Thursday, May 5, 2016

The Truth About Ed Terlaje's Email

In the past, Tim Rohr has quoted Ed Terlaje's letter in the attempt to show that the Archbishop tried to transfer the RMS property.  Ed Terlaje's email can be found here in the jungle.

The first thing you should notice is that Ed Terlaje never addressed this email to the Archbishop.  Nowhere is the Archbishop's name on this email.  It was addressed to the Finance Council: Joe Rivera, Monsignor James Benavente, Monsignor Dave Quitugua, Sister Stephen Torres, and Richard Untalan.  It was also CC to Deacon Steve Martinez and to himself.  Note that the Archbishop's name was never in that email.  Obviously, Tim Rohr thought that the Archbishop went against his legal counsel Ed Terlaje.  According to Tim Rohr: 
Atty. Terlaje and the finance council are not only unaware that Apuron has already recorded the Deed Restriction, he obviously proceeded against the advice of his legal counsel........


What made Tim Rohr so certain that the Archbishop went against the advice of his legal counsel when Ed Terlaje's email was addressed to Richard Untalan and the Finance Counsel?  The subject of the email was:  "Response to AFC's regarding Alienation of Seminary Property.   And in that email, Ed Terlaje ended his email to Richard Untalan with the following statement: 
Do you really want to risk title to the property conservatively valued at 75 million dollars.  I have other serious concerns raised in the letter, and if you wish, I would like to discuss in private with you and other members of the finance counsel.
Obviously, the jungle misled people into believing that Ed Terlaje's email was addressing the Archbishop about the alienation of property.  The truth is.......he was addressing Richard Untalan about the alienation of property.  The letter that Attorney Terlaje mentioned in the email is not the Archbishop's letter, but rather Richard Untalan's letter because the email was addressed to Richard Untalan, not the Archbishop.  Based on Attorney Ed Terlaje's letter, it appears that it was Richard Untalan and the former finance counsel that were trying to "alienate" the RMS property by suggesting to sell it.   

Today, we have learned in the Patty Arroyo talk show that Mr. Genarinni had nothing to do with the Declaration of Deed Restriction.  He stated that it was the Archbishop who made the Declaration of Deed Restriction with Ed Terlaje, his legal counsel.   He was following the advise of his legal counsel.   


  1. Instead of taking responsibility of misleading the people, Tim is now bringing up all the anti-Neo websites that were all frozen in time since 2006 and what not.

    1. Dear Anonymous at 3:14 pm,

      Exactly. Those anti-Neo websites are frozen in time. There are no updates after 2006.

    2. JW has zero new ideas. Everything they cite is so boring, were stolen from people who are smarter than they are. But even those :smart" people are dead wrong about the NCW. Like bishop Sheider of the Russian tayga who is Rohr's hero. Lol!

      Rohr will never understand this because of lack of education. He himself is frozen in time, lives in the Ancient forever. He is like Lot's wife, will never move again because he totally lost his ability to genuinely respond to the world around him.

  2. Dear Diana,
    Can't help but think that if the NCW hadn't altered the Mass and indoctrinated their priests/bishops into believing that their Mass is just fine, all these "other" concerns/arguments/name-calling/etc. simply would not be happening. May God have mercy on us all.

    1. Dear Anonymous at 4:14 pm,

      This whole thing started in 2013 when Father Paul was removed from the Dededo parish. The NCW was brought into the picture when a false rumor started going around that Father Paul was removed because the Archbishop wanted the NCW in Santa Barbara Church. And who was the one who started that false rumor? It was not the NCW or even the Archbishop.

    2. Dear anon, what is your problem with our mass? Could you just stop whining about alteration and indoctrination, please? Is your mind poisoned against your sisters and brothers? Well, then you should be deeply ashamed of yourself!

      I know you won't feel regret, because you were sent here by Rohr. You are one of those jungle minded people who just won't stop their silliness. Extremely boring already...

  3. "The letter that Attorney Terlaje mentioned in the email is not the Archbishop's letter, but rather Richard Untalan's letter because the email was addressed to Richard Untalan, not the Archbishop"

    The letter from Ed Tarlaje begins with the words "Read your letter and that of the Archbishop". He then goes on referring directly to the letter of the Archbishop, saying "alienation and assignment are words of distinction without a difference". In other words, he was directly contradicting what the Archbishop had argued - ie that the transfer was merely an "assignment"

    While it is correct that it appears that Ed Terlaje was at that time under the impression that RIchard Untalan was favoring the transfer (because the matter had been placed on the agenda of the AFC meeting), Mr Terlaje's was obviously not favouring such a transfer.

    Of course, you knew that Diana. That's why you didn't post the full text of Mr Terlaje's email.

    Who is being disingenuous now?

