Tuesday, July 5, 2016

Sex Scandal In The Catholic Church

Reporting sex abuse in the Catholic Church in the 1970s was not the problem.  The "cover up" was the main problem, which Pope Francis addressed in his papal decree.

Lee Webber, a former president and publisher of the Pacific Daily News, recommended two films to watch that offered some perspective on the Church situation on Guam.  His article can be found here.  The two films were Karadima and Spotlight.  In both films, the priests were guilty of sexually abusing young boys and the Bishop covered it up.  

Guam's case is very similar to the two films.  Bishop Flores covered up the sex abuse of one priest.  According to KUAM news dated November 2, 2009: 
And, a self-described, 30 year veteran of the Guam police force, who called into my radio show, stated that he had arrested a Catholic priest who molested a young alter boy on Guam. He stated that after his arrest, the priest admitted to molesting multiple victims on Guam.
According to the retired police officer, this entire incident was covered up by former Archbishop Flores. The alleged offending priest was, according to the retired officer, promptly shipped off-island shortly after his arrest, and never faced justice on Guam. 
As anyone can see from the news report, there was a priest on Guam who sexually molested young boys and it was covered up by Bishop Flores.  And this happened during the 1970s or earlier.  This priest also did NOT say he was innocent.  He admitted to molesting multiple victims on Guam.  Archbishop Apuron, on the other hand, claimed he was innocent and is a victim of a smear campaign to remove him from his position as Archbishop. 

The priest on Guam who was arrested for sexual abuse was transferred off-island by Bishop Flores; therefore, he never faced civil prosecution. However, my emphasis is that he was reported.  Therefore, reporting the crime in the 1970s was not the problem.  

If Archbishop Apuron was actually guilty of the same crime, Bishop Flores would have known about it and would also have covered it up.  However, there was no report of any sexual molestation given to Bishop Flores regarding Father Apuron at that time. Yet, according to Quintanilla and Denton, they stated that they reported their sexual molestation to Father Jack.  

The conclusion then is that Father Jack covered it up.  However, the bizarre thing is that the jungle never condemned Father Jack. In fact, even Walter Denton did not condemn him in his interview with Jesse Lujan.  Denton appeared to excuse Father Jack's failure to report it by stating that Father Jack was just a new priest in town and was under Father Tony. Being the new priest in town, Denton found it understandable that Father Jack would not report his superior (Father Tony) to Bishop Flores.  You can listen to Denton's interview here. This reaction is totally opposite from the reaction shown by many victims who were angry at Bishops who failed to report their case, but instead chose to move the offending priest to another location.      


  1. Sorry but I'm not following your logic on this. Does this mean the blame goes to Father Jack and not Father Tony?

    1. Dear Anonymous at 3:22 pm,

      On the contrary, it means that Father Jack never reported it because no one ever came to him claiming sexual molestation.

    2. Another opinion piece from the PDN:

      Catholics should follow doctrine on forgiveness

      I've been a Catholic for over seven decades and educated for about 12 years in schools run by the Franciscan, Jesuit, Dominican and Benedictine orders.

      My faith is centered in the “Nicene Creed,” which the pope and all pray at the opening of the holy Mass. The doctrine ordains the belief in God the Father, Jesus Christ, the Holy Spirit, Virgin Mary and the forgiveness of sins.

      Archbishop Anthony Apuron is being accused of sexually molesting altar boys while he was a priest about 40 years ago. “Once a priest is a priest forever.” Had he been accused while just a priest, he would not have been appointed bishop or elevated to archbishop.

      Assuming, without necessarily admitting that Apuron committed those crimes, he must have confessed to God and his confessor did penance, giving absolution and forgiveness. Know the words of Jesus: “Whose sins you shall forgive are forgiven them.” True Catholics must follow and live by the doctrine of their faith.

      History shows that saints and popes had committed more serious sins and crimes and they were forgiven.

      Real Guamanians and true Americans must obey the U.S. Constitution and the 1950 Organic Act, which ordains “ex post facto doctrine.” To those Apuron accusers and their cohorts, if you cannot swallow the Catholic doctrine of “forgiveness” you may as well leave the Catholic church and form your own congregation.

      May God bless you.

      Luis A. De Vera is a resident of Dededo.


