Saturday, July 11, 2015

More Clarifications On Corporation Sole

In my last entry post an anonymous commenter asked the following questions: 

Diana, Tim made the following statement in JW. Is this true? Will Archbishop Apuron always be in the Board because he is named personally?

"In his being named as a guarantor in the RMS Articles of Incorporation, he is named personally without any reference to his office.
Because he is named personally - and not his office - he will remain on the Board of Guarantors even after he is replaced as Archbishop of Agana."
 
Apparently, Tim Rohr thinks that because the office of the Archbishop was not included in the Board of Guarantors, he believes that Anthony Apuron will remain on the board even after he is replaced as Archbishop of Agana.  This is false.  What Tim Rohr failed to understand is that the Board of Guarantors is the "Board of Guarantors of RMS."  And RMS has a corporation sole, namely the current Archbishop of Guam Anthony Apuron.  According to the legal website I provided in my last entry post on corporation sole (bold is mine): 
 
Corporations sole consist of one person only and his successors, in some particular station, who are incorporated by law, in order to give them some legal capacities and advantages, particularly that of perpetuity, which in their natural persons they could not have had.  In this sense the king is a sole corporation; so is a bishop; so are some deans, and prebendaries, distinct from their several chapters; and so is every parson and vicar.

Corporation sole consist of one person only and his successors.  Thus, the successor of Archbishop Apuron will be the corporation sole of both the Archdiocese of Agana and RMS.  The Board of Directors and the Board of Guarantors exist to assist the Corporation Sole.  Regarding the truth about the RM seminary printed in the Umatuna, it stated: 

The Pontifical Council concluded that there was no alienation of the property even if the Archbishop transferred the title of the property to the RMS Corporation.....

http://neocatechemunal.blogspot.com/2015/04/the-truth-about-rms-property.html

The Pontifical Council concluded that there was NO ALIENATION of the property EVEN if the title of the property was transferred to the RMS.  Why?  Because the corporation sole of the Archdiocese of Agana is also the Corporation sole of RMS.....the same person.  The authority and power lies with the Corporation sole, not with the Board of Directors or the Board of Guarantors.  Therefore, those who say that the Archbishop only has 1/4 vote is incorrect.  As the legal website pointed out, Corporation sole consist of only one person.  The boards are there to assist this one person, namely the Archbishop.  The Board of Directors assist the Archbishop in overseeing the daily administration.  The Board of Guarantors assist the Archbishop in ensuring that the Corporation follows the original purpose for what it was created.  The Archbishop has the authority to appoint and remove both the members in the Board of Directors and the Board of Guarantors. 

75 comments:

  1. Dear Diana, please post a copy of the report from the Pontifical Council for the Interpretation of Legislative Texts. I think it is essential that this be available if you are going to quote it as a defense against criticisms , which, on the face of it, appear reasonable.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Dear Anonymous at 1:33 pm,

      You can see a copy of it at the chancery.

      Delete
    2. "You can see a copy of it at the chancery"...... but standing at the counter under watchful eyes, right Diana?

      Delete
    3. Dear Anonymous at 2:53 pm,

      The watchful eyes is only there to ensure that you do not photograph it. However, you can still read it.

      Delete
    4. Diana at 2:38 PM, you're saying a copy of the report from the Pontifical Council for the Interpretation of Legislative Texts is at the chancery? Is the opinion from the Denver law firm Lewis Roca Rothgerber LLP also at the chancery for people to look at? The last we were told was that after the CCOG lawyer looked at it on the afternoon of April 24 it was withdrawn from public view at 4:30 PM.

      BTW: In your 2:57 comment you said "The watchful eyes is [sic] only there to ensure that you do not photograph it. However, you can still read it." What's wrong with taking a photograph of the document? If it provides proof that the archbishop did nothing wrong (like the opinion from the Denver law firm) why not post it for EVERYONE to see? (That would put an end to the accusations from Tim Rohr, right?)

      Delete
    5. Dear Anonymous at 4:44 pm,

      I do not know the reason it was withdrawn if that was the case. Perhaps, it was withdrawn in case the CCOG lawyer plans to sue the Archbishop. If there is going to be a lawsuit, that document would be their evidence.