    I think it is disingenuous of you to argue that Ed Terlaje was implying that Richard Untalan and the

    1. Dear Anonymous at 5:12 pm,

      No one knows what Richard Untalan wrote to Ed Terlaje. But we know what the Archbishop wrote to the Finance Council, and his letter clearly said that the owner would not change. If we know what Richard Untalan wrote, that may explain what Ed Terlaje was saying. With that said, Ed Terlaje was addressing Richard Untalan, and it was Richard Untalan he wanted a private conversation with, not the Archbishop.

  4. And Ed Terlaje spoke! The truth will set us free!

    1. Dear Anonymous at 8:43 pm,

      Yes, he did. He stated that he told the Finance Council that he was against the transfer. He did not say that to the Archbishop. Was it the Finance Council who was in favor of the transfer?

    2. No, it was the NCW and the Archbishop, Gennarini already said that they wanted to transfer the property to "protect against lawsuits", and the Archbishop's letter makes it clear what he wanted to do.

      How long are you going to keep up this charade? Do you actually think lying helps the situation?

    3. Dear Anonymous at 9:28 pm,

      The word "transfer" was never used by Mr. Genarinni or the Archbishop. It was Richard Untalan who used the word "transfer". According to PNC news (capitalization is mine):

      "Gennarini denied any involvement in drafting of the papers and told Patti that the deed restriction was created at the suggestion of former Archdiocese of Agana legal counsel, Attorney Ed Terlaje.

      "He was asking the seminary and the archbishop that in order to protect the estate of the diocese in case there is lawsuit ... this was five, seven years ago, six or seven years ago. In order to protect the estate, it was better to do what they do in many diocese of America, which is somehow to ASSIGN the property to the different corporation of the diocese," explained Gennarini."

  5. Here we have the crux of the matter: benavente stole so much money he left the diocese in financial trouble. When he was removed from parish, Tim rohr lost his personal cash cow. How do we solve this big problem? Let's sell the seminary!!

    Why does Tim rohr hate the seminary? Because he wants the money from the sale of the property. Why does he hate the NCW? Because in order to destroy the seminary he needs to show that its roots are bad. Why is Tim rohr crearing such division and scandal? MONEY.

    Tim rohr does not just hate the seminary and the NCW. He hates the church. The only thing he loves is MONEY. He is willing to destroy the church for money.

    1. Sorry to say 9:46 PM but you are just trying to find anything to discredit Tim Rohr who is only out to show what a scam the NCW is by using good & innocent people to build their own riches. Who loves money? Take a look at the Gennarinis who are here and living it up at a suite at the Hyatt. Case closed!

    2. the gennarinis do not receive any money. Nothing. But you don't believe it so you say "case closed" either you are lying or I am. I know I am not. What I do know is that benavente stole money and that rohr not only was on his payroll but also is furious that benavente is not in the position to handle the money he used to. I could say case closed.
      Why do I not say case closed? Because i care. I care about the church, I care that you believe lies and I care for innocent people who you are slandering.

    3. And you don't call it slander when you say msgr benavente stole so much money? What a hypocrite you are. Case closed!

    4. So is it true that the Gennarinis are staying at a Hyatt suite, Diana? Is that in following with the true spirit of the NCW?

    5. Dear Anonymous at 12:25 pm,

      First of all, where did you get that information?

    6. What does it matter where the information came from. The question sis pretty straight forward. The Gennarinis claim that they live on "providence" and it is such a miracle that they can do this for so many years.

      By providence, does he mean the cash collected by ordinary members of the NCW; maybe also from annual appeals from the Archdiocese?

      The truth is that despite the NCW Statutes stating that the NCW can have "no material assets" of its own, the NCW has a huge volume of unreported cash flowing through it. I know this, because I have personally been involved in administering payments to mission families - cash money flowing through the system, but "off the books" so to speak.

      So, do the Gennarinis (and other NCW celebrities) stay in these expensive hotels, and fly business class because of "providence", or do they live the high and comfortable life simply because the minions are paying for them?

      By the way, the only way to understand your hesitance to answer the question in the first place, is that the information is true.

    7. Dear Anonymous at 1:09 pm,

      The reason I ask is because in the Way, even the mission families who come to Guam do not stay in the hotel. They usually stay in the seminary or in the homes of one of the community members who take them in. The same would be true for those walking in the Way such as the Gennarinis. So, where did you get your information?

    8. Why do you insult me? I am saying facts. Deloitte showed that benavente stole money. There are millions missing from the accounts he handled. I am not slandering.

      However you are lying. The fact that you say you were involved administering payments to families in mission proves you are lying. No one pays anybody in the NCW. There is no cash flow. Had you ever really been involved in anything you would know that each individual member can choose to do with his or her money what ever he or she wants. If there is a collection he or she can choose to give or not. You would also know that while families in mission may ask their own community, in their country of origin not in the country where they go, for help with specific expenses they are not guaranteed anything. They can ask and not receive anything. Itinerants instead cannot even ask for anything ever. But since you do not know this I am guessing that what you are repeating is hearsay of more hearsay.

      The perpetuation of lies is really what scares me about this whole controversy. It's like the lies these people tell take on a life of their own.