    3. Also from the Bible:

      Warning against Judging Another

      11 Do not speak evil against one another, brothers and sisters.
      Whoever speaks evil against another or judges another, speaks evil against the law and judges the law; but if you judge the law, you are not a doer of the law but a judge. 12 There is one lawgiver and judge who is able to save and to destroy. So who, then, are you to judge your neighbor? (James 4)

    4. How can the people at jungle say they love the Catholic Church and obey Pope Francis when they shun, look down, mock and attack Archbishop Savio who was appointed by Vatican? He represents Pope Francis on Guam in everything except the sexual allegations that were taken out and brought to Rome for investigation.

      How can they claim they love the church when they cause so grave damages from inside? How can they be obedient to the supreme church authority, to the office of the Roman Pontiff, to Pope Francis if they are disobedient to his local voice Archbishop Savio? How can they say they are Catholic when they are so full of hatred against everything the church provides?

  2. Diana, that priest you refer to is the very same priest who archbishop Apuron listed in 2005 as leaving island in 1972 BUT he is named by the Umatuna as the first pastor of San Isidro parish in 1973. How can that be? Why did archbishop Apuron lie about when the priest left? (You can't blame the 2005 list on Flores because he died 20 years earlier.)

    The fact that the priest's actions were reported in the 1970s was the exception to the normal way of doing things while covering up was what usually happened. Yes, the late archbishop Flores shipped the priest off-island in the 1980s because that's how sex abuse cases were handled back then. It was the wrong thing to do but that's how sex cases were handled back then. They're still handled that way now. We saw how a priest accused of being in a sexual relationship was shipped off-island. BTW: that priest who was shipped off-island by Flores is still incardinated on Guam so we continue to support him.

    Your wondering why the jungle and Walter Denton didn't condemn Fr. Jack. Maybe they don't condemn him because he was just the assistant. Even when an assistant knows that his boss did something wrong, the assistant won't speak up. That's just the way it is. The same question could be asked about archbishop Apuron. If he knew that shipping the priest off-island was wrong why didn't he speak up? If he was afraid to go against Flores because Flores was his boss, archbishop Apuron could have spoken up after Flores died. Why didn't he? Why didn't he do anything to get that priest off the list for the archdiocese after Flores died?

    About the victims Archbishop Apuron should have just said he was innocent and stop there. If he didn't call the men liars and say he would be suing them I don't think people would have gotten so upset no matter what the jungle said. Lots of my friends don't even know what the jungle says. But they read and hear in the news what archbishop Apuron says. They feel bad for the victims and think archbishop Apuron should have been more humble. They feel really bad when they watch the victims on tv. Some of my friends went to the legislature and cried again when the victims testified.

    Covering up is a big problem on the island. People say that archbishop Apuron lied about that priest and said he left Guam 10 years before he really did because he was helping Flores cover up. I don't know if that's true, but like I said he could have spoken up after Flores died. So archbishop Apuron has also been involved in years and years of covering up.

    1. Dear Anonymous at 4:01 pm,

      In the first, what made you think it was a lie and not simply an error in the dates?

      Secondly, where is your evidence that Father Luis was arrested for sexual abuse? And by evidence, I mean something like a police report. Please do not cite Deacon Steve's accusation because a we both know that Deacon Steve was no where in the area to see anything.

      In the third place, victims of sexual abuse express outrage when their case was not reported and the offending priest was simply moved out of town. They certainly never excuse their behavior. In fact, they do not care if the priest or bishop was new to the town.

      You stated that all Archbishop Apuron had to do was say he was innocent and stop there. He did not have to call them liars. If that was all there was to it, then why are they still demanding that he tell the truth? Furthermore Roy Quintanilla also said that the Archbishop was lying; yet, you have no problems with that.

      Finally, how was he involved in years of cover up when the priest was caught and arrested by police. It was Archbishop Flores who shipped him off-island. Apuron was only a priest then.

    2. First, if it was "simply an error in dates," why wasn't the "error" corrected?

      Secondly, I wouldn't cite deacon Steve's accusation. I got the 411 on Luis from the tilifon alaihai. You know how that works. :-)

      In the third place, I think you forget that the victims were 12-15 at the time of their abuse. They weren't the mature men you see today so they couldn't "express outrage." They were scared kids who had been sexually abused by someone they trusted. And they were told that nobody would believe them even if they told.
      My friend told me how she had been abused by a family member when she was a young girl and when she told her parents, they didn't believe her.
      All you see are grown men who are telling their stories. You don't have any idea how hard it was for them to come out because they were afraid of being ridiculed like they are here where you and others call them actors who are just reading lines. I hope and pray your children are never sexually abused only to be told that they're liars when they talk about their experience.

