Thursday, July 30, 2015

The Truth About Father Paul's Removal

The following was made by an anonymous commenter, whose comment can be found here. 

Diana at July 27th, 9:59 pm,

Tim refuted your first statement to Joane Santos. What do you have to say about that?

"In 2011, Apuron ordered Fr. Paul to terminate the employment of Mr. Lastimoza. When Fr. Paul was called in two years later he was accused of disobeying an order:

"You disobeyed the direct order given by the Vicar General" are Apuron's exact words in his July 16, 2013 letter to Fr. Paul.

When Fr. Paul produced the evidence that he had obeyed the "order given by the Vicar General", Apuron changed the charge to "refusing to terminate the de facto employment" of Mr. Lastimoza. (Decree of Removal. August 20, 2013. Prot. No. 013-074)"

This is my response: 

Tim Rohr did not refute anything.  I stated:  " If the Archbishop really wanted the NCW in the Dededo Parish, he would simply remove Father Paul from the Dededo Parish the day AFTER Patricia Cottman banged her fist on the table."
He did not refute that at all.  He said nothing about why the Archbishop did not remove Father Paul the day AFTER Patricia Cottman banged her fist on the table, which was stated according to Father Paul.  In 2011, the Archbishop ordered Father Paul to terminate the employment of Mr. Joseph Lastimoza.   Then Tim Rohr claimed that the Archbishop CHANGED the charge? 

 In 2011, Father Paul was not removed.  He was given an order, which is to terminate an employee.  In 2011, there were no charges.  There was only an ORDER given to Father Paul to terminate an employee.  So, how can Tim Rohr say that the charge was changed when in 2011, Father Paul was not charged with anything? 

In 2013 after an investigation was conducted, the Archbishop charged Father Paul for "act of DISOBEDENCE BY REFUSING to terminate the employee."  That was the REASON for his removal.  In other words, he was removed because he disobeyed the order of 2011, which was to terminate the employment of Lastimosa.  That was the first charge.  There were no second charges after that nor any changes to that first charge in 2013. 

The July 16, 2013 letter said that he disobeyed because he did not terminate Mr. Joseph Lastimosa.  According to the July 16, 2013 letter (bold is mine): 

"You disobeyed the order given by the Vicar General and the Attorney for the Archdiocese to release him." 

The Decree of removal on August 20, 2013 says the same thing.  According to the Decree of removal (bold is mine): 

"A canonical reason for removal has been determined, that is Reverend Father Paul A.M. Gofigan's act of disobedience refusing to terminate the de facto employment of a registered sex offender working in the parish...."

Father Paul was removed for disobedience when he did not remove Mr. Joseph Lastimosa from employment.   So, what change was Tim Rohr referring to? Terminating an employment does not mean to remove only the paycheck, but also to remove the duties that came with that paycheck.  The NCW never had anything to do with Father Paul's removal.


I received a comment saying that Tim Rohr did refute my statement.  Apparently, the anonymous commenter above copied and pasted only a part of Tim Rohr's statement.  Tim Rohr further stated on his blog: 

"As for Apuron putting in the NCW after Cottman pounded her fist on the table, he certainly could have. But Apuron doesn't call the shots in the Archdiocese. Gennarini and Pius do.  And they are much smarter than Apuron.  They know they have to sneak in the NCW lest we detect their evil intent." 

My response to this is........OH REALLY??  If it was Father Pius and Gennarini who call all the shots, then whose decision was it to put Father Bien (a "non-Neo" priest) to replace Father Paul on July 17th, which is the very next day AFTER Father Paul was removed????????  

If the goal was to install the NCW into the Dededo parish, and Father Pius and Gennarini call all the shots as Tim Rohr claimed, then why didn't they take the opportunity to replace Father Paul with an RMS priest?  That would have been the smart move. In fact, that would have been the golden opportunity to "sneak in the NCW."    

Monday, July 27, 2015

The History And Strength Of The NCW

The founders of the Neocatechumenal Way are Kiko Arguello and Carmen Hernandez.   The NCW was born in the poor.  It did not come from the rich.  Regarding the history of the NCW: 

  Two dynamic Spaniards are the founders of the Neocatechumenate movement: Francisco Arguello, better known as Kiko, and Carmen Hernandez, who once studied to become a nun .

          Born in 1939, the "existentialist" Spanish painter Kiko did not start out as a practicing - or even believing - Catholic. On November 2, 1980, recounting his history during his meeting with Pope John Paul II in the Martyred Canadian Saints parish in Rome, he stated: "God permitted me to experience the absurd - atheism - until he had mercy."

          Upon his conversion, Kiko began to frequent catechism courses, and for years he also trained as a catechist. Finally, convinced of Christ's presence among the poor, he went to live with the poor of the Palomeras Atlas shanty town in Madrid. In 1964 he started his "Way," following in the footsteps of Charles de Foucauld. At this stage, Kiko's sole possessions were a guitar, a crucifix, and a Bible.

          It was among the poor of Palomeras that Kiko encountered Carmen Hernandez; they joined forces to establish the bases for what they would eventually call the Neocatechumenate Way. Carmen Hernandez, who held degrees in Physics and Theology, had already been teaching for nearly eight years in a religious missionary institute. While awaiting a missionary assignment Bolivia, she had been living an analogous experience to Kiko's. One of Hernandez' main concerns had been the liturgical reforms instituted by Vatican II.