      The fact that the jungle has been taking documents and twisting it around is the reason why. After all, everyone can see from the Archbishop's letter to the former finance council that the Archbishop was trying to explain that "alienation" and "assignment are not the same in legal terms. But no one paid attention to what he wrote. The jungle merely called him a liar and neglected to get consent from the former finance council. They belittled him for opposing the Archdiocesan legal council. And no one bothered to check a legal dictionary,to see if there was any truth to what the Archbishop was saying.

      Delete
    6. Dear Diana (10:49)-
      I personally think that if the documents were available more people would be able to see it and read it for themselves. And since it really does prove the Archbishop's side, then the better for him it will be. Removing it just because it might be "twisted" doesn't seem like a good enough reason. After all, if it does go to court the Judge's interpretation will be the one that will prevail. Removing it just made it seem like we are hiding something. Just my take on things.

      Delete
    7. Dear anonymous at 12:23 pm,

      If it does go to court the Judge's interpretation will be the one that will prevail?????? There is a reason why our government set up a judicial system. If it goes to court and when the judge rules in favor of the Archbishop, that should finally put an end to the opposition's twisting of words.

      Delete
    8. Diana at 12:47 PM, IF it turns out that the judge rules in favor of the CCOG, then what? IF the judge rules that the archbishop is guilty of fraud, then what? Will you say that Tim Rohr and Chuck White influenced the judge the same way you claim that they influence PDN? Will the archbishop appeal?

      Delete
    9. Exactly. So why hide it away? We believe that it supports the Archbishop's position, no matter what anyone else says. Let everyone else read it and see! Like you, I've been telling people to go and read it---only to have them tell me that we are hiding it now.

      Delete
    10. Well then....there shouldn't be any problem making the documents available. But we all know that the Archbishop is hiding something.

      Delete
    11. Dear Anonymous at 2:18 pm,

      Did you notice in my comment that I never said "IF." I said "WHEN." Have you not notice that the Anthony Apuron is still the Archbishop? Have you not notice that Rome remains silent and has not responded to your call?

      Delete
    12. Diana at 6:05 PM, yes I did notice that you said "WHEN the judge rules in favor of the archbishop" but I was just asking What IF you're wrong?

      You're right that Apuron is still the archbishop "for now anyway" as he said about Fr. Mike Crisostomo. It's no surprise that Rome remains silent; I honestly don't expect Rome to act. I think Rome will let Apuron stay until he reaches retirement age.

      But if there is a court case, there is no guarantee that the judge will rule in favor of the archbishop. There is no guarantee that the judge will rule in favor of CCOG. That's why I used the word IF in my questions. I don't believe in counting my chicks before they hatch like you do.

      Delete
    13. Dear Anonymous at 9:35 pm,

      I trust in God. It was God who allowed the Archbishop to see the Pope in South Korea when the Archbishop was not even invited. He managed to go through South Korea's security and even through the Pope's security despite that his name was not on the list. God also allowed him to see the Pope in the Philippines. There is a reason why he went to see the Pope.

      There is no "if". You can have all the village meetings and prayer protests, and still you have accomplished nothing. You can write all the letters you want, the Pope already showed that he is on the side of the NCW and the Archbishop. You have accomplished nothing with Rome. As for the NCW, the Pope gave us his strongest support on March 6th and ordained 9 priests from the NCW. The founders of the Way was recognized by the Catholic University of America. The NCW and the Archbishop are moving forward while the jungle folks are still stuck in the past with no accomplishments to show for. So, get real.

      Delete
    14. archbishop is only archbishop by name. Apuron no longer a respected nor is acknowledged as archbishop of Guam. Reason as to why Rome must appoint to the vacant diocese.

      Delete
    15. Dear Anonymous at 8:35 am,

      Speak only for yourself. There are many people who respect and pray for the Archbishop.

      Delete
    16. Dear Diana @8:02--
      I can't believe you actually said the following: "It was God who allowed the Archbishop to see the Pope in South Korea when the Archbishop was not even invited. He managed to go through South Korea's security and even through the Pope's security despite that his name was not on the list."
      You honestly believe that the sly and sneaky maneuverings are God's work?? Bypassing security measures is dishonest and scrupulous behavior not befitting an Archbishop!! For shame!
      A man was reprimanded and subsequently resigned from his job because Sen. Tom Ada was inadvertently allowed on to the Port Authority property without proper clearances. I sure hope nobody received the same when they found out that Guam's Archbishop broke through the security to see the Pope!

