Wednesday, July 30, 2014

Poll Results

Jul. 28, 2014

Grade Archbishop Anthony Apuron's handling of recent church controversies.

A
54%

F
37%

D
4%

C
2%

B
1%


Voting is now closed | 2375 votes
○ ● ○ ○ ○ ○ ○

56 comments:

  1. You guys are so transparent, people observed the voter count going up so fast in short period for A's, an obvious effort by a group or person to turn things around.

    Did you see all island leaders at the Cathedral yesterday, and not just political leaders. I sure you we're there yesterday.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Dear Anonymous at 5:49 a.m.

      Judging from your protest yesterday at the Cathedral, you do not even have one fourths of the Catholics there. According to the news, there were approximately 50 or so people there.

      Delete
    2. Diana did you see us carry picket signs? The LL story will come out and we will see where the money is going? Dark,dark days ahead.

      Father Michael Jucutan was taking pictures to show that it was a protest. We prayed for all people so that healing may occur. At this point it shows that the Atchbishop doesn't want it to happen. May God have mercy on all our souls!

      Delete
    3. I was there. Diana. It was not a protest.
      I know some people did not make it because of the weather and because they were not able at that time. They asked me to be there in their place.
      Don't malign good praying Catholics because of your prejudices. Go after those who you have personal problems with, but don't you dare go after the good prayerful Catholics of Guam. You don't even have the courage to put your own name to your comments.

      Delete
    4. We are more blessed praying inside the church rather than outside.

      Delete
    5. Dear Jose and Anonymous at 9:00 a.m.,

      The fact that there was a huge sign on a red truck saying "Enough is Enough" to the Archbishop showed that it was indeed a protest. It was a protest disguised as a prayer. The weather yesterday was not that bad.

      Delete
    6. Thank you Jose for the courage to state your name. I also pray for unity. One church in communion with our God, his Son and the Holy Spirit

      Delete
    7. Hell ya it was a protest, a peacful one in fact. Focus was on healing and building bridges. Yes the news said about 50 people, but that was way before the event time. I got there at 5:00 and i was so surprised to see 2-3 hundred people there. Many island leaders too; now I know for sure these people have some brains and a good sense of what is right and wrong. So go ahead and do/say what you do Diana, that's who you are, we know. Just remember these days though, these days are the beginning of the end of tyranny.

      Delete
    8. The fact that you would denigrate prayer in such a manner says more about your own confidence in God and his Church.

      The event yesterday was most certainly prayerful. You always say that in order for anyone to witness the neo they have to join the neo, however, where were you yesterday to witness this prayer service?

      It is hypocritical of you to say this while bearing false witness at the same time.

      Delete
    9. Dear Anonymous at 12:26 p.m.,

      It was supposed to be a one hour prayer which started at 4:45, and you got there 15 minutes late, and already you saw 2-3 hundred people. And what time was KUAM there?? I would think that they would be there on time or (if they are late) around the same time you came.

      Delete
    10. Dear Jose at 12:37 p.m.,

      I did not denigrate the prayer. Tim Rohr and his followers denigrated it when they put a big protest sign on a red truck along with their prayer.

      Delete
    11. Never mind Diana. You are certainly stuck and fixated on Tim when Tim is not the discussion. Conversations with you are fruitless. I will pray for you, even in the presence of a red truck with a sign.

      Delete
    12. Diana,

      You are wrong, it was a 4:45 showtime for preparation, the vigil was scheduled for 5;15-5:45. But that's not what matters, typical of you to draw focus away from main points.

      The fact is I was there, and I know what I saw. The weather and need to prep my house for typhoon almost kept me away, but it was too important not to be part of it.

      Delete
    13. Dear Anonymous at 2:31 p.m.,

      Okay so it was not about 50 or about a dozen people as the news reporter says. Even if there were about 100, that is still not a lot of people.

      Delete
    14. Why do you hate so much. More than two hundred, don't chastise me. Those are excellent numbers for TCOR 3.

      Delete
    15. This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

      Delete
    16. Dear Anonymous at 6:03 p.m.,

      Was that prayer group supposed to be TCOR 3?

      Delete
  2. You can have the Arch, but you won't get our money. Yesterday was just the beginning, enjoy the arch's favor for now because it will be worthless in the future.

    ReplyDelete
  3. People spoke you can have Barack Obam there if people love the Archbishop that's all it matter.

    ReplyDelete
  4. David G asks a question that I believe deserves an answer:


    David G.July 30, 2014 at 12:35 AM
    So if you believe Fr. John was innocent, why "bring it to light?" Maybe if you didn't, Monsignor James would still be the pastor. Again Tim, I am not saying your wrong rather, I am trying to fit things together.

