bother me to evangelize.

  8. Dear Diana,

    Yes that it true. It is every Catholics duty. However our Leader, the Archbishop, really never tried did he?

    Sadly this is all retrospective now. But back 10, 15 years ago, Bishop Apuron could have made a point to attend every mass through the villages saying to the congregation something as simple as this at the end before the final blessing,

    "Brothers and sisters after mass today, or tomorrow, or even next week, step outside of your home, out of your door, to your neighbors home, apartment, and simply greet them, "Hafa Adai neighbor, auntie, cousin, the Bishop was wondering how you are and God loves you, Si Yuus gof un guiya hao, and is inviting you to Mass next week."

    How many lives could that have saved?

    I applaud the Way for evangelizing as well as others who do too but the Bishop always had it in his power to come out of his comfort zone and do what is necessary.

    1. Anon 2:13 PM the Archbishop went out door to door and I was with him. People were shock and happy to see him. But remember he is not super human being. He can't do everything he needed help. Christ was persecuted not love you have to remember and there is no rule the Archbishop cannot join a community as a brother. Every priest knows life being a priest is lonely.

    2. Anon 3:24PM.

      You don't understand what Anon 2:13PM wrote.

      The Archbishop was lonely in the sitting in the Chair of Peter in the whole of his Archdiocese which is why he joined a community, Are you serious?

  9. Why is it an issue here whether he joined the Catholic men or Cursilio? The motive of your question that erks you that he joined a community not yours. Envy is a sin you know.

    1. lastly, as the Archbishop of the Diocese he should have joined them ALL of the groups or joined none at all. A man of his position the only partisanship he should be party to is the main party, the big old dusty one with all of its imperfections, but he wanted to be salt i guess. I thought he already was?

      -Catholics United-

    2. Dear Anonymous t 7:57,

      The Archbishop is free to join any Catholic organization or Intinerary. Joining the Neocatechumenal Way does not mean that we are the salted ones. In fact, if you were walking in the Neocatechumenal Way, we teach that ALL of us are unsalted and are called to be the salt of the earth and the light of the world. This is aligned with Catholic teaching. The Bible tells us to be the light of the world and the salted ones.

      Mother Teresa is most likely a light to the world and the salt of the earth, and she was never walking in the Way. All Christians are called to be the light and the salt of the world.

  10. Anonymous at 6:04 you presume to know the motive of my question. You yourself maybe committing the sin of presumption. Oh, and casting judgement via your sleight passive reference to the sin of envy....hmm that could be, maybe, strike 2? and it's not even 8am yet?

    Problem here is you don't attempt to expound on this discussion you try to slam it shut, please watch your fingers as it comes closing in though....

    -Catholics United-

  11. Okay why is it your call whether the Archbishop should or should not join? Why is it wrong? Why does it bother you so much? Is there a written rule in Vatican? Did the Pope prohibit him? Tell us?

    1. Dear Anonymous at May 7, 2014 at 1:22 PM

      I thought i answered these questions already @ the following replies today in case you didn't see.

      May 6, 2014 at 10:09 AM
      May 6, 2014 at 2:13 PM
      May 7, 2014 at 7:57 AM

      -So tell me, what is so right about it then? How has his joining the Way benefited this Archdiocese. Please expound on the fruits of this Archdiocese. Was it 10 years ago that he joined, now 10 years later how has he grown and how has our Archdiocese grown?

      Tell me what he has gained for all of this persecution?

      -Catholics United-

    2. Dear Anonymous at 1:22,

      As a result of the Archbishop approving the Neocatechumenal Way and even joining it, the number of priests ordained in Guam has increased. The number of people getting more involved in the parish have also increased. We also now have families and people on Guam evangelizing not only on our island, but to other places as well. Unlike in some places in the United States, not one single parish on Guam has shut down.

  12. Dear Diana,

    I don't mean to sound derisive, as i know many good priests from the seminary but they just don't stay here for long. The seminarians ordained here, where did they go? We donated, we participated in fundraising, we helped pay the power bills but ultimately these priests serve the NCW.

    They are "special interest group" priests. They fly out on the beck and call of the International Team of Cathechists.

    Please tell me otherwise? As an example again, Fr. Art was needed on Guam. He was one of those RMS priests that actually had some wisdom, you could understand the man we he spoke, after his formation which we paid for, he was sent to China. There went our investment!

    From Fr. Arts lips to MY anonymous ears, "The bishop told me that because of all the things they had given to me, the seminary, etc etc, i have to give something up. I have to give you up, i have to send you to China."

    Sounds like the Archbishop is in charge of our priests?

    Further, Why is the Archdiocese spending on flying in the families of the newly ordained and further flying out the newly ordained to host their first mass in the original community. The money that goes into donation baskets all over the island pays for those airline tickets.

    How does that help Guam Catholics, is it just for the bragging rights? No wonder why we can't afford to fix the plastic statutes or hire someone to dust them off...

    All of a sudden because of reaction to the media the Arch Diocese opens a 2nd Seminary for those formation who don't want to be in the NCW. Is that fiscally proper for such a small populus? Why can't we welcome these young men into the ONE Seminary? Makes you wonder does the Archdiocese run the seminary or does the NCW run it. The Good People of Archdiocese certainly pay through the nose for the upkeep of that hotel though.

    How do you measure that there are more people getting involved in the parish? Do you do a headcount? Because at the St. Patricks Day 2014 at the Seminary, that was indicative of the pulse of the whole of the archdiocese. That was a sad turn out. I was there with my family, what was supposed to be an islandwide celebration of the Great Saint turned out to be a NCW show of support.

    These are the fruits of the ArchBishops partisanship.

    Thank you for the opportunity to express my views on your blog.

    -Catholics United-

    1. Dear Anonymous at 5:05 p.m.,

      In the past, Guam could not afford to send any priests to evangelize. In fact, we were getting priests from other places (mainly the Philippines) to come to Guam. Priests were needed here. After the RMS seminary was established, Guam was able to ordained more priests than before. Other countries helped us out by sending their priests here. Now that we have ordained more priests, you want them to stay only on Guam, and not help other countries that are lacking priests?

      You say that Father Art is needed here? Are any of the Parishes on Guam closing down due to lack of priests?

      Yes, we now have a second Seminary mainly because there is one priest who does not want to associate with the NCW priests. So the Archbishop gave him what he wanted.....which is to be away from the NCW priests. This one seminarian got what he wished for, so why the complaints?

  13. Did Pope Francis call on all clergy not to be mediocre and go out and announce the Gospel? Blessed Diego is one sample.