          In 1968, Kiko and Carmen came to Rome where, with the support of Rome's Vicar-Bishop Cardinal Angelo dell'Acqua, they first launched their movement in the Canadian Martyrs' parish.
        Their work soon aroused the interest of the Vatican's Congregation of the Liturgy and Sacraments. After a period of examination, the Congregation published a laudatory article in its official journal Notitiae.A few years later, the Congregation officially defended the movement against accusations of heresy by a group of traditionalist Canadian priests.

          One of the Congregation's advisors wrote in his report: "I would like to point out another aspect of this catechesis, or rather Neocatechumenate Way. As a historical scholar of ancient catechesis, I can say that Kiko's and Carmen's endeavor to realize the Catechumenate for our times has been successful. Personal experience has allowed them to intuit the profound validity of Church institutions in the first three centuries, permitting them to translate these into a new structure, which assumes the most important elements of early Christianity, yet employs them in a new context: conversion of the baptized who never made the personal choice of faith... I find all of this positive, and thereby conclude my judgment by inviting the responsible members of the Sacred Congregation of the Clergy to encourage this movement, guiding it with comprehension and paternal indulgence, so that it remain as it is - a service to authentically renovate the parish communities."

          Years later, on May 9, 1986, Kiko and Carmen were summoned by the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith to respond to a series of questions regarding their views on hermeneutics, pastoral work and doctrine. After thorough study of their responses, Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger informed them that his Congregation wished to assist them, and proposed linking the movement to a Vatican congregation to provide a juridical basis. Kiko and Carmen fervently desired the official support of the Holy Father. As a result, John Paul II nominated Bishop Paul Josef Cordes, Vice-President of the Pontifical Council for the Laity, to act as the Pope's delegate ad personam to the movement and intermediary with the Vatican Congregations.

          On August 30, 1990, Pope Wojtyla sent Cordes a letter appreciating the Neocatechumenate movement's "correctness and good intentions" and recognizing the movement as "a Catholic path and initiative which is valid for our times."

God works in mysterious ways.  From among many people, He chose Abraham, who was a pagan and an old man with no heirs.  From this pagan, God turned him into the "father of faith" and a father of many nations.  God chose Moses, a person slow of speech raised by Egyptians.  From this stutterer, God made him the spokeman for His chosen people.  God chose David, a young poor shepherd boy with no military skills. From his poor shepherd boy, God turned him into a king who conquered many people including the Philistine giant Goliath.  God chose Saul, a Pharisee who persecuted Christians.  God turned this persecutor into an Apostle of the Gentiles.  And so we have Kiko Arguello, who started out as an unbelieving Catholic.  Somehow God turned him into the Founder of the NCW, which was born in poverty.  According to St. John Paul II: 

Begun in the slums of Madrid, 30 years later it has become, like the Gospel mustard seed, a great tree which has now spread to more than 100 countries of the world, with a significant presence also among Catholics of the Eastern-rite Churches.

 Like every anniversary, seen in the light of faith, yours too becomes an opportunity for praise and thanksgiving for the abundant gifts that in these years the Lord has granted you and, through you, to the whole Church. For many people the Neocatechumenal experience has been a journey of conversion and maturing in the faith through the rediscovery of Baptism as a true source of life, and of the Eucharist as the culminating moment in Christian life; through the rediscovery of the word of God which, shared in fraternal communion, becomes a light and guide for life; through the rediscovery of the Church as an authentic missionary community.
Like a small mustard seed from among the poor, the NCW grew into a huge tree.  It's strength lies in the Holy Spirit who nourished it into growth.  From the early days, the NCW has always been misinterpreted as a movement, but it is an itinerary of Christian formation.   
Before starting their evangelizing activities, Kiko and Carmen asked themselves: where did the strength of the early Church lie, and what accounts for weakness in the modern Church? The answers are to be found in the "Neocatechumenate Way" they eventually mapped out: post-baptismal Christian initiation realized with the methods and forms of the early Church.
The Neocatechumenate movement has revolutionalized parish life in the churches to which it has been called. No longer do sociological criteria divide groups by age - children, adults, the elderly. Parishes rather become true communities of 30-50 individuals of diverse ages, social conditions, mentalities, and cultural backgrounds, growing together in faith and commitment. These communities act in the parishes with a "tripod" basis of catechesis (as suggested by Vatican II): Word, Liturgy, and Community.

 For the Neocatechumenate movement, the Word implies the proclaiming of the Gospel (Kerygma) anywhere and everywhere; the Liturgy represents the celebration of Faith, within which all the symbols of tradition are remembered; and the Community (Koinonia) signifies the communion between those who have heard the Word and those who live in the unity of love under the sign of the Cross.

The Neocatechumenate community celebrates Mass with slight variations conceded by the Congregation of the Divine Liturgy and Sacraments (Note of December 19, 1988). After the three Scripture readings and before the homily, members engage in commentary, comparing their readings with their personal experiences. The homily then takes account of the observations made, corrects deviations, and stimulates reflection. Next, as in the Ambrosian rite, is the Rite of Peace. The rite of the Eucharist follows early Christian practices, using unleavened bread and wine.