    My answer:


    TimJuly 30, 2014 at 5:04 AM
    Well then here, let me help you. Here's what you should be asking. If Apuron believed he was innocent "why didn't HE bring it to light" when the charges were first published in 2004 on a national list? Why didn't HE bring it to light in 2000 when he incardinated Wadeson (who should have told him)? Why didn't Apuron bring it to light in 2011 when he recevied a call from the Los Angeles Archdiocese about Wadeson? Why didn't Apuron proclaim his innocence instead of getting rid of him? Hope that helps.

    Interesting though how David seems to know the real reason for the firing of Msgr. James: "Maybe if you didn't, Monsignor James would still be the pastor." David is absolutely right. Firing Msgr. James was in direct retaliation for the Wadeson affair.

    But NOT because Wadeson was exposed, but because the Archbishop was exposed. Archbishop Apuron could care less about throwing another priest under the bus no matter who he is. He proved that when he immediately got rid of Wadeson instead of standing up for him.

    The story made Apuron a national embarrassment. The AP picked up the story and went to Los Angeles to find the truth. Turns out, according to a lawyer for the L.A. Archdiocese, they called Apuron in 2011 to warn him about Wadeson.

    Denying Wadeson faculties in L.A. is one thing. But that L.A. thought it necessary to call Guam and notify Apuron of Wadeson says something far more. In any event, Apuron did NOTHING, NOTHING, NOTHING. He just never expected to be held accountable. And when he was...he turns on others and destroys them.

    This is why St. John Crysostom said "the floor of hell is paved with the skulls of bishops." No one has more power in the Catholic Church than bishops. And "to whom much is given, much is expected." And when they lead the little ones astray, then "better for him that he had not been born."

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Dear Anonymous at 8:59 a.m.,

      Tim Rohr is in denial about what he has done to Father John. He feels that he did nothing wrong and will not acknowledge it. This is why I do not bother going to the jungle asking Tim questions or even trying to convince him of his faults. His obsession is the Archbishop. We cannot change him because he does not want to change. The only thing we can do for Tim Rohr is to pray for him.

      I cannot stop those of you who want to try to reason with him, but based on just what he wrote here, I find that he is beyond any reasonable thinking right now due to his obsession of the Archbishop. Tim does not comprehend "cause and effect."

      The Archbishop did not bring it to light because he believed he was innocent. Tim Rohr himself knew the circumstances surrounding Father John and kept it a secret. The only reason Tim brought it to light recently was because Tim allowed his emotions to get the better of him. He sought revenge and Father John got hurt in the process. Tim Rohr goes after the Archbishop and will not allow anyone to get in his way even if he had to throw Father John under the bus. Tim will always find a way to rationalize his behavior and blame it on the Archbishop. I am sorry to say but this is no longer rational or logical thinking.

      Delete
    2. To imply that someone is distined to enternal hell anonymous makes you either a god with power to know or a saint like St. Crysostom graced with the gift from our Lord. You dont talk like a saint so you must be or think of yourself as a god. if the latter is true, please be careful. You might be already in hell

      Delete
    3. Dear J. Bautista,

      Anonymous did not destined anyone to Hell. He/She copied and pasted Tim Rohr's comment in the jungle, and I published it here. It was Tim Rohr who destined a person to Hell.

      Delete
  5. Do you really think anonymous that God, the creator of the universe, the Father of our church, needs your money. Your comment was a window into your heart. I don't know if you are Catholic but you just confirmed that you are not Christian.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Shouldn't you be praying that the storm doesn't hit us? or wait the Chancery has to do more damage control. Nice to see the IP addresses of the Chancery and Seminary. IP: 69.44.203.41 (serviced by IT&E) getting those pole numbers up.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Dear Anonymous at 9:51 a.m.,

      There may be one computer, but there were more than one person punching in the grades in that one computer.

      Delete
    2. Why was my posted edited? P addresses of the Chancery and Seminary. IP: 69.44.203.41 (serviced by IT&E) and 2a00:1450:4013:c01 (via google client gmail)

      It was several computers with the last numbers c00, c02, etc. repeating and Fr. Adrian's computer IP is there too. "domain of acristobal@archagana.org designates 2a00:1450:4013:c00::232 as permitted sender" So go ahead make more lies up.

      Delete
    3. Dear Anonymous at 12:07 p.m,

      I cannot edit any posts. I can only publish or delete it. If you feel there was an error, then you mistype it.

      Delete
    4. Diana, pls publish my comment to Juan.

      Delete
    5. Dear Anonymous at 6:04 p.m.,

      If you are the anonymous poster who wrote that you know who Juan is and then wrote a remark that I find insulting......that is the reason I deleted your comment. If you know the person, then go up to the person and say it to his face.

      Delete
    6. insulting, pls, it was no more than him insulting me by saying I'm not a Christian

      Delete
    7. Dear Anonymous at 5:26 a.m.,

      The thing is you know the person. So, if you personally know Juan, then say it to his face. That way he knows which one of his friends said it to him.