      I have no problem with Roy Quintanilla saying that archbishop Apuron was lying because Apuron said that Quintanilla was attacking the Church and Quintanilla said that was a lie. He was not attacking the Church. He was saying what Fr. Tony did to him.

      Archbishop Apuron CONTINUED the cover up started by Flores because even though he was "only a priest then" once he became archbishop he could have taken action against the priest but he didn't.
      BTW: The victims were little kids when they were abused. But Apuron was an ADULT (AND a PRIEST) who should have known that shipping the priest off-island was wrong and he did NOTHING. Not when he became auxiliary bishop and not when he became archbishop.

    3. Dear Anonymous at 5:28 pm,

      I was not referring to the time when they were kids. I was referring to when Denton was an adult. Tim Rohr was almost molested by a priest, and he and his father,reported to a bishop who did nothing. You can see Tim's outrage over that incident. He even blamed the bishop's failure to do nothing on his father' slack of faith in the Catholic Church. That kind of anger is missing in Denton. In fact, he even said that he met Father Jack when he was in Hawaii, and everything was okay. And this was supposed to be a priest who dismissed what he said as something so trivial by saying that the priesthood is a lonely life. Now, what is wrong with that picture???

    4. I don't know if anyone picked up something else from the interview. I find it strange that a kid abused by a priest would turn to the NEW priest in town whom he hardly knows rather than to his family.

    5. Someone is not telling the whole picture here. I remember this on PDN a priest have rape bunch of kids. Someone is not telling the truth here. Again in American justice, innocent till proven guilty. It spells conspirancy!

    6. Anon 5:28,

      Remember, AAA "allegedly" molested them. Stop speaking as if you know for a fact the accusers are telling the truth. And if you have proof, please show us.

    7. The lady whose son died... Wow, is she for real? I mean her testimony has no substance at all. Her son told her one single sentence before he died. Is this really all? How can this lady claim she knows all details for sure what happened to her son?

      How can she justify her story and accusations without being able to talk substance? Does she claim half a million dollars for herself? Really?! Half a million dollars?! OMG! Is she serious of demanding a profit that equals 20 years of hard work for a regular worker? Wow!

      Now, do you see what the problem is with the lawsuit? It will be thrown out as frivolous. Lujan will get dirty rich but everyone else will have to pay for it to cover his fees and expenses.

    8. Is that you Tim Rohr Anonymous 4:01 PM...5:28 pm

    9. Diana Tim Rohr was almost molested,was that in Guam ?

    10. Dear Anonymous at 4:29 pm,

      No, it was in Los Angeles. He told about it in his blog and also mention it in the radio talk show. He and his father reported the priest to the Archbishop, but he did not listen to them.

    11. Dear Anonymous at 2:42 pm,

      If I was at Death's doorstep, there are two things I would confess depending on the situation of my death. If I was dying as a result of a criminal act, my first confession before I go would be to name my killer so justice will go after him and prevent him from killing another. If I was dying from an illness, the confessions I would make before I go would be my own sins. I would confess my owns sins and ask for forgiveness. Confessing the sins of someone else that took place 40 years ago does not benefit me anything.

    12. You are right on target, dear Diana. The emotions conveyed in these testimonies do not ring true. You feel like these people were requested to include sentences following a premeditated plan. They were instructed by Rohr and Lujan about "how a testimony should look like" with a definite intention of going to court. They tailored the testimonies to make them appear uniform, filled up with the same kind of patterns.

      Yes, despite what they claim it was planned from the beginning to sue the archdiocese and drag the church to court! They told they are not seeking restitution but now they go for the money! half a million dollars per capita. Wow, that is a lot on money. This induced greed and instruction defies and contradicts the true emotions one would or should have if one's testimony would be true.

      This lady with the one-line sentence from her deceased son is suing for the same damages as the others. Is this not very strange? She is treated by the jungle the same fashion as the others, while all she has a broken sentence that is emotionally unfit for a dying soul. This lady claims she was called a liar. But how? She did not claim abuse directly, she only repeated what her son allegedly told her. Now, if her son told her something untrue, how would this make his mother a liar? How could the denial of charges be interpreted as calling her a liar?