 The re-discovery of the liturgy has been a determinant factor in overcoming cynicism and indifference, especially affecting Catholics in the prosperous and comfortable Western world. At present, thousands of parishes have passed from a state of limited activity to one of florid growth thanks to the Neocatechumenate. (In Spain in recent years, there has been a 17.5% growth in parishes with Neocatechumenate leadership). Neocatechumenate communities have been able to overcome two serious problems in today's Church: defections among the young and among couples.

In the Roman diocese alone, where 25% of the parishes are Neocatechumenates, 50% of the members are persons 25-50 years - the age group most minimally represented in other Italian parishes. As for couples, the average birth rate in the Roman diocese is 3.11%, considerably higher than the national average of 1.2 children per woman.

The teachings of Kiko and Carmen are based on two main Scriptural passages. The first refers to love: "As I loved you, so you should love one another... By this love, all will recognize that you are my disciples" (John 13: 34-35).

          The second passage refers to death. In Chapter 2 of the Letters to the Hebrews, it is taught that Jesus Christ has come to "destroy the mediator of death, the Lord of death, i.e. the Devil, and to free those, in fear of death, who were subjected to this slavery during life" (Hebrews 2: 14-15). This victory over death is the essential Christian message Jesus left us, and it is central to the teachings of the Neocatechumenate movement. 

Saturday, July 25, 2015

Letter From Dora Salazar

The following letter appeared on the opinion page of the Pacific Daily News dated July 23, 2015 by Dora Salazar of Tamuning. 

Courage in the face of persecution is the strongest type of courage that exists. Martin Luther King Jr. is one example of a man who showed courage in the face of persecution by standing firm to his beliefs and convictions.

Archbishop Apuron is showing this same kind of courage.

This year we have been hammered by an onslaught of malicious slandering of the archbishop. The archbishop accused of lying. The archbishop accused of having an improper relationship with a man. The archbishop accused of preferring the Neocatechumenal Way to the detriment of everyone else. The archbishop accused of not forming his priests well. The archbishop accused of not being transparent.

I think I am beginning to understand the meaning of the word “manic” — they can’t let go. Their whole lives are centered on the destruction of the archbishop, the Way and the seminary. Their hatred eventually will destroy themselves.

The news is that the Church in Guam is not alone. Sadly, this lynching and character assassination of bishops is happening all over in the Catholic Church. In Washington they have the Catholics For Choice. In San Francisco they have the Committed Catholics. In Guam we have the Concerned Catholics. All of them are eager to attack their respective bishop. All of them use the media extensively (for example, full page ads in the local newspapers). All of them are well funded.

Well, I suppose it is the fate of all great men to be misunderstood. Pythagoras was misunderstood and Socrates, and Copernicus, and Galileo, and Newton, and Martin Luther King Jr. and Blessed Diego and Pope Paul VI and Jesus himself.

The overwhelming silent majority loves you dear archbishop. You are an inspiration to many.

Dora B. Salazar is a resident of Tamuning.

The Other Side Of The Story

For every story, there are two sides.  I am sure that some members of the NCW has been reading the jungle despite that we are told by our catechists not to.  Nevertheless, Vangie Lujan claimed that she was threatened by Zoltan.  This is Zoltan's side of the story, which can be found here. 

During the meeting, someone yelled at me, I was accused that I am a colonizer and should go back to my country. Nobody countered that. I requested opportunity from Vangie Lujan to respond, who moderated the discussion, based on personal attack. Vangie wanted to allow me to respond to the charge, but Greg Perez overrode her and closed the discussion. It was after the end of the meeting when I told Vangie that I was denied to respond to a personal attack and this could come out in the newspapers. I did not mention PDN or any particular newspaper, so she does not remember correctly. It was not a threat to her. It is interesting what Vangie Lujan is now saying that she felt threatened by my comment after the Agat meeting of CCoG last Thursday. All I said was that the press may learn about the antics of CCoG. What is it so threatening about a news report of a public meeting? Perhaps, maybe only perhaps, could something shameful have happened there that CCoG wants to keep hidden?

Under the circumstances and the accusations made at Junglewatch, I am compelled to give a more detailed account of what exactly happened last night at the CCoG meeting. I don't provide a full transcript out of respect for the people of Agat who were mostly innocent bystanders of the events. Shortly after the lengthy presentations of Mr. Rohr and Mr. Perez I raised my hand and asked a few questions. I add explanations to my questions here in order to indicate the context.

1. Where is the evidence that Fr. Gofigan's release from the Santa Barbara church is Dededo was related to the NCW? Explanation: Mr. Rohr published a pamphlet, apparently without ISBN number, about the case, but there is no evidence anywhere of the involvement of the NCW. What is the source of this pamphlet? Is this, perhaps, a gossip and hearsay only?

2. Is it true that there was talk among the members of the previous financial council for the Archbishop of selling the Yona seminary? Explanation: There is a lot of talk about the seminary, but not much about protecting its function. Is it not possible that what happened there was for protecting its function as a seminary for the foreseeable future?

3. What is the reason of spreading superstition about the NCW: claiming NCW teaches that "Jesus was a sinner"? Explanation: a conceptual charge of heresy was made based on a taped speech of one single person who obviously cannot speak English very well. However, no one spoke directly to this person and asked him if he believed that Jesus was a sinner.