      Delete
    17. Dear Anonymous at 11:32 am,

      The archbishop did not have to lie to get through security. South Korea security allowed him in with the rest of the other Bishops. That was God's work because there was no lie involved. At the Pope's security, the Archbishop said his real name, and the pope's security allowed him to enter despite that his name was not in the list. That is a miracle, which only God can perform. God was the Archbishop's clearance. :-)

      Delete
    18. grow up in faithJuly 13, 2015 at 2:02 PM

      "When the judge rules in favor of the Archbishop, that should finally put an end to the opposition's twisting of words."

      Diana, this is a presumption. How would you actually know this FOR SURE until it will have been pronounced by the court? Just curious.

      Delete
    19. Diana @ 1:58--
      I sure hope Rome is monitoring this because the fact that the Archbishop was allowed to get that close to the Pope, despite his name not being on the list, is serious. And I highly doubt that he just had to say his name and they let him through! As for the South Korean security--they let him through because of his attire?? That, too, is a serious concern!
      And for you to attribute it to a miracle from God is sacrilegious--there was nothing miraculous about it!

      Delete
    20. Dear Anonymous at 5:24 pm,

      That is what the Pharisees always say about miracles.

      Delete
    21. Dear Diana at 11:32 PM,
      You say a miracle, I as a security officer myself, see it as a breach of security--which can be very serious for someone with status as the Holy Father. It is something I would not go around bragging about.

      Delete
    22. Dear Anonymous at 9:29 am,

      Of course, you would see it as a breach of security. It takes faith to see God's hand at work. And until you have this faith, then you can see that with God all things are possible.

      Delete
    23. Dear Diana at 9:29 am,
      I am anonymous (11:32) ... you presume to judge my faith just because I don't agree with your point of view!
      But look at it from another point of view: Rules and Regulations have been set forth by the security people of our Holy Father to protect him as he goes about his duties. The devil works at circumventing these securities to get his influences close.... and has succeeded with the Archibishop and his people.
      Don't judge me or my Faith in God. I just don't follow blindly....He gave me common sense to discern between His direction and the other....

      Delete
    24. Dear Anonymous at 9:29 am,

      I apologize for judging your faith. But God does go by the laws of man. While it is true that the Pope's security was established to protect him, God's will will be done. In other words, if it is God's will that the Archbishop meet with the Pope despite that his name is not on that list, God will make it happen and He did. The devil, on the other hand, circumvents security through deceit. The Archbishop did not use deceit. He used his real name, which was not on the list.

      Delete
  2. Diana, what do u have to say about Tim's comment in JW?

    The fact that RMS is formed by a Corporate Sole DOES NOT make RMS a corporate sole. The formation of RMS is specifically as per the provisions of 18 G.C.A. §10101. The provisions for the formation of a Corporate Sole are found in 18 G.C.A. §10102. Look it up.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Dear Anonymous at 2:41 pm,

      Tim Rohr appears to be under the impression that I had stated that RMS is a corporation sole, which is ridiculous. In my last entry post, I specifically said that a corporation sole is a PERSON. It is not a thing or object. The corporation sole of RMS is the Archbishop.

      Delete
    2. But on your previous post you said this:

      "The RMS seminary has a corporation sole (in this case - the Archbishop) in the same way that the Archdiocese of Agana also has a corporation sole (in this case - the Archbishop)."

      ???

      Delete
    3. Dear Anonymous at 5:32 pm,

      The RM seminary HAS a corporation sole is not the same as saying the RM seminary IS a corporation sole. According to the legal website I provided, it stated that a corporation sole is a PERSON.

      Delete
    4. Diana! you're getting TIM UPSET he doesn't like to hear the truth

      Delete
    5. Dear Anonymous at 2:52 pm,

      Yes, I saw that. And all I did was answered a person's question. :-)

      Delete
    6. Embarrassing that our church is even led into a possible law suite. This will further divide the church. This is reason why archbishop forever damaged the faith . Hie is the cause of islands division.

      Delete
    7. Dear Anonymous at 8:23 am,

      It is not the Archbishop who is bringing suing anyone. CCOG (an affiliation of the jungle) is the one bringing on the lawsuit. The Archbishop has been publishing the Archdiocesan Annual Appeal. They Archdiocese already told where and how the money is going to be spent. They already said that the title of the RM seminary is under the Archdiocese of Agana, but apparently CCOG are not satisfied with those answers. So, they want to sue the Archbishop for giving the RM seminary away. Imagine how they would react when they find out that the title is still under the Archdiocesan of Agana.