      Delete
  7. 100's attended. Plus i voted ten times myself

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Dear Anonymous at 10:31 a.m.,

      You voted 10 times yourself??? It appears that you doubted otherwise why vote 10 times. I only voted once.

      Delete
  8. Another idiocy http://www.guampdn.com/article/20140730/NEWS01/307300005/Catholics-criticize-Apuron-sect

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Dear Anonymous at 10:44 a.m.,

      I agree, and it is so very one-sided.

      Delete
    2. i voted ten times because our responsibles told us to last night

      Delete
    3. Dear Anonymous,

      Am I supposed to believe this especially when you just admitted that 100 attended?

      Delete
  9. We all know that the polls were manipulated once Rohr placed it on JungleWatch where 68% had graded Apuron an F! We all know that you and the other neos called each other up and said to get up on the PDN polls. Stop kidding yourself.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Dear Anonymous at 12:06 p.m.,

      Perhaps, you should have called up all your supporters and told them to vote.

      Delete
    2. Diana, you admit that the NCW manipulated the poll results?

      Delete
    3. Dear Anonymous at 2:56 p.m.,

      I admit no such thing. How is it manipulation when the brothers call each other up encouraging each of them to vote online? Tim Rohr did the same thing when he posted the weblink on his blog and called on his supporters to vote online.

      Delete
    4. The Chancery and Seminary's IP address had multiple votes from the same computers. IP addresses don't lie.

      Delete
    5. Oh and there isn't 700+ people at the Seminary so tell me another reason how it showed up?

      Delete
    6. Dear Anonymous at 6:48 p.m., and 6:49 p.m.,

      Are you guys still upset about the poll results? Again as I said, I did not post anything on my blog about the PDN poll vote. I did not provide any weblink address to the PDN poll in my blog. Tim Rohr did that and he encouraged all his supporters to vote. It is amazing how the results came out. The jungle's intent was to use the PDN poll to humiliate the Archbishop, and it backfired. That is all I can say.

      Delete
    7. Tim wanted to rig the poll.

      Delete
    8. AnonymousJuly 30, 2014 at 8:46 PM I agree with you.

      Delete
    9. Okay Tim Rohr followers are monitoring IP addresses now and acting like a terrorist hacker? AG Office should see this. Can I call this smooth Criminal.

      Delete
  10. AnonymousJuly 30, 2014 at 12:06 PM

    You can't simply accept it, people in the Community won't have time for that. The people spoke, there are people still love the Archbishop just like me.

    Gino from Sinajana

    ReplyDelete
  11. Diana,

    You should write about this
    http://www.ucanews.com/news/pope-warns-clergy-on-celibate-life-lived-as-sterility/71532

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Dear Anonymous at 2:57 p.m.,

      This is an interesting article about what the Pope said. Thanks you for sharing it. I will indeed write something about it. If my power is still on after dinner, I can write about this. For now, I am going to get dinner ready just in case we lose power.

      Delete
    2. Pope Francis condemns those clergy who behave like old ladies habitually spreading gossips. These are the same clergy on Guam who join Junglewatch and spread gossip, hearsay and superstition anonymously. Spreading gossip, hearsay and superstition is the trademark of Tim Rohr and his ilk.

      Delete
    3. AnonymousJuly 30, 2014 at 8:39 PM Amen to that. Lord listen to our prayer. May the evil one be defeated. Do not resist evil folks.

      In Christ.

      Delete
  12. Assembly Time was at 4:45 PM, but there were more than the 50 people you refer to at that time. Jolene Toves from KUAM started walking through the small crowd of about 50-60 people who were there around 4:25 to conduct her interviews. The Prayer Service began on schedule at 5:15 PM so Anon @ 12:26 who arrived at 5 PM was actually 15 minutes early, not "15 minutes late" as you claimed. It ended at 5:45 PM, on schedule.

    The schedule was shared by many people on Facebook but it sounds like you and nobody who follows you saw it, Diana. The Prayer Service began after normal working hours, so that no unfounded accusations could be made that people were there during their work day. Fr. Michael Jucutan was present and taking pictures in the early part of the gathering. He might be willing to share his photos with you. And if you check the photo gallery "Members of Catholic church gather to pray" on the guampdn.com website, you will see many, many more people than the "50" you persist in claiming we're present. Surely you can trust photos from PDN since you hold their poll in such high regard, so look and see for yourself.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. AnonymousJuly 30, 2014 at 3:11 PM Who cares this is not a popular contest. People love the Archbishop like I do. Deal with it.

      Old Man George from Santa Rita

      Delete
  13. I am walking in the Way, but also kinda like Msgr James. I would like to know why is he blamed for financial mismanagement. Is he really responsible for the losses? Is he truly the culprit? Why and how? In case he is made a scapegoat to cover up the misdeeds of others, I would be very disappointed.

    I don't think it has anything to do with the Neocatechumenal Way, what PDN claims. Based on what??

    ReplyDelete