4. How would CCoG increase transparency in parish finances if parishioners are encouraged to shortcut collection and give donations directly to the priests in envelopes? Explanation: CCoG has an item on its agenda to increase transparency and accountability. If CCoG president Mr. Perez encourages the above mentioned practice, is he not in apparent contradiction with the goals of CCoG?

5. What is wrong with presbyters and the celebration of St. Patrick's day? Explanation: It was claimed that presbyters are not priests and St. Patrick's Day is not a Catholic holiday. Perhaps, the leader of CCoG was not aware that Catholic presbyters are consecrated priests and St. Patrick's Day is a great feast day in the mainland and in many Catholic countries around the world.

6. How could one Catholic group call for war against another Catholic group? How could the same person claim that the war he is suggesting is a "war against the devil"? Explanation: Jesus teaches love and peace, but not war against your own denomination. Perhaps, Mr. Perez has never learned about Jesus as a teacher of all Christians?
I did not get answer for any of these questions, except the 2nd. Mr. Rohr said that the financial council did not have authority to sell the property. This was a smart sentence. Unfortunately, it was not a real answer to the yes/no question that should have been a clear yes or no! What we got instead, was simple evasion. Then, sensing that sand got into the CCoG machinery, Mr. Rohr gave a noticeable hand sign. He did not know that hard-of-hearing people, like myself, are alert of nonverbal communication. I was sitting in the front row, so I just saw everything! After the sign was secretly given, someone stood up, started shrieking and yelling at me. I won't repeat what this person uttered. It was a clear instance of a prearranged xenophobic attack, some kind of Plan B or escape mechanism in case of trouble for the masterminds of the meeting. I had to call attention that I am an American citizen who cannot be sent "back to your country". Well, I don't have to say that an angry mobbing mood developed in an instant and I felt seriously threatened for my safety. Meantime Mr. Rohr was smiling like a sphinx as if teasing me, "you see it is not me, I am not doing anything..." This lynching atmosphere felt obviously good for him and his smile showed that he enjoyed it.

At further comments from several people I was also accused of being a colonizer and someone who "changes the official Catechism of the Catholic Church". This turn of events was greatly puzzling. I requested time from CCoG secretary Vangie Lujan, who moderated the meeting, to respond to these new charges based on personal attack. We all know the parliamentary rules, called Robert's Rules, that grant an opportunity of rebuttal for personal attack. First, she wanted to allow me to respond but a quick hand sign was given, this time by Mr. Perez, indicating that my request should be denied. I could see this very well. It was a true shame that Robert's Rule was replaced by the Bully's Rule, despite the good intention of the moderator.

In Mt 23:37 Jesus laments: “Jerusalem, Jerusalem, you (...) stone those sent to you, how often I have longed to gather your children together, as a hen gathers her chicks under her wings, and you were not willing."

After the closing prayer, when people started to leave to premises, I came to Vangie and told her that I was denied the opportunity of responding to a public personal attack and this could be in the newspapers tomorrow. I did not mention PDN or any particular newspaper. She did not say she took it as a threat. On the contrary, she shared with me that she had a degree in mathematics and I congratulated her. We got a friendly conversation. She asked me to help her to make an appointment with the Archbishop. I told her it was impossible for me, as I have no connection to the chancery. I asked her why CCoG does not separate its concerns related to the Archbishop from those related to the NCW. I would be glad to help in any issue, according to my best knowledge, relating to the NCW, but I cannot speak for the Archbishop. I think she understood this. I said good night when she left.
First of all, I commend Zoltan for trying to reach out to our Catholic brothers who oppose the Archbishop and the NCW.  Because Zoltan has attended the CCOG meeting in Agat, we now have an idea of what their meeting is really about.  It is simply a spreading of false rumors. 
1.   They are spreading the false rumor that the removal of Father Paul had to do with the NCW, and Tim Rohr points to his own book as his evidence.....a book written by him.....the spreader of false gossip to begin with.  There is no evidence that the NCW had anything to do with Father Paul's removal.  The only real evidence comes from a document naming Joseph Lastimosa as the reason for his removal. 
2.   They still talk about the seminary.  The Archbishop already said that the title of the RM seminary is under the Archdiocese of Agana.  Why they continue to speak about it is beyond me.  If they do not believe that the RM Seminary is under the Archdiocese of Agana, that is not the Archbishop's problem. 
3.  Nowhere in the NCW is it taught that Jesus was a sinner.  That is a false rumor spread by Tim Rohr and Chuck White.  The Archbishop told the parishioners in Toto that Jesus was not a sinner.  Zoltan tried telling those at the CCOG meeting that he does not believe that Jesus was a sinner and that is never taught in the NCW.  I have also never heard the NCW teach that Jesus was a sinner.  Everyone in the NCW can testify that nowhere in the NCW is it ever taught that Jesus was a sinner.  Furthermore, the jungle is also spreading the false rumor that the NCW does not believe in the Holy Trinity.  The fact that we make the sign of the cross and say "In the name of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit" is evidence that we believe in the Holy Trinity. 
4.  The auditor of Deloitte & Touche LLP together with Deacon Kim has visited every parish, telling them that the parish financial report should be published either every month or every week.  It is hypocritical of CCOG to demand transparency on where the Sunday collections are going when all one needed to do was pick up their parish bulletin.  If CCOG is encouraging people to give money to the priests, are these monies being audited?  And if CCOG is collecting money from its members to be used for a certain purpose, are they being audited?
5.  To say that a presbyter is not a priest shows ignorance.  The Latin word "priest" comes from the word "presbyter".  Someone needs to remind CCOG that Pope Francis ordained 13 men from the RM seminary into the priesthood.  Also, Zoltan is correct about St. Patrick.  Saint Patrick's Day was made an official Christian feast day in the early 17th century and is observed by the Catholic Church, especially in Ireland.  
6.  CCOG brings up this "war" against the Archbishop and the NCW simply because they never desired reconciliation in the first place.  The following statement was made in the jungle by Thomas Tanaka, who is a member of CCOG.   
" We have said that peace can prevail by having RMS property returned, and the seminary for the Way closed.  We want all parishes under Neo control returned to non-neo priests and for the Neo’s to open up their own place of worship apart from ours."