      The waves of the ocean start to take apart a lousily built ship at its weakest point. The weakest point of this ship of lousily built accusations is this lady's testimony. Well, at the least, the logical and emotional inconsistencies seriously raise eyebrows. This is all very fishy to believe. The court will have a serious job to clean up some hearts and minds so that the truth may prevail!

    13. " Confessing the sins of someone else that took place 40 years ago does not benefit me anything."

      Is this meant to suggest that he was wrong to tell his mother of the abuse he suffered? Didn;t you already say that

      "my first confession before I go would be to name my killer so justice will go after him and prevent him from killing another."

      Well, try this:

      "my first confession before I go would be to name my abuser so justice will go after him and prevent him from abusing another."

    14. Dear Anonymous at 9:17 pm,

      It means he never said it. 40 years is too late to seek for justice when I am dying of an illness. Better to confess my own sins in the hopes of getting into Heaven.

  3. There are many more inconsistencies in the public media testimonies of the alleged victims. This won't be left unnoticed by Vatican. The whole design of made-up charges and fake fairy tales of the most vicious accusatory nature against a high ranking church official is now crumbling and will fall apart.

    Even atty Lujan recognized how fake it appears that CCOG published paid advertisements AFTER fact, AFTER they have already recruited, found and hired the accusers off island and finished composing their pre-written, uniformly designed testimonies in advance.

    The jungle is in trouble now. Their credibility is disappearing. They are retching up their rhetoric and noise making machine, yelling louder and louder as they realize how shaky position they are sitting in. The internal contradictions in their stories are caught easily by common sense. One the most revealing tactics that gives their true intentions and plot away is that they are desperately trying to link sexual abuses to the NCW. Lol, don't they realize how transparent it is?

    Another feature of jungle mentality is that they apparently enjoy what they do. Rohr has emphasized many times the sheer entertainment value of what he is doing. He repeatedly refers to the tremendous fun he has while concocting and spreading his trash. Fun means fun. He is pampered by his allies, the liberal media, gladly publishing and magnifying all his garbage. Don't forget one of accusers CCOG hired against the Archbishop is a media professional working for the PDN.

    1. So, now, remember what you have stated here. If and when Apuron is found to have committed these offences, you will be obliged to personally apologize to each of the victims for your horrible (and uncharitable) attitude.

    2. You'll notice, dear anon at 10.39 am, I did not say anything about the alleged victims. I am personally sorry for them that they are being used as cannon balls in a jihad of revenge, terror and intimidation against Catholic communities, their supporters and leaders on Guam.

      The true colors of the beast are of those who call Archbishop Savio names over at the jungle in their tremendous frustration just because he is working on unity, peace and reconciliation.

    3. Some great ideas to learn from the Good Ole' Book:

      11 The house of the wicked is destroyed,
      but the tent of the upright flourishes.
      12 There is a way that seems right to a person,
      but its end is the way to death.

      13 Even in laughter the heart is sad,
      and the end of joy is grief.
      14 The perverse get what their ways deserve,
      and the good, what their deeds deserve.

      15 The simple believe everything,
      but the clever consider their steps.

      (Proverbs 14)

  4. Molested by priest, and then tells the new priest? New priest doesn't report it and he's not mad because of that? Probably because it NEVER HAPPENED.

  5. Or it could be mistaken identity? By a priest long gone but using thier testimony to blame archbishop? Making up for lost time and taking down an archbisop while at it...."Killing 2 birds with 1 stone..."

  6. All I know is that if I was ever raped at the young age of 12, I would have been in so much pain that I would have no choice to report it to anyone.
    I also read Dentons statement and found that although he was graphically detailed about the rape, he never took a shower afterwards. In the filth that he endured he never shared anything about cleaning up his wet ass.
    I think the accusers were lured into a plot to take advantage of a weak system within the church.

    1. Dear Anonymous at 12:17 am,

      He was told to give every detail and not leave anything out. Yet, his written testimony led me to think that he was already sleeping in the nude and on his stomach when he was raped. There was no mention of the rapist tearing off his clothes or forcing him over on his stomach and things of that nature.

  7. I still don't get why everyone is saying "VICTIMS" with no proof to their testimonies there are 4 ACCUSERS and 1 ACCUSED.

