Thursday, December 4, 2014

John Toves' Interview With Patty Arroyo

In the jungle, one can find John Toves' interview with Jesse Lujan and Ray Gibson.  But for some reason, Tim Rohr missed John's interview with Patty Arroyo.  That interview can be found in the following weblink below:

According to that Interview, John Toves admitted that his real motivation for coming out was to reinstate Monsignor James and Father Paul. It was not about his cousin who he claimed was sexually molested by the Archbishop.  As a matter of fact, he admitted in this interview with Patty Arroyo that he never communicated with his cousin about his plan to launch the allegations against the Archbishop.  He went on to say that he would continue the allegation regardless of whether he contacted his cousin or not. Therefore, John Toves was never speaking on behalf of his cousin.  How does one represent someone they have never contacted and claim to speak on their behalf? 

Where did John Toves get the idea that the island Catholics on Guam are suffering when he has not been on this island for 30 years?  The only ones suffering are the very few people who oppose the Archbishop.   So, how can he substantiate mass suffering of the island Catholics when he was living in California?   


  1. The ones suffering are the priests who want to be 're-instated'. I appears that they will do anything, even to destroy the church, to alleviate their own suffering. Their pride has been wounded, that's all.

    1. It is not pride. It is a JUSTICE issue.

    2. Isaias- shows you fail to learn from your spiritual walk in the WAY. The CATHOLIC church teaches do not resist evil. Mathew 5: 38-39 38"You have heard that it was said, 'AN EYE FOR AN EYE, AND A TOOTH FOR A TOOTH.' 39"But I say to you, do not resist an evil person; but whoever slaps you on your right cheek, turn the other to him also. 40"If anyone wants to sue you and take your shirt, let him have your tunic also.

      A person who seek JUSTICE is not Christian, evidently Jesus Christ is not a REBEL. Someone said here your opinion don't matter anymore because of you not being in the CATHOLIC Church.

    3. "A person who seek JUSTICE is not Christian"

      Is the archbishop seeking justice in taking legal action? Oh dear, El Camino, I believe you just accused your Archbishop of not being Christian. I think you need to be excommunicated.

    4. AnonymousDecember 4, 2014 at 3:54 PM - As my beloved Archbishop said sometimes you make peace and sometimes you make war with the wicked. Pope Leo the great confronted Attila the Hun because of his evil intentions, similar way with John Toves and the Jungle followers just like you who wickedly intend to harm our Archbishop. You mistakenly have taken this out of context which is in Exodus 20:13, “You shall not kill,” and then seeking to apply this command to war. However, the Hebrew word literally means “the intentional, premeditated killing of another person with malice; murder (Slashing the Archbishop tires at his resident six times).” God often ordered the Israelites to go to war with other nations (1 Samuel 15:3; Joshua 4:13). God ordered the death penalty for numerous crimes (Exodus 21:12, 15; 22:19; Leviticus 20:11). So, God is not against killing in all circumstances, but only murder. War is never a good thing, but sometimes it is a necessary thing. In a world filled with sinful people (Romans 3:10-18), war is inevitable. Sometimes the only way to keep sinful people from doing great harm to the innocent is by going to war. Similar to what you and the JUNGLE are doing.
      Also, 1 Samuel 15:18 says, “Go and completely destroy those wicked people, the Amalekites; make war on them until you have wiped them out.” Obviously God is not against all war. Jesus is always in perfect agreement with the Father (John 10:30), so we cannot argue that war was only God’s will in the Old Testament. God does not change (Malachi 3:6; James 1:17). ==== Read it.

    5. CONT:

      It is an error to say that God never supports a war. Jesus is not a pacifist. In a world filled with evil people just like the JUNGLE followers who thinks that you’re doing a good deed, sometimes war is necessary to prevent even greater evil. If Hitler had not been defeated by World War II, how many more millions would have been killed? If the American Civil War had not been fought, how much longer would African-Americans have had to suffer in slavery?
      If you and the Jungle continue your defamation how many more narrow minded individual would fall out the Catholic Church and follow the protestant sect that Tim Rohr thinks there is good fruits. He stated Victory Chapel and New Covenant Church produced good fruits also. Now is that heretical or what?

  2. Diana, this is what Tim is saying in his blog:

    Third, Mr. Toves has been very clear about the objectives of his visit: 1) to confront AAA about the molestation of his cousin, 2) to demand the reinstatement of Msgr. James and Fr. Paul, and 3) to demand that the Archbishop step down.

