Thursday, September 11, 2014

Certain Deacons' Misconception: The Other Side Of The Story

 Those who have been reading my blog already know that an anonymous poster had posted a comment using Deacon Steve Martinez's name, which prompted the deacon to post on my blog.  We have already heard Deacon Steve's side of the story of why he feels he was "forced."  I do not know Deacon Steve nor have I ever met him, and I made the mistake of thinking that he was pursuing the priesthood.  I did not realize that he was married, so when he said "ordination" in his comment, I wrongly assumed that he meant ordination to be a priest" when actually it was an ordination to be a deacon. 

Nevertheless, my trusted friend who has been getting some documents for me from others went ahead and got information from the other side of the story.  For every story, there are two sides.  We have heard the Deacon's side.  Now, this is the information my trusted friend has gathered.  It is from the side of the Archbishop and those who support him. 

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

CERTAIN DEACONS’ MISCONCEPTION
 
Ten year ago, Archbishop suggested/mandated/recommended (it depends to which person you speak) the deacon class of 2003 to go and listen to the catechesis of the Neocatechumenal way.  Some deacons claim that Father Adrian ‘threatened’ them that Archbishop will not ordain them deacons if they do not follow this directive.  
 
These catechesis are a fifteen talks-and-celebrations package, that may give way to the birth of a small Neocatechumenal community in a parish. At the end everyone is asked whether he wants to continue or not.
 
All of them, I believe, went to listen to the initial catechesis. Some opted to continue and are still in the Way. Others selected to continue but desisted after some months or years. Others decided it was not their soup and after the initial convivence, never bothered to stay.  All these thirteen men were ordained deacons.
 
These are the simple facts.

THE AFTERMATH

Some of these deacons are very grateful that the Archbishop insisted that they go and listen to the catechesis. I know, to give one example, that Deacon Ed Borja found the Neocatechumenal community a tremendous help in his battle against the terminal sickness that eventually ended his life.

Other deacons never forgave the Archbishop for this unspeakable sin. ‘What?! Forcing us to go and listen a catechesis!! Making this a condition for diaconal ordination. Unheard of. Canonically unjust. Archbishop is overstepping his authority… ‘

And they are still harping on this after TTTTEEEEEN long years!! When Archbishop Krebs came, apparently they strongly brought it to his attention. Again.

Why did the Archbishop do this? I do not know. I am not the Archbishop.  I know however that he loves his people and he knows that the Neocatechumenal Way can help certain people who are suffering. So I guess he saw in the Neocatechumenal Way a good pastoral tool to help the people discover their faith in a deeper way. He also saw this Way a good instrument to help former Catholics come back to the Church. This Way was/is producing results. And so Archbishop thought that it is good for these deacons in formation to taste this pastoral instrument.

He also believed that it could help them in their personal life. A deacon (or a priest) is a normal man who needs conversion, who needs a place that can help him face his issues under the light of the Word of God. Obviously the Neocatechumenal Way is not the only place where one can grow in faith, but it is also one valid place. Confirmed by the magisterium of the Church with a good tracking record of many years here in Guam.

‘He had no right to impose it or make it a condition for diaconal ordination’, one may argue. I am not a canonist and so I cannot really answer this objection. However the facts are that he ordained both those who went and continued in the Neo-catechumenal Way and those who did not continue.  

One needs to ask oneself whether the archbishop can and should determine certain aspects of the spiritual, academic and personal formation of the candidates, like their willingness to respect and obey the authority of the Church.  Ordination is not a right or a privilege.

I believe this was more a pastoral decision than anything else. A friend priest of mine always tells me that the Church is a mother and that the administration of justice in the Church has no other purpose than the salus animarum, the salvation of souls, as laid down in the last canon, 1752, of the Code of Canon Law. Perhaps this is what motivated Archbishop.

What I fail to understand is why some deacons are still harping on this after ten long years. Can’t they forget and let go? Let us say, for the sake of the argument, he made a mistake, can’t they excuse him? Do the Gospel values like forgiveness and lenience have any worth today?
 
Let us be grateful that we have an Archbishop who cares for souls and is trying to do something...
 
The following comment was also emailed to me, which I think goes well with this post: 
 
ANY  FOOL CAN DEMOLISH... AND SOME DO!
 
I fell asleep this afternoon and I dreamt… Archbishop Apuron is gone. Mgr. David is gone. Father Adrian is gone. The seminary is gone. The Institute Blessed Diego closed.  The seminarians are gone. The neo priests (whatever that means!) are gone. The Neocatechumenal Way is gone. All the communities disbanded. The property in Yona sold.  (Tim Rohr is a realtor and he can find a buyer and get the 10% realtor fee for all his efforts in creating all this excitement!) 
Fantastic. Great. All problems of Guam solved!!Or ... are they? 
An old Chinese proverb goes something like this: "Any fool can throw a stone down a well, but it takes a wise man to get it out!" Which is one way of saying that anybody can tear down, but it's difficult to build up.
 