  8. Diana, there is an expression in Spanish very used by neocatechumenal catechists, I don't know if it is used as well in English: tener el colmillo retorcido, translated: to have a twisted tusk.
    I can not belive while I was reading your post, it seemed you actually were showing true empathy. Finally bubble of illusion broke and for the umpteenth time you did not give even one millimeter. I tell you just what Jesus says: "with the same measure you use, you will be measured". That is the point. No mercy, no compassion...nothing. As well as you claim for Apuron's innocence until proben guilty, you must appeal to the benefit of the doubt with those who say they were sexually abused. People do not use to go through the world inventing sexual abuses as if they were just drinking a coke.
    That lack of mercy is incompatible with Jesus' heart. You can pray Liturgy of Hours like a pro, you can assist twice a mass for Sunday precept, you can sing as angels in your community, you can even levitate with your white linen tunic...If you do not love, you are nothing.
    Maybe this is the point.

    1. Dear Lapaz,

      I can easily say that mercy is a two way street. Christ said, "Blest are they who show mercy, they will be granted mercy." Did any of those alleged victims show any mercy when they came out publicly the way they did with the media and crowds of people behind them? Why did they not give their letter privately to Arcbhishop Apuron?

      After going public, these alleged victims (like Roy Quintanilla) then comes out to say that he is deeply offended that the Archbishop went public and denied the allegation???? Did they actually expect the Archbishop to ask to meet with them privately after what they have done publicly???

  9. Hey Lapaz, what did Guam people do to you that you come after us so wickedly? Don't you have the decency to leave those people alone who have never hurt you?!

    1. Anonymous, by the date I have the same right to write here as you have to write in anyblog or web from anywhere, it is not a question of dedency, it is a quiestion of freedom, while I do not violate legal terms.
      I can speak about NCW because I have enough experience and knowledge about, with people from Guam as well as with people from China or Belarus. And maybe my background in that field is much more than yours.
      I do not write about things I do not know. That is my decency. If you want to compare your "medals", go on. The place where you have born is not a medal, you did nothing to choose it.
      Be serious, be truly democratic, please.
      It is known NCW is not a "democratic" place, but democratic people can speak freely about it in internet where governing democratic values and rules.
      If you do not like it, call "blogspot.com" to report. In Spain we live in democracy. Dictatorship finished some decades ago.
      And overall, my human rights do not depend on you, fortunately.

    2. Lapaz, what did the people of Guam do to you that you so intensely hate us and come here to spread your European style anti-Catholic venom? We want peace and unity, we want to walk toward our Lord, we want our communities and yes we want NCW on Guam! This is our home, this is our Catholic family we belong to. What do you have against us, man?

    3. "European style anti-Catholic venom"? Ok, that's right, then every point of view different than yours about the Way is part of an "anti-Catholic" and, even more, European styled? Let me laugh. That sounds like conspyranoic!
      You want the NCW but at the same time want peace, you should know the NCW does not bring peace in Church, even Kiko knows and he is very proud of it, since the moment he pretends "that peace" is a symtom of "gentifrication" within the Church.
      Please, try to understand other's point of view: my different opinion about the Way, based on my experience and knowledge, is not a war against anybody.
      And please, assume we live in internet times, you can not put doors in the ocean, in internet people is free to express themselves about everything. Kiko told NCW people don't use internet, why? Because it is a risk to read former members' testimonies.
      If you consider each person's different opinions than yours about the Way like an evil's work, then you are drawing the line from where the peace and unity are impossible to reach.
      I do not hate you, how could I do such thing if I don't know you? It is simply impossible, "man". And if I could not hate you, how more could I hate Guam?
      And by the way, the Way is very European.

    4. Dear Lapaz,

      Kiko never said not to use the Internet BECAUSE there is a risk of reading former members' testimonies. He said do not use the Internet FOR CHATTING. He said that chatting online can break up marriages and lead to fornication.

    5. Anonymous @10:13-
      Why do you attack Lapaz? He speaks his opinion just as you and others do. Believe him or not...that is your choice. Correct his points if you must, disagree with him if you feel the need. But to just attack his input is not right. The internet is worldwide, these blogs extend far beyond Guam's shores and attract many people who feel they have something to contribute.

    6. Dear Anonymous at 10:41 am,

      Anonymous at 10:41 am was not attacking Lapaz. He/She was simply asking a legitimate question. Lapaz is not from Guam.

    7. First of all, he/she accuses Lapaz of "intensely" hating "people of Guam". Strong words, wide generalities. Secondly, his/her comment "European style" hints at bigotry....just because he referenced a Spanish saying? Just where does he think NCW comes from anyway--not American, for sure!
      And re your comment "Lapaz is not from Guam": and so? He has no business commenting on your blog?