Friday, July 24, 2015

World Family Day In Philadelphia

In his four page letter, Giuseppe Gennarini encouraged the brothers and sisters of the Way to participate in the World Family Day, which is scheduled to occur in September.  Pope Francis and Kiko Arguello will also be there in Philadelphia.   

With the passage of same-sex marriage by the U.S. Supreme Court, gender ideology is slowly coming into the schools.  Young children at the elementary level are being taught that the concept of sexual differences between men and women have no objective or biological basis, but are the product of educational options and cultural patterns imposed by society.  Very young children are being taught that they can choose their own gender and books such as King and King, portraying homosexual romance, are being introduced to them. Rome's Family Day Demonstration turned out to be successful in that thousands of the silent majority took to the streets and participated against same sex marriage and gender ideology.  The demonstration in Rome was also a non-denominational event.  Orthodox, Christians, Sikhs, and Muslims came out to support World Family Day.  In his four page letter, Giuseppe wrote to the brothers: 

The visit of Pope Francis to the United States will be an historical watershed in the life of the Church and of the United States.  The effort to de-construct the Christian family is rapidly progressing as gender theory is being taught in schools, trying to instill into our children since pre-K that they can choose their gender according to their whim.  

Pope Francis, during an Angelus in June, referring to gender ideology, said "This effort [to oppose gender theory] is very important because we are speaking about our youth's and our children's education for which you, parents, are firstly responsible.  Our youth start hearing these strange ideas, this ideological colonization, which poison the soul and the family: we must act against this..."

Kiko Arguello will be in Philadelphia to support Pope Francis, and he will meet with all the brothers and sisters who participated in this event at the Wells Fargo Center on September 28th at a gathering presided by Archbishop Chaput. 

Tuesday, July 21, 2015

Post Scriptum From Giuseppe and Claudia Gennarini

The NCW received a four page letter that was signed by Giuseppe and Claudia Gennarini, Father Angelo Pochetti, and Fernando Sousa Costa.  What caught my attention was the post scriptum, which was about two paragraphs long.  It was very interesting to read the Pope's seven points about the Neocatechumenal Way.  Imagine that!  The first point of Pope Francis was calling Kiko Arguello a SAINT!  :-) 


P.S. We have just received news from Alonso, the itinerant of Santo Domingo of something which I think is very important for all brothers and sisters: on June 23, in the afternoon, in the middle of the Itinerant’s Convivence, His Excellency Ramón de la Rosa y Carpio, Archbishop Emeritus of Santiago, Dominican Republic, showed up unexpectedly. He came directly from Santiago, in the middle of a powerful rain storm, in order to personally tell us: "A short time ago, we had the AD LIMINA visit of all bishops from Santo Domingo. The Holy Father received us breaking protocol. Before, he would receive us one by one for fifteen minutes each and he would conclude with a brief common message. This time he changed the protocol and received us all together, paternally dialoguing with all of us for more than one hour and a half.  The reason for my presence here is because I want to tell you with details something very important which was said during that audience. The Holy Father, when Bishop Fausto spoke about the existence in the Dominican Republic of an Inter-diocesan Seminary and of two Redemptoris Mater Seminaries, focused his dialogue on speaking about the Neocatechumenal Way. I realized that what he was saying was so important, that in that moment I took out my notebook and started taking notes of everything he said. The pope centered his speech on 7 points: 

FIRST: Many things have been said about Kiko Argüello and many other can be said. However one thing is sure: HE IS A SAINT.
SECOND: The Neocatechumenal Way is of the Holy Spirit for his Church.
THIRD: Therefore, I strongly exhort you to support, encourage and follow this Christian Initiation.
FOURTH: I value very positively the missionary dimension of these communities. This year I’ve just sent out more than one hundred families to where there is not a presence of the Church or it’s very small.
FIFTH: Regarding the Redemptoris Mater Seminaries, I say the following: what would it be of the Diocese of Rome without it? I’ve just ordained 16 priests and 13 were from the Neocatechumenal Way. You draw the conclusions.
SIXTH: The Neocatechumenal Way has restored in the church the EASTER VIGIL, which is the center of Christian life.
SEVENTH: The Neocatechumenal Way is the one that knows the most about the Christian Initiation. Consult them and, if necessary, correct the catechists, the communities…(because to correct is to love)…but correct with the Statutes in your hands.

Saturday, July 18, 2015

Archbishop Retains California Lawyer

It is official.  The Archbishop has retained a lawyer in California.  A letter of warning was given to John (the typhoon) Toves.  The story was in KUAM and in the PDN. 