 
 

41 comments:

  1. Well written, Deacon Martinez, come and read this and see the real parrot you claim.

    ReplyDelete
  2. There is so much wrong with this post, its hard to know where to start. And, as usual, "Diana" won't post anything "she" deems too challenging anyway.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Dear Anonymous at 3:43 p.m.,

      Perhaps, you can start by showing if there was any in the deacon class of 2003 who were NOT ordained because they did not attend the catechesis. My sources say that all of them were ordained as deacons including the ones who decided not to walk.

      Delete
    2. the so much wrong with your response anonymous 3:43 is that if you had any reasonable or factual comment, it wasn't readily provided. You did not know how to start because the truth is undisputable. You instead tried to mask your ignorance by saying that Diana is somehow afraid to publish your rebuttal. Nice try.....may work with the jungle crowd but not here.

      Delete
  3. People can email you, Diana? That means you are not anonymous. May I have your email? Thanks,girlfriend!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Dear Anonymous at 4:10 p.m.,

      I am sorry, but I do not give my email just to anyone.

      Delete
    2. Diana, obviously someone knows who you are since you admitted receiving something in your email. There is no need to give your personal email info to anybody. You can do what Tim did for JungleWatch. Create an email account for your BLOG so others who want to communicate with you privately can do that.

      Delete
    3. Dear Anonymous at 9:46 a.m.,

      If I wanted to put my email in my blog, I would have done that already. I chose not to. Everything in my emails are private. Some of my posts and comments here have been copied and pasted on the jungle. I would not want any of my private emails posted in the jungle. And that is what will happen if I put an email on this blog.

      Delete
  4. A priest for deacon who publicly disobeys and openly disrespects the bishop is causing a great deal of harm to the church. These guys who do this need to think real hard and ask themselves 'why?'. Why do you want to destroy the church?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Anon @ 6:34 PM: And who do you think incited all this? The answer: KIKO ARGUELLO!! Tell me now who wants to destroy the Church!!

      Delete
    2. 4:29 AM is you guys who chosses to disobey! Kiko Arguello is Catholic and obey the Pope.

      Delete
    3. Who is disobeying the Pope when he came out and said that the NCW shouldn't be forced? Kiko Arguello through Archbishop Apuron.

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

      How is it "force" when a person promises to be obedient to the Archbishop??

      Delete
    5. Dear Diana, if you don't want to use the word "force", then how about "abuse of authority".

      When the Pope said the NCW shouldn't be forced, Archbishop Apuron instead used his authority by pulling out the "obedience card" to get his priests to join. Now do you see the picture?

      If the reason Archbishop Apuron is mandating it on his priests because he sees the NCW as the salvation of souls, why isn't the Pope mandating all archbishops to do the same?

      Delete
    6. To Anon @ 5:26am: That is true. It is not the Pope that Archbishop Apuron is being obedient to, but to Kiko Arguello when he tells Guam priests to be obedient to him to join 'The Way'.

      Delete
    7. Dear Anonymous at 9:26 a.m.,

      How is it an abuse of authority when the Archbishop does have the right to tell a priest what to do and the priest has made a promise to be obedient. If a father tells his children to clean their room, do you call that an abuse of authority? If a boss tells his employee to work on a project that will benefit the company, is that an abuse of authority? If the Archbishop tells the priest to open his parish for the Way to help people in need, how is that an abuse of authority?

      Delete
    8. To Anonymous at 9:36 a.m.,

      And how is that possible when the Pope supports the Way?

      Delete
    9. The Pope may support the Way but he doesn't mandate it. They are two different things.

      Delete
    10. Dear Anonymous at 5:34 p.m.,

      The fact that the Holy See has approved the Statutes and the Catechetical Directory as well as appoint Kiko Arguello the Consultor of the Pontifical Council shows that the Pope has already mandated the Neocatechumenal Way.

      Delete
    11. There's the problem. Because you say that the Pope mandated the NCW, you believe that everyone is required to follow it. No honey, if that were the case, ALL Catholic churches would have already implemented the NCW.

      Delete
    12. Dear Anonymous at 7:49 p.m,

      Where in my post or comment did I say that EVERYONE is required to follow the NCW???

      Delete
    13. Diana -- EVERYONE includes priests & deacons, so even they shouldn't be required to follow The Way.

      Delete
    14. Dear Anonymous at 7:15 a.m.,

      Everyone includes all people regardless of whether they are priests and deacons. The priests and deacons are under the Archbishop, so he has the authority to tell them what to do, and they were the ones who made a promise of obedience to him. Also, if all the priests and deacons were supposed to join the Way, then why were they given the choice to leave as Deacon Steve says? Why establish another seminary that is not affiliated with the NCW?