    8. Dear Lapaz, your intense hatred and bias can be seen when you support jungle propaganda and you praise Rohr's vulgar and obscene language at his blog. You come here to claim freedom of expression but you are silent when the jungle oppresses and eliminates opposing views and opinions. This is double talk and double standard, man. Please, do not try to say your double talking is coming from your European culture.

    9. Dear Lapaz,

      1. what is your opinion about the verbal abuse and mental torture of Junglewatch against everything and everybody who disagrees with them?

      2. What is your opinion about Rohr declaring that he will drag Diana to court?

      3. What is your opinion about making existential threat against people who speak their mind about the jungle trash?

      4. What do you think about using sexual charges as weapon of elimination against adversaries?

      Please, express your opinion freely, do not hold yourself back any bit! Will you?

    10. Dear Anonymous at 1:55 pm,

      There is nothing wrong with asking a person why they hate the people of Guam. Asking a question allows a person to understand the other. All Lapaz had to say was I do not hate the people of Guam or if he does hate us, he can explain his reasons why.

    11. First of all, in order of importance: I do not hate Guam. Countries are made of people. I do not hate any people. "To hate" is something very extreme, it requires very extreme components in a very specific relationship between two persons, which obviously I do not have with anybody here.
      As a person, also a formed person, I do not consider as "hating" the fact of thinking different than other person. We were created with intelligence and free will. We can think, express and act freely. Internet allows us to conect freely despite living in many different places, cultures, countries...Despite Kiko considerations on interet as "a son of Devil" (Advent Announce, 2006).
      My opinion about the Neocatechumenal Way is based on my life since I was 13 years old, when I joined, and my belonging for more than 20 years. I finished the Way with Election. I had my white linen tunic. I think I am able to speak about it in first person.
      I do belive Tim Rorh is a catholic very well formed, he is a free citizen and he acts according his free will and his well formed conscience. I think he is a man of word. And over all, he is a man of God. He loves catholic Church.
      About the questions made by anonymous July 10 3.00 p.m., I just can say those are questions about judgments of intent. And I do not give my opinion about judments of intent. Anonymous, you consider "sexual charges" used as a "weapon against adversaries". There you give your personal judgement of Tim's intention. I do not give my opinion about it because I do not want to judge anybody's intention, nor Tim's intention.
      I can give my opinion about sexual abuses, which I consider obvious. If a priest or a bishop has to go to court to explain, good. I agree whith the fact that a priest should be prosecuted by civil law as a common citizen, even by canonical law as an ordained member of the catholic Church.
      I do not agree whith the NCW in how it does face any violence against human dignity. I do not agree whith the NCW in other many aspects, but here now we are talking about sexual abuses, supposed sexual abuses, about some victims and about an ordained minister of God as abuser.
      The truth is not a friend or an enemy. The truth does not depend on our own opinion, fortunately. The truth does not need our defense to be true. Let court and legal judgers do their work.
      I am not the judge. I just think if Apuron is acused, then he has to go to court to be judged.
      I think it is very dangerous for a movement or a group to value such kind of things depending on a lot of collateral interest which are absolutely marginal, because it rests objectivity.
      That was a thing I never liked of the Way: judges are made "depending on"...over all, depending on if the person was near or far from the Way, for example. I think here there is a lot of contamination because the bishop in question is a member of the Way. My opinion is that this bishop is citizen of the world, he is a member of herarchy in catholic Church, he is an ordained minister... and very, very finally he is a member of the Way (in order of importance).
      He should defend himself in front of a civil court and a canonical court and final point.
      I have seen the Way changing its position about persons and facts in many cases only moved by marginal questions, at the end by its only interest. It does not deserve much more. God deserves all, the Way doesn't.
      Let justice work. In the Way they told christians can not appeal justice, which is clearly opposed to human rights. Catholic Church is not against the human right of a person to go to a court for justice. The Way and the catholic Church teachings respect of that are quite different.

    12. Dear Lapaz, we did not ask you to praise Rohr, we read self praise and adulation well enough at his blog. Lol! You say you are not judgmental. Well, you are. We did not ask you about the Archbishop, you still talk about him. What is this if not judgment? We asked your opinion about using sexual allegations against someone as a weapon! Why do you talk about "an ordained minister of God as abuser"? Have you already judged him? You should rather talk about allegations and alleged abuses, my friend.