Archbishop Anthony Apuron has retained an attorney to warn an accuser to stop ruining the name of the island’s Catholic church and its leader.

“This letter serves as a demand to you to immediately cease and desist from making any further defamatory comments or publications against Archbishop Apuron’s reputation and character,” wrote Michelle R. Neal, a Sacramento, Calif., attorney whose expertise includes sexual harassment claim prevention and investigations.

“Your conduct has caused and continues to cause grave harm not only to Archbishop Apuron and the church in Guam, but also to the universal church,” Neal wrote to Toves on July 5.
The accuser, John C. Toves, a native of Guam who lives in California, said Friday he won’t stop publicly questioning Apuron because he believes he’s saving the church by calling for a change in leadership.

The lawyer is acting on behalf of the archbishop because of the constant harassment by Toves, Father Adrian Cristobal, chancellor of the archdiocese, stated Friday.

In November last year, Toves sent letters to Vatican representatives to call for an investigation on his allegation against Apuron.

In the letters, Toves alleged that sometime between 1980 and 1983, when Apuron was a priest, Apuron allegedly had inappropriate contact with a relative of Toves when both attended a youth seminary in Guam.

He sent a letter to Archbishop Martin Krebs, the Vatican’s delegate in the Pacific islands; and similar letters to Cardinal Marc Ouellet, prefect of the Congregation for Bishops; and Cardinal Fernando Filoni, prefect of the Congregation for the Evangelization of Peoples and a former personal envoy of Pope Francis.

In December, Deacon Larry Claros, the archdiocese’s sexual abuse response coordinator at the time, said the archbishop is innocent — “for sure” — and that the archdiocese has determined no investigation was necessary.

Claros gave a public statement after Toves went to the archdiocese to try to confront the archbishop.
No victim has come forward publicly since Toves made the public allegation. Toves said his relative and former co-seminarian remains anguished and doesn’t wish to come forward.

At the time of his Guam trip in December, Toves said he’s speaking up because of the rift in the island Catholic church between those who support the Neocatechumenal Way and those who want to keep the island’s long-held Catholic traditions.

Many on Guam are afraid to speak up, he said. He said he hopes to be able to afford a Canon Law expert to press the Vatican to investigate.

“I am risking my entire well-being on all of this. Why are the people so afraid? Why?” Toves said.
The archbishop’s attorney wrote to Toves that if Toves doesn’t comply with the letter’s demand that Toves cease spreading “patently false” statements against the archbishop, Apuron will have to pursue all available legal remedies.

“Your liability and exposure under such legal action will be considerable,” the archbishop’s attorney wrote.

Friday, July 17, 2015

Corporation Sole With Board Of Directors

An anonymous commenter wrote the following, and I said that I would clarify more in an entry post.  This is that entry post.  According to the dialogue that had taken place: 

  1. Hi, Diana--
    Sorry, but an example of how Tim refutes your comments is in Junglewatch under entry titled, "Apuron is a footnote". He does do this quite often. Maybe not as an entry all the time, but he'll put it in comments as the need warrants.

  2. Dear Anonymous at 9:22 am,

    That was not a refutation. That was a contradiction to the legal website I quoted. I said that a corporation sole can have a board of directors because according to the legal website a corporation sole also applies to a king as a head of state. The only thing that Tim Rohr said is that a corporation sole does not have a Board of Directors. He completely ignored the fact that some corporation sole do have a Board of Directors. I will write and entry post and clarify more on it.
A corporation sole can have a Board of Directors because there are two types of corporation sole.  The legal website I cited in a previous entry post said that a corporation sole can either be a king such as the head of state of England in former times or a Bishop.  The first to hold the title of a corporation were the monks.  Such monasterial corporations usually had several officers functioning as a Board of Directors and were therefore, called a "corporation aggregate." 
I do not care very much for Wikipedia, but it explains the two types of corporation sole.  According to Wikipedia (the bold is mine): 

A corporation sole is a legal entity consisting of a single ("sole") incorporated office, occupied by a single ("sole") person. A corporation sole is one of two types of corporation, the other being a corporation aggregate.[1][2]  This allows corporations (often religious corporations or Commonwealth governments) to pass without interval in time from one office holder to the next successor-in-office, giving the positions legal continuity with subsequent office holders having identical powers to their predecessors.
Most corporations sole are church-related (for example, the Archbishop of Canterbury[3]), but some political offices of the United Kingdom, Canada, and the United States are also corporations sole. In the United Kingdom, for example, many of the Secretaries of State are corporations sole.[4] In contrast to a corporation sole, a corporation aggregate consists of two or more persons, typically run by a board of directors. Another difference is that corporations aggregate may have owners or stockholders, neither of which are a feature of a corporation sole.
Furthermore, the corporation aggregate is defined as a "legal personality" which comes in two kinds: natural persons or juridical persons. 

In addition, if you want to know who a juridical person is according to the Canon Law of the Catholic Church, you can read the following website below:

The following website is a better website than Wikipedia, which I never favor.  The website is from the Catholic Encyclopedia:  

A further division of corporations, either sole or aggregate, recognized by the law of England, is that of ecclesiastical corporations and lay corporations. Ecclesiastical corporations are those whose members are persons devoted to spiritual affairs, such as bishops, archdeacons, parsons, and vicars. Prior to the reign of Edward VI, deans and chapters, priors and convents, abbots and monks were ecclesiastical corporations aggregate.