      Delete
    15. The priests and deacons who joined knew from the start that the Way wasn't for them, but they obeyed the Archbishop and eventually got out. Maybe that's what all priests who are forced should just do in order to meet the "obedience" rule. Join and then get out real quick.

      And by the way, why establish a seminary only for the NCW?

      Delete
    16. AnonymousSeptember 14, 2014 at 12:30 PM And by the way, why establish a seminary only for the NCW?

      To answer your question is a missionary seminary to prepare PRIEST to evangelize, not EXCLUSIVELY for those particular people who are in the WAY but for evangelization in OCEANIA. A separate seminary was recently establish with four local seminarian. So pray for these four local boys to be our Holy Priest.

      Delete
    17. El Camino -- Why is it that only the four local boys in the separate seminary need our prayers to be our holy priests? It sounds like you have so much confidence in the NCW seminarians to be holy priests and therefore they don't need prayers. El Camino, you are Father Pius indeed!

      Delete
  5. Maybe they have asked themselves and decided to take a stand to save the Church.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Father Edivaldo, why don't you wait for a few more years experience before you make your judgement?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Dear Anonymous at 10:20 p.m.,

      I am not Father Edivaldo. Think for yourself instead of swallowing everything Tim Rohr says. Do not let Tim Rohr think for you. Does Father Edivaldo know who Deacon Steve Martinez is and that he is married?? Since Father Edivaldo is a priest, I would think he would know Deacon Steve Martinez and most likely even met him. I have never met the deacon; therefore, I did not know he was married, which is why in my post and comments.....I said that he was pursuing to become a priest.

      Delete
    2. Anon 10:20PM what made you think Diana is Fr.Edivaldo? Keep guessing.

      Delete
  7. anonymou 10:20...I pray that before commenting, you will have the presence of mind to rethink with a analytical mind the topic of which you are to comment on. English is probably Father Edivado's 3rd or fourth spoken or writing language so a quick review of Diana's writing s could to a logical mind eliminate or cast doubt on your assumptions. Then you quickly ignored the weakness of charge and instructed an ordained priest of the Catholic Church to get more experience. Do you have any experience to justify your evaluations of ordained priest? Again we have a situation in which a commentor is speaking without foundation. Talking for the sake of taking without substantia. I can surmise two things: anonymous 10:20 likes to read what he writes and anonymous likes to hear himself talk. PRIDE

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Dear Anonymous at 3:56 p.m.,

      It sounds more like a correction rather than a judgment.

      Delete
  8. I do not see any validity in those who comment against the way anymore.

    ReplyDelete
  9. Anon 4:29 am - For the sake of argument, IF the archbishop is wrong in this case, am I as a catholic still obliged to obey the archbishop? Is my obedience to him as a catholic dependent upon my perception of like to dislike towards him? Do I obey him because I like him or agree with him? Or do I obey because mother church instructs me to do so?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Anon 6:39 PM -- When Archbishop Apuron blatantly uses his authority to get what he wants, I don't think this is what Mother Church wants us to obey.

      Delete
  10. anonymous 4:29....we pray to see Christ in every person that he puts in front of us..today...today. There is a reason, always a reason because if we don't see his presence in our daily lives, we are lost. Praying for you, please pray for all of us.

    ReplyDelete
  11. If the Archbishop does not make things clear and maintains his silencio for months and months and criticizes and moreover slanders clerics, he is knowingly causing scandal. It has nothing to do with like or dislike. Who is outrightly disobeying? I don't see it. Where is the disobedience? The outright wrong I know of has been TAPED. That's the way it goes. Even the Pope has said shaky things spontaneously on tape.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. AnonymousSeptember 13, 2014 at 9:37 AM I believe whether the Archbishop says something in PUBLIC, I suspect your going to criticize him no matter what he say.

      Delete
  12. anonymous 9:37......we are responsible to proclaim the truth; we are not responsible for how a person interprets that truth....THAT'S THE WAY IT GOES

    ReplyDelete
  13. Diana,

    I just want to share this story to you since everyone on the Jungle are angry with the Archbishop's silence.

    One day a Wise Man was walking through a village.

    A very angry and rude young man came up and began insulting him. “You have no right teaching others,” he shouted. “You are as stupid as everyone else. You are nothing but a fake.”

    The Wise Man was not upset by these insults. Instead he asked the young man “Tell me, if you buy a gift for someone, and that person does not take it, to whom does the gift belong?”

    The man was surprised to be asked such a strange question and answered, “It would belong to me, because I bought the gift.”

    The Wise Man smiled and said, ”That is correct. And it is exactly the same with your anger. If you become angry with me and I do not get insulted, then the anger falls back on you. You are then the only one who becomes unhappy, not me. All you have done is hurt yourself.”

    “If you want to stop hurting yourself, you must get rid of your anger and become loving instead. When you hate others, you yourself become unhappy. But when you love others, everyone is happy.”

    ReplyDelete