      Now you see, dear Lapaz why we think you are extremely biased. You actually did not deny that you are biased. We explain your bias by a hidden hatred you harbor in your heart (HHHH: "hidden hatred harbored in your heart", that is a good one!), but perhaps you have an alternative motif that you don't wanna share.

      We have read your tear jerking story of walking in the Way. It is sad it did not work for you, man. NCW had never claimed it is for everyone. But there are thousands who are saved by the Way! (More precisely 144 thousands if we take the prophecy literally.) You have to admit that the NCW is good and works fine for many-many Catholics. Perhaps it was you whose pride prevented you from listening to a catechist. Who knows? Perhaps it was you who did not choose freely obedience. The Lord Jesus says we are to follow Him in good will. But this good will also must be your free will, otherwise you go astray. You only follow a catechist when your free will is there. It is you who makes the choice to follow or not.

      You simply ignored the questions about the oppressive, dark side of the jungle. They go after people, single them out and make serious existential threats against them. Don't say you have never noticed that. Please, open you eyes. Why do you think they want to drag Diana of this blog to the court? They intimidate and terrorize.

      The reason they only have "Rudy" there as opposition is that they openly chase away, publicly mock and threaten people who express opposing views. Rohr is yelling until his head is blue that Junglewatch is his blog and he only publishes what HE wants. Really? Then he publishes anonymous trash with no limits! Wow! Is this an honest behavior, dear Lapaz?

      They steal IP-codes from computers and launch unauthorized hacker attacks using x-rated software against anyone of their wish. They steal emails, church documents and make unauthorized publications of them. But the tools they employ were not developed and are not to be used against peaceful citizens of the United Stated at Guam! What is it if not oppression? What is it if not bullying and intimidation? What is it if not mental terrorism?

      Open you eyes, dear Lapaz. Wake up! Please, try to move on your personal hurt and disappointment that you had to go through in the NCW for whatever reason. This should not be a reason to make you allied with brigands. It is your free choice to remain biased or not. You are free to express your opinion here. Please, don't be blind and see that no free expression of view and opinion is allowed at Junglewatch.

  10. Hey Rohr, what did Archbishop Savio do to you that you go after him so wickedly? Don't you have the decency to leave those people alone who have never hurt you?!

  11. You all mare funny! It's beyond me how you all can paint this pretty, flowery, and colorful picture of Apuron. It doesn't matter what the Jungle says. The bottom line is that these alleged victims have come forward and NO ONE has bothered to reach out.

    1. Dear anon at 6:57

      "Rohr has emphasized many times the sheer entertainment value of what he is doing. He repeatedly refers to the tremendous fun he has while concocting and spreading his trash. Fun means fun."

      They may be laughing now and enjoying themselves. But who will have the last laugh?

      32 For waywardness kills the simple,
      and the complacency of fools destroys them;
      33 but those who listen to me will be secure
      and will live at ease, without dread of disaster.
      (Proverbs 31)

    2. (Oops, Proverbs 1)

    3. Anon @ 9:36 AM, your right but I don't think AB Hon and the other priests care. When AB Hon assigned Fr. Pat to take care of victims Msgr Bibi said the church reached out to them. But PNC found out from the victims that nobody from archdiocese called them. And when PNC tried to reach Fr Pat he didn't answer.
      So even if the victims are "alleged" the archdiocese policy says they must be taken care of. But nobody from the archdiocese is doing what the policy says to do and NO ONE has bothered to reach out to the victims even though Pope Francis said that care for the victims is top priority. Where's the obedience to the Pope????

    4. They are "alleged" victims. Their victim status is being addressed with the Archbishop's trial in Rome. Are you saying that iqn the meantime, the chuch should assume that the other party is guilty, thus condemning them for an "alleged" crime? Reaching out to the "alleged victims" would be the same as acknowledging the "alleged crime" at this point because almost everyone on Guam is aware of these allegations.

      Or is that a wrong assumption?

    5. Anon @ 6:20 PM lets look at the first 3 principles of the archdiocese policy about sex abuse policy:
      1) the victim is not responsible for the abuse
      2) the healing of the victim should be primary concern
      3) all allegations of sexual misconduct are to be taken seriously

      Notice that there is nothing at all about "innocent until proven guilty" and that the victim is not referred to as "alleged victim" in the policy. Just VICTIM.
      FYI: reaching