Another anonymous commenter asked the following questions, which can be found here. According to the anonymous commenter:
This is my response:
The FACT that the Archbishop was able to make that deed restriction for the RM seminary showed that the title is indeed under the Archbishop who represents the Archdiocese of Agana. A person cannot make any deed restrictions on property that does not belong to him. According to "Property Rights Research" below (bold is mine):
A deed restriction defines specific limits regarding allowable uses and development of a property. It is established by a landowner on a property's title, typically when the landowner is selling the land and wishes to exert some influence over its use, usually to benefit adjacent lands to which he or she intends to retain title.
Therefore, Tim Rohr's statement is false when he claimed that the title report is useless due to the deed restriction. The title report shows that the Archdiocese of Agana retains the title of the property because of the fact that the Archbishop can remove the deed restriction. The Pacific American Title conducted the report in 2015 AFTER the deed restriction was already in place and found that the ownership of the property is still under the Archdiocese of Agana.
As I said in my last entry post, the pontifical council concluded that there is no alienation of property because the corporate sole of RMS is the same corporate sole of the Archdiocese. They are the same person. In addition, the Pacific America Title also confirmed that the lots on which the RM seminary sits identified the owner as the Archbishop of Agana.
The Archbishop already said that the title of the RM seminary is under the Archdiocese of Agana. As the spiritual father, he has already shown a summary of the documented proof, which was published in the Umatuna. If CCOG or Tim Rohr does not believe him, that is not the Archbishop's problem.