    The only reason demands two and three have any weight is because of demand number one. Otherwise Toves would pose no threat to AAA and AAA would not be threatening to sue him.

    1. Dear Anonymous at 10:08 am,

      The truth is.......if they were really after justice, they would not put any weight on demand number 2

      Furthermore, they claim to care about this relative who is so traumatized by this so-called allegation that they did not even bother to communicate with him about his feelings regarding John Toves' plans to USE him in their campaign against the Archbishop. Where is their respect for this person when they used his name to launch their plan to attack the Archbishop? They did not think nor care that his name was used without his permission?

    2. Dear Diana at 10:20.

      "They did not think nor care that his name was used without his permission?"

      Which name is that? I haven't heard any name - can you clarify please?

      Also, did you ask permission before you named Tim Rohr's daughter in one of your posts?

    3. Dear Anonymous at 11:58 am,

      You are comparing apples and oranges. I never accused Tim Rohr's daughter of any crime. I was actually accusing the PDN for playing favoritism, which is not a crime. John Toves, on the other hand, is accusing the Archbishop of a very serious crime.

      Also, John Toves already named his relative in the letter he gave to the Archbishop, SARC, and the Vatican. His relative was named as being the victim of a crime.

    4. I would also like to add that the letter was sent on November 21st while the Archbishop was in Rome meeting with the Pope. And at that time, he still had not communicated with his cousin. If you are going to involve someone's name in a criminal allegation, it is only right that the person should know about it....and he should know about it from his cousin rather than learning about it in the mass media.

    5. he still had not communicated with his cousin...and how do you know? are you his cousins' secretary? you control all communication in and out?.

    6. Dear Anonymous at 12:54 pm,

      I know because 1) John Toves admitted it in his interview with Patty Arroyo and 2) Tim Rohr also admitted it in his latest post after someone copied and pasted my comment on his blog.

  3. Look at what the leader of the Church Tim Rohr put on the jungleTO THE MEMBERS OF THE SEX ABUSE REVIEW BOARD
    Dear Mariles D. Benavente; George Kalingal; Sr. Trinie Pangelinan, RSM; Vince Pereda and Juan Rapadas:

    You are the Sex Abuse Review Board Members. The Sex Abuse Response Coordinator, Deacon Larry Claros today stated to the press that you have met, you have looked at the allegations, and that there is no reason to conduct an investigation:

    "...the review board has met to look at these allegations and see if there is anything we need to investigate and there is none."


    Earlier in the interview Deacon Claros told Mr. Toves in front of the press that his allegations were "under review". However, in the above statement, he states that a decision not to investigate has already been reached, that the Archbishop is innocent, and there is "no investigation". 

    Obviously the allegations cannot be "under review" and a decision already made at the same time. We are asking you publicly here: WHICH IS IT?

    It is quite clear that Deacon Claros' first job is not the Sex Abuse Response Coordinator (SARC), but to run interference for the Archbishop. We would expect that of him. However, you are all professionals with reputations to protect. 

    The people of the Archdiocese of Agana are calling on you to clarify Deacon Claros' contradictory response. 

    We hope you will.

    Meanwhile, Deacon Claros, if the Archbishop is innocent, then why the dog and pony show? Why is he sending out his little soldiers? Why did he not just come out to the press himself and state simply and clearly: "I am innocent of these allegations." 

    That's all he has to say, isn't it? And how did Tim Rohr get this film when hes not suppose to have it because confidential informant

    1. Dear Anonymous at 4:29 pm,

      I when SNAP did not investigate, that was okay with the jungle. And when Deacon Claros did the same thing, they are up in arms about it?

    2. I think we should bring back John Wadeson to drill Tim Rohr which will shut down his continuous calumny. After all Wadeson will donate the money to the Church and the poor. Because of Tim Rohr he was the cost of Msgnr James Benavente being relocated (NOT FIRED) at Tamuning. He admit on screwing up. Who would you follow VATICAN or Rohr. Tricky to the minds of the Benavente followers and Gofigans. The Jungle threaten or riddle the truth will make a major ripple effect towards the Archbishop. Little they know if prevail a trail dirt that left behind by the former Clergy at Cathedral will come out and his family will majorly experience a world of hurt!

  4. I is agreeing with you are. SNAP is joke of day. How can the y say that none investigate is necessary. To be shure, many money is not the answer. I am beleving that The Way is the only Way. There way is wrong Way. I liking very much lady with big hands.

  5. hahahah we already know the motive on the Jungle. It's obvious.