      Delete

    8. I do not ant a law suit for any side Diana. But there is a problem with the seminary title that must be resolved. This we must do.

      Delete
    9. Diana at 8:32 AM, don't forget that in November 2014, you posted Archbishop Plans to File Defamation Lawsuit (http://neocatechemunal.blogspot.com/2014/11/archbishop-plans-to-file-defamation.html)

      Now you're saying that "It is not the Archbishop who is bringing suing [sic] anyone." Did the archbishop decide not to file that defamation lawsuit? It has been 226 days (and counting) since he told KUAM in an exclusive statement that "DEFENDING THE CHURCH COMPELS ME TO FILE A SUIT FOR DEFAMATION."

      The archbishop may not be bringing suit against anyone in this RMS scam but he did say that he is COMPELLED to "FILE A SUIT FOR DEFAMATION" and people are still waiting for that suit to be filed.

      Delete
    10. Dear Anonymous at 11:50 am,

      The Archbishop is a man. He is not perfect. He can say that he will file a lawsuit for defamation and later change his mind. I believe Father Paul also said the same thing and decided later on not to. Christ never brought a lawsuit against anyone even when he was mocked and lies were told about him. I suppose the Archbishop is following Christ's example. However, it remains to be seen whether CCOG would bring their lawsuit against the Archbishop.

      Delete
    11. Dear Anonymous at 10:40 am,

      And how do you propose to resolve it??? Even the summary report published by the Archdiocese has been called a lie. If they can call the summary a lie, how much more the full report? The Archbishop already said that the title of the RM seminary is under the Archdiocese of Agana. If you do not believe him, that is your problem. After all, the Archbishop was not lying when he told the former finance council that "alienation" and "assignment" were not the same. The fact that they did not believe him was the problem of the finance council.

      Delete
    12. Diana at 2:13 PM, looks like you were wrong when you supposed "the Archbishop is following Christ's example." Here's the latest from KUAM NEWS:

      http://www.kuam.com/global/story.asp?s=29569791

      Archbishop retains stateside lawyer, demands end to harassment


      The chancellor for the Archdiocese of Agana, Father Adrian Cristobal, confirms that Archbishop Anthony Apuron has retained the services of Attorney Michelle Neal with the Employment Law Counsel in California. According to Father Adrian, "The lawyer is acting on behalf of the archbishop because of the constant harassment by [John] Toves."

      Toves, a former Guam resident, has made allegations of sexual harassment against Archbishop Apuron, however no victim came forward and the leader of the island's Catholic faithful denies any such allegation.

      According to the letter obtained by KUAM News, the archbishop is demanding that Toves "Immediately cease and desist from making any further defamatory comments or publications against Archbishop Apuron's reputation and character." It further states that the conduct causes grave harm not only to the archbishop, but the church as a whole. The letter goes on to state that if Toves does not comply with the demand, "The archbishop will have to pursue all legal remedies including seeking monetary damages for harm to his reputation and character, punitive damages, injunctive relief and an order that Toves pay court costs and attorney's fees."

      Delete
    13. Dear Anonymous a 6:27 pm,

      Thank you for the information. I applaud the Archbishop.

      Delete
    14. Diana at 7:13 PM you've got me all confused now.

      On 7/17 you say that you applaud the archbishop. I'm guessing that you approve of the archbishop taking the first steps to file a lawsuit.

      But 4 days ago on 7/13 at 2:13 PM you said "Christ never brought a lawsuit against anyone even when he was mocked and lies were told about him. I suppose the Archbishop is following Christ's example."

      Diana now that the archbishop has made it known that he will file a lawsuit whose example is he following?

      Delete
    15. Dear Anonymous at 12:01 pm,

      A lawsuit is never a good thing, but I will support the Archbishop's decision. He is still following God. Last year, the Archbishop gave John Toves a verbal warning that he will sue him. And all John did was mock him. This time, the Archbishop has given Mr. Toves a WRITTEN warning. It appears that the Archbishop is still giving Mr. Toves a chance before proceeding to a legal lawsuit. The choice is now up to Mr. Toves.

      Delete
  3. So....we have exposed another MISINTERPRETATION of mr. timothy rohr.