  6. Diana, JW is accusing you of being established under the order of Gennarini. Is that true???

    AnonymousMay 5, 2016 at 9:37 PM

    I am starting to think that the Dianas are nothing other than the direct mouthpiece of this Gennarini, and if truth be known, was established under his direct order.

    1. Dear Anonymous at 11:16 pm,

      It is not true. The Genarinnis do not even know who I am. They have never met nor seen me. And I am not "the Dianas" (plural). I am one person, and I am not Susanna.

    2. Diana, don't forget,you are not a priest.

    3. Dear Anonymous at 8:36 am,

      I never said that I was.

    4. Any person that sits on a committee can say "I am one person", but it doesn't mean that the committee doesn't exist.

      And, the Gennarini's do not have to have "met" you or "seen" you for you to be doing their work.

      What is clear is that you are nor simply an individual, ordinary member of the community. You have been "ordained" as an official spokesperson. We know this because nothing is done in the NCW without permission from the leaders. So, you have been "approved" to operate this blog.

      We also know that your answers to the issues are not only wrong, deceptive, and deliberately obfuscating, but also they reflect the "party line", most recently seen in the interviews with Gennarini.

      You are provided with official (sometimes only official looking) documents; you refer to the same spin; and you post from the CCC and other Church documents (often incorrectly in must be said) in a way that an ordinary NCW member would never do - mainly because the CCC is not taught in the catechesis.

      Of course, like a lot of accomplished liars, you say things like "I am one person", which from a certain point of view is correct. For example, a group of people are not going to type the text of your comments, so when you say "I am one person", the person typing is "telling the truth", albeit in a deceptive way.

    5. Jungle people are paranoid. They think everybody is out there to get them for no reason! It is ridiculous. Why would anyone do that?

      They think we give them wrong information. No, we don't! We give the right information, completely, honestly and according to the facts. It is them who do not believe us! They are full of suspicion and malicious assumptions. But this is crazy! What else can we do for them?

      Paranoid people don't trust anyone. They always look at their back, assuming someone is following them. They are scared that someone makes them accountable for their action. That is why jungle people prefer hiding and remaining anonymous. But we would never hurt them. It is their own mind that hurts them and makes them feel embattled.

      Who is after them, I don't know. We are surely not as we don't care about them at all. It is them who always need somebody to blame for their nightmares. Look, jungle folks! It is not us! We tell you the truth. Why can't you believe us?

      The sad part is that paranoid people feel free to lie and deceive. They think they are being watched just to be destroyed. So they assume they can do anything they wish, even if morally wrong. But it is not true! They are not free to be immoral. Nobody wants to destroy them. It is only in their minds. They all have the false concept of being pursued. This is exactly what paranoia is.

      Please, why don't you just stop it?

    6. Dear Anonymous at 1:18 pm,

      First of all, I do not sit in any committee.

      Secondly, this blog is my own. I am the only one who can log on here and the only one who decides what comments to publish. I am the only one who write my posts other than the ones I copied and pasted off the Internet. People can make their own blogs, and I am not the only NCW member with a blog.

      And finally, I was never ordained the spokesperson for the NCW.

    7. "...and you post from the CCC and other Church documents (often incorrectly in must be said) in a way that an ordinary NCW member would never do - mainly because the CCC is not taught in the catechesis."

      Good one :) In the catechesis maybe not, but after yes :) LOL
      Check Mr. White maybe he can provide u a copy of catechesis with the footnotes of CCC.

    8. Dear Anonymous at 2:15 pm,

      Chuck White uses the same tactics as the Protestants. He says that the NCW is wrong in teaching that Abraham was a pagan and he cites the fact that no where in the Bible did it say that Abraham was a pagan. Well, no where in the Bible did it say that he was not a pagan as well. This is the same tactic that Protestants use when they tell Catholics that Mary did not assume into Heaven because no where in the Bible did it say that. Well, no where in the Bible did it say that she did NOT assume into Heaven as well. Just because the scriptures are silent does not mean that it is false.

  7. Anon at 1:18.
    Your whole argument is based on a FALSE premise. You build a house of card on a lie.

    Lie 1. Nothing is done in NCW without permission from the catechists." Not true. So Diana can have a blog, I like motor jets and I'm sure lots of people do lots of things. Unfortunately you can build an even bigger castle of lies based on this lie if you do not even contemplate the possibility that you might be wrong about the NCW and that you yourself have been told lies.

    Lie 2. CCC is not taught in the catechesis. Before every catechesis, I prepare what I will say using the CCC.

    Are you willing to admit that any of your ideas are false?

  8. Lie 2: it is not true that CC is taught in the catechesis. I have yet to hear a catechesis that quotes CCC.

    1. Dear Anonymous at 6:09 pm,

      Do you not think that you should know first the Catechism of the Catholic Church before you make such judgement?

    2. I just quoted a few weeks ago. CCC 1231 infant baptism by its very nature requires a post baptismal Catechumenate. I said it on the very first night of the catechesis.