Catholic Encyclopedia on Corporation

And according to US legal on the definition of "ecclesiastical corporation" (the bold is mine): 

Ecclesiastical corporations are either sole or aggregate. The members composing which are all spiritual persons, such as bishops, certain deans, and prebendaries, all archdeacons, parsons, and vicars are corporation’s sole, and such corporations aggregate as deans and chapters, prior and convent (formerly), abbots and monks, and the like.


Thursday, July 16, 2015

World Family Day

A letter written by Giuseppe and Claudia Gennarini, Father Angelo Pochetti, and Fernando Sousa Costa was given to members of the NCW on Guam.  In his letter, Giusppe invited and encouraged families and communities of the NCW to participate in the World Family Day in Philadelphia in September.  Pope Francis will be there.  According to Giuseppe:  Pope Francis is coming to canonize Fr Juniero Serra (a great source of controversy already because they are trying to take down his statue from the Capitol in Washington D.C. substituting it with the statue of a lesbian astronaut!).  The Pope will speak at the United Nations before an unprecedented gathering of heads of state.  He will also be the first Pope to address the joint session of the U.S. Congress. 

The following article describes what World Family Day is and its significance: 

In September 2015, Philadelphia will have the honor of hosting the 8th World Meeting of Families, an international event organized by the Pontifical Council for the Family. Here’s a brief Q&A about the 8th World Meeting of Families, along with some helpful links.

What is the World Meeting of Families?

The World Meeting of Families is an international event of prayer, catechesis, and celebration that draws participants from around the globe. It seeks to strengthen the bonds between families and to witness to the crucial importance of marriage and family to all of society.

What is the Pontifical Council for the Family?

The Pontifical Council for the Family is part of the Roman Curia. It was instituted by Bl. John Paul II in 1981, replacing the Committee for the Family which was created by Pope Paul VI in 1973. As explained on its profile page, the Pontifical Council for the Family “is responsible for the promotion of the pastoral ministry and apostolate to the family, through the application of the teachings and guidelines of the ecclesiastical Magisterium, to help Christian families fulfill their educational and apostolic mission.” The Pontifical Council for the Family has its own regularly updated website. (It is in Italian but can be accessed in English by clicking “Eng” in the upper toolbar.)

When and where is the 8th World Meeting of Families?

The 8th World Meeting of Families will be held September 22-27, 2015, in Philadelphia. This decision was announced by Pope Benedict at the 7th World Meeting of Families in Milan in 2012, and confirmed by the Vatican on February 25.

Where have the other World Meetings of Families been held?

Previous World Meetings of Families have been held in Rome (1994 & 2000); Rio de Janeiro (1997); Manila (2003); Valencia, Spain (2006); Mexico City (2009); and Milan, Italy (2012). The 8th World Meeting of Families will be the first time this event has been held in the United States.

Will the pope attend the 8th World Meeting of Families?

No one knows for sure, since Pope Benedict’s successor has not yet been elected, but it is certainly possible that the new Holy Father will attend the 8th World Meeting of Families in Philadelphia. If so, it could also be the new pope’s first visit to the United States.

How many people attend the World Meeting of Families?

Attendance varies depending on the location. Most recently, hundreds of thousands of people attended the 7th World Meeting of Families in Milan, and one million attended Pope Benedict’s mass at that Meeting.

Does each World Meeting of Families have a theme?

Yes. For example, the theme of the 2012 World Meeting of Families in Milan was “The Family: Work and Celebration.” The theme for the 2015 World Meeting of Families will be chosen by the new pope after he is elected.

What has Archbishop Charles Chaput, Archbishop of Philadelphia, said about hosting the 8th World Meeting of Families?

In a letter published on February 25, Archbishop Chaput said, “I believe that this event has the power to transform, in deeply positive ways, not just the Catholic Church, but our entire community. We look forward to welcoming you and your family to Philadelphia for this important event in September 2015.”

To DonaMila Taitano

This is from your comment which is found here.
This is my last response to this unending diatribe of zero intelligence, civility or any ounce of Christian values. I sincerely hope that the administrators of this blog are not part of my community or any community member that I personally know, for if you are, shame on you.

I would like to take this opportunity to apologize to Mrs. Martinez for the community here, now, and personally if and when I see her: Mrs. Martinez, on behalf of myself and anyone else in the Neocatechumenal Way who still have an ounce of integrity and honor, I humbly ask for your forgiveness. I apologize for this attack on your person and I pray that you will find it in your heart to forgive us for even giving credence to this blog by reading it and allowing it to continue.

You stated:  I sincerely hope that the administrators of this blog are not part of my community or any community member that I personally know, for if you are, shame on you.
Why do you hope that the administrator of this blog (my blog) is not from your community or any community member that you personally know?  Do you honestly think that only your community and those whom you personally know are better than other community members?  We are all the same and no better than anyone because we are all sinners.
You also stated:  This is my last response to this unending diatribe of zero intelligence, civility or any ounce of Christian values.
The moment a person makes a personal attack rather than discussing the issue at hand is the moment the person lost the dialogue.  Disagreeing with a person is one thing, but name calling is a whole different matter.  Your description of “zero intelligence” is a personal attack that has no basis at all in this discussion.  You asked why I allowed the publication of a comment you dislike, and I gave an honest answer.  You could have easily asked Anonymous 9:47 why he/she speculated that Mrs. Martinez would have anything to do with providing Tim Rohr any information.  Perhaps, he/she may have heard or seen something that led him/her to make that speculation.  And if you had asked him/her that question, you might have learned something.  This is why I value freedom of expression.
However, you asked me why I chose to publicize the comment.  The fact that you disagree with my reason is not a valid excuse to resort to belittlement, which is uncalled for.  I put your comment on an entry post, not to judge you, but to CORRECT your behavior.  If you feel hurt over my words, I apologize for that is not my intention.  You may disagree with me over a topic, for I never expect anyone to wholly agree with me.   We are all different in our backgrounds, histories, and perspective.   
You also said:  on behalf of myself and anyone else in the Neocatechumenal Way who still have an ounce of integrity and honor,…..
You label yourself and a few people you know as the only ones having an ounce of integrity and honor while I do not have any.  And you are correct. You are much more intelligent than I am.  You have more honor and integrity and are more of a Christian than me, and I say this with humility. The Way has taught that it helps to listen to what the brothers have to say about ourselves because many times we are blind to our own sins. 
I thank you for your judgments in claiming that I have "zero intelligence", lack integrity and honor, and have no civility and Christian values.  Nowhere in my blog have I ever claimed to be perfect and without fault in any way, but I do pray for God's grace so that I may walk more like my brother Jesus Christ and truly be a daughter of God as He calls me to be.   May you walk in peace, Sister DonaMila, and you are in my prayers.  I hope that you also keep me in your prayers as well.    

Wednesday, July 15, 2015

Opinion of Counsel

By January, 2015 questions have come up as to who OWNS the Redemptoris Mater Seminary in Yona.  According to news report: 

Local Catholic Observer Tim Rohr believes that since its purchase, the Archdiocese has made some secret dealings that have officially turned over the property to a third party, namely a corporation made up of Italians. And he has the Deed Restriction to prove it.

Rohr even sought the opinion of experts such as realtors and attorneys, who he says read over the documents and agreed that control of the property no longer belongs to the Archdiocese.

The Deed Restriction reads, in part, “I decree to designate, assign, earmark, and otherwise set aside the property … to the Redemptoris Mater Archdiocesan Missionary Seminary of Guam, a non profit corporation … in perpetual use.”

Notice that the word "assign" is in the deed restriction.  In one of my entry posts, I showed that the words "alienation" and "assignment" are not the same in legal terms.  However, the jungle disagrees.  According to Tim Rohr: 

Note the statement: "As you well know, 'alienation' and 'assignment' are words of distinction without a difference", and "Any documents containing these words would place a huge cloud on title..." 

Notice the word ASSIGN and refer back to Atty. Terlaje's warning: "Any documents containing these words (assignment) would place a huge cloud on title."$40m-redemptoris-mater-seminary-in-yona

It is very clear from Rohr's statement above that he believes the words "alienation" and "assignment" are not the same.  He took Ed Terlaje's words without bothering to look up the legal terms himself.  As I pointed out in one of my entry posts, "alienation" and "assignment" are not the same in legal terms.  A legal dictionary is online, and this is what the legal dictionary says regarding these two words: 

Alienation:  the transfer of title to real property, voluntarily and completely. It does not apply to interests other than title, such as a mortgages.

Assignment: A transfer of rights in real property or Personal Property to another that gives the recipient—the transferee—the rights that the owner or holder of the property—the transferor—had prior to the transfer.

Above is "written" documented evidence showing that the two terms are not the same.  Thus, it appears that Ed Terlaje's "legal opinion" was incorrect.  Perhaps, the incorrect legal opinion was due to a lack of knowledge in canon law and in corporation soles. Tim relies on the "opinion" of counsel as his documentation.  We already saw that the legal opinion of a lawyer regarding the words "alienation" and "assignment" to be incorrect."  In fact, according to a business dictionary, an opinion of counsel is defined as follows (bold is mine): 

"Formal, written report by an attorney (or a firm of attorneys) to a client on a specific case or legal problem. It outlines the (1) attorney's understanding and analysis of the facts basic to the case or problem, (2) implication of applicable laws, and (3) a suggested course of action. In some instances (such as in purchase of a property or a firm) where the report certifies the seller's title or legal status, the attorney may be liable for damages if it turns out to be incorrect. Also called legal opinion."

As anyone can see, there is a possibility that a legal opinion or "opinion of counsel" can be incorrect.  Thus, the legal opinion of Attorney Bronze is what the jungle and CCOG is relying on.  The Archbishop, on the other hand, has three documents as his evidence.  One of those evidence is a CERTIFIED document dated January 28, 2015 and is actually posted in the jungle:

The deed restriction is also on that title document, where it should be.  The fact that it is on the title document showed no encumbrance as to who the owner is. The Archbishop has a written certified document showing that the RM seminary is under the Archdiocese of Agana.  The question is.......if CCOG or Tim Rohr believes that it is NOT under the Archdiocese of Agana, then do they have any written document showing the title to be UNDER another name?  Or is it just the "opinion" of counsel that they rely on?   It should also be noted that their legal counsel has no experience in religious institutions and corporation soles.  He also does not specialize in that area.