    I have lost count about two years ago. Not that I was keeping count because to be honest; it is a waste of time.

    I wonder if mr. rohr has ever gone out two by two

    JSB

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Dear JSB,

      The jungle folks often call people who chose to remain anonymous "cowards". Being anonymous is not what makes a man. After all, the Jewish people took up anonymous names during the Holocaust, and no one would call them "cowards". A person has a right to protect their jobs and families, and that is not being a coward. What makes a man is taking responsibility for his action and admitting his mistakes when he is wrong.........something Tim Rohr is incapable of doing due to his pride.

      Delete
    2. TIM ROHR favorite word is COWARD he doesn't even know the meaning the word coward nothing but talk

      Delete
    3. Two by two? Sorry, that's only what the neos do.

      Delete
    4. Dear Anonymous atm5:16 pm,

      Correction: it is also what the Apostles did. :-)

      Delete
    5. And the Mormons, and the jehovah's witnesses

      Delete
    6. Dear Anonymous at 9:58 pm,

      Yes, they followed this practice of the Aposles whereas the Catholics gave up on it. Praise The Lord for the NCW that the Catholics are now starting back up what the Catholics have abandoned.

      Delete
    7. Diana at 7:50 AM, are you not aware that here on Guam members of the Legion of Mary have been going "two by two" visiting the homes of lapsed Catholics and have been able to bring many back to Church? By praying with the lapsed Catholics and talking to them (AKA evangelizing) they have been able to convince people who have cohabitated for many years to receive the Sacrament of Matrimony and have their children baptized, too.

      BTW: The Legion of Mary was established in 1921, a good 41 years before Kiko began his NCW. So please don't say that Catholics gave up on it (evangelizing two by two) and that the NCW got Catholics to start back up what you claim "Catholics have abandoned."

      Delete
    8. Dear Anonymous at 11:36 am,

      Yes, I am aware of that, and I commend these women. Unfortunately, not many women are in the Legion of Mary. It is those Catholics like Tim Rohr and Chuck White along with those who compare us to the Mormons and Jehovah Witnesses evangelizing in two by twos whom I refer to.

      Delete
    9. Diana at 2:05 PM, your statements were (1) "Catholics gave up on it" (the practice of evangelizing two by two) and (2) "Praise The Lord for the NCW that the Catholics are now starting back up what the Catholics have abandoned".

      You referred to CATHOLICS which I took as ALL Catholics, not just "those Catholics like Tim Rohr and Chuck White along with those who compare us to the Mormons and Jehovah Witnesses evangelizing in two by twos."

      Your "Praise The Lord for the NCW that the Catholics are now starting back up what the Catholics have abandoned" clearly shows that you think only the NCW go evangelizing two by two.

      Delete
    10. Dear Anonymous at 7:39 pm,

      In my previous comment, I clarified myself as to what I meant by Catholics. I should have written "most Catholics". I was reminded of the Legion of Mary who evangelizes despite their very few membership. Did you not read my clarification?

      Delete
  4. "I wonder if mr. rohr has ever gone out two by two"

    The fact that you think this is the only valid form of evangelizing is not only worrying, but deeply revealing of a impoverished faith.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Well JSB has stated he doesn't know Jesus Christ. :o

      Delete
    2. and this is your problem Anonymous July 11, 2015 at 11:46 PM not mine.

      two by two is a action by the faithful. Go proclaim my Word and if you have to speak. Have you ever gone out and proclaim the Word of God two by two.

      yes or no my anonymous deeply revealing of impoverished faith. YES or No.

      I have plenty..plenty times...how about you? Now answer who has impoverished faith...Me or YOU!!!!

      JSB


      Delete
    3. Dear Anonymous at 5:06 pm,

      There is a big difference between knowing Christ and knowing ABOUT Christ. Very few people know Christ.

      Delete

    4. Fr. Blockley is an example of a priest who knows Christ and believes in God. He knows there is a God and reminds our group that when God is on your side no one in this world can stand against you. Fr. Blockley believe NCW is a form of communism at work in the church .Communist movement working to take over property rightly belonging to the people of God on Guam. Communism taking over capitalism according to Fr. Blockley's thinking. Many listening to his breakfast meetings believe he is right on these issues.

      Delete

    5. Priest saying NCW is a communist movement inside church.

      What is your opinion JSB.

      Delete
    6. Dear JSB, here now is good opportunity to realize the danger of cultish catchphrases like "two by two" and "standing up" etc .You say "Have you ever gone out and proclaim the Word of God two by two. I have plenty..plenty times...how about you? Now answer who has impoverished faith...Me or YOU!!!!"

      Clearly you believe that this "action by the faithful" is superior to other sorts of "witness", without ever speaking about what this action involves or about what is being transmitted. Do you realise that Mormons go out "two by two"? But in that case they preach heresy, don't they? What if we were to "two by two" to the pizza shop? Would that be holy too?

      The point is that you have been conditioned to believe that this "two by two" action of the NCW is the only valid form of witness, or of evangelization. Do you realize that there are plenty of Catholic saints that never went out "two by two"? Would you say that they did not evangelize because they didnt go "two by two"?

      At the heart of the matter is what the NCW teaches - and this has been shown to be problematic, not only doctrinally, but in its pscyhology. I'm sure you're a fine person with wonderful intentions, but to criticize someone, merely on the basis that they have never gone out "two by two" is ridiculous and arrogant and sad.

      The NCW uses these catchphrases to bind a member to certain ideologies and to keep them enslaved. This is actually the very opposite of Christianity.

      Delete
    7. Dear JSB @5:08--
      I have gone out (and still do) by myself to proclaim the Word. Not two by two. Does this make me less faithful than you?

      Delete
    8. In response to both Anonymous July 13, 2015 at 11:39 AM and Anonymous July 12, 2015 at 10:29 PM

      I sincerely doubt that you or both of you are of the Catholic FAITH. If you were and attended Mass this weekend; the GOSPEL that was proclaim to all was Mark 6 7-13.

      JESUS SUMMONED THE TWELVE AND BEGAN TO SEND THEM OUT TWO BY TWO AND GAVE THEM AUTHORITY FOR OVER UNCLEAN SPIRITS.

      You response to me after the first paragraph is dust in the wind.

      If you are Catholic and go out by yourself.......this my brother is the sign of a man that is not listening to the Gospel as proclaimed by JESUS CHRIST but of a man who thinks of himself has know better than JESUS CHRIST.

      Why should I follow what JESUS CHRIST instructs me to do? I can do it myself.

      And here is where we start to live a life not in communion with JESUS CHRIST "the KING" but instead live a life in communion with what we think is right. In other words my brother....WE ARE THE KING.

      Faith comes by listening. Want some q-tips?

      JSB


      Delete
    9. In response to TEM

      The Church is many things to many people; who am I to say to another person what the Church should be to them?

      It is Jesus Christ who calls people to his Catholic Church. I believe that each person at some point in their lives has an experience of this calling and if the heart is open will answer. YES or NO.

      Say yes and the struggle of salvation begins. Say no and we test the love of God.

      Let us give thanks to our God who never stops loving.

      What do I think of people who say the Church is communist?

      There is a distinction between politics and religion. There is a distinction between religion and faith. There is a distinction between human faith and divine faith...spirituality.

      People who think the Church is communist do not know the Church and cannot speak about divine spirituality which can only be given as a gift...nurtured by the Holy Spirit.

      Let us give thanks to God who never stops loving. Let us give thanks to God who never stop giving to those who ask.

      JSB

      Delete
    10. JSB-- Jesus sent out the apostles two by two, He did not instruct us to spread the Word two by two. Jesus asks us all to share the Gospel and if it its done alone, three by three, or groups of more then we are doing it! You, again, want to make yourself the better Catholic.

      Delete
    11. Dear Anonymous at 9:37 am,

      Yes, he did. According to the Holy Bible (capitalization is mine):

      Mark 6:7 And he called unto him the twelve, and began to send them forth by two and two; and gave them power over unclean spirits;...........And whosoever shall not receive you, nor hear you, when ye depart thence, shake off the dust under your feet for a testimony against them. Verily I say unto you, It shall be more tolerable for Sodom and Gomorrha in the day of judgment, than for that city. And they went out, and PREACHED THAT MEN SHOULD REPENT.

      Delete
    12. Diana at 9:37--
      Don't know where you are reading that he instructs us to go two by two. It says he began to send them two by two--describing to us what he did. It does not tell us to go two by two. Please don't start 'putting word's into their mouths'! You can interpret it that way if you want....but don't discount what anyone else does just because they don't see it your way!
      And what is the reason for the capitalization part? That has nothing to do with instructions regarding going out two by two.
      You and I agree, by the way, on going out and spreading the Word---it's just the manner in which you feel we have to do it.

      Delete
    13. In response to Anonymous July 14, 2015 at 9:37 AM

      You did not even refer to or bother to read the Gospel. How can we have a meaningful discussion of being a better Catholic if you are talking apples and we are talking oranges??

      I may disturb you but I need to say this...Jesus Christ did not come to the better man; the rich, educated; well off. The foundation of his Church was built with people...apostles who were the most unworthy; poor; uneducated.

      How can this be?

      Isaiah 55:8
      “For my thoughts are not your thoughts, neither are your ways my ways,”declares the Lord.

      JSB

      Delete
    14. Dear Anonymous at 4:26 pm,

      Christ sent them out in twos and twos. It is in the first paragraph.

      Delete
    15. Diana at 8:57PM--
      Yes, I read that. And he also 'called unto him the twelve'. Do you also group your small communities into groups of twelve? If you are going to follow it literally, then it stands to reason that you start in a group of 12 and go out two by two.
      This is just another example of where the Neos separate themselves from the other Catholics (especially when JSB infers that if you don't do it that way then you are wrong): the interpretation of what the Gospel says and how to follow it.
      I want to make it clear that I don't have a problem with how you choose to follow the Word. But I do have a problem when Neos make themselves out to be superior to other Catholics based on their interpretation.

      Delete
    16. Dear Anonymous at 7:55 am,

      The twelve is referring to the Apostles rather than to a number.

      Delete
    17. Of course it is. And two by two is referring to the number of apostles that were in the groups that were sent out---pairing them, in other words. My point is that you are using the Word literally to prove that Jesus said to go out in twos. And if that's the case, you'll need to also group them into 12 as is written--to account for the 12 Apostles. Just following your argument for reasoning.

      Delete
    18. Dear Anonymous at 9:18 am,

      Two by twos refers to "numbers" because at that time, there were only 12 Apostles. But I will agree that if you want to evangelize on your own alone and by yourself......go ahead.

      Delete
  5. Diana,

    I wanted to make a comment about money since most of your comments have been the topic of discussion over at jw.

    First, I love the idea to start withholding money towards the Parishes, atleast the neo parishes that is. I like this idea because it will eventually show that there are problems with the Parish Formula as they say the ncw believes so. It will show that collections are down because attendees are down also. The Parish is failing. Who will eventually come and give from their hearts? The NCW brothers and sisters of course! The Pastors will be asked how have they been surviving? They will respond, by the providence of God working in the NCW communities. A+ for the Communities!

    Second, there are people promoting this idea of not only stopping their contributions but also stopping their attendance. Good for them. Let them go and find another parish. Guess what? This gives those(neos) who are left behind the go ahead to rearrange the church accordingly without any resistance.

    Im beginning to like jw a whole lot more. They come up with the best ideas. Kuddos to them for helping to clean out the Catholic Church. They should have been smarter. They should have stood firm and held their ground. But no, lets complain about the NCW being divisive and then divide themselves even further by forming a group and labeling themselves as CONCERNED Catholics. The ncw never labeled themselves as NEO Catholics, theyre just plain simple CATHOLICS. What looks more divisive?

    In the end everything has been documented. They are all grown adults, no one chased them out of the churches, they removed themselves. No one stopped accepting their money, they stopped giving.

    If judgement came today where would God find you? Outside the church? Inside? Celebrating?Grumbling?
    Are you working to unite what has been divided? Are you working to mend what was broken? or are you building a wider gap and smashing in to smaller pieces what has cracked?

    -Jokers Wild

    ReplyDelete
  6. Well said Joker's Wild

    ReplyDelete
  7. Diana, are you sure that the title of the seminary is under the Archbishop? Attorney Bronze said that it isn't and Tim agrees with him. Did the deed restriction made the title report useless as Tim indicated?

    In the present situation, the Title Report is useless because it shows the Deed Restriction as an "encumbrance". The legal nature of that encumbrance is what is at issue. This is why a legal opinion was needed.

    http://www.junglewatch.info/2015/07/the-situation-is-this.html


    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Dear Anonymous at 9:35 am,

      My response is found in the following weblink:

      http://neocatechemunal.blogspot.com/2015/07/the-truth-about-title-of-rms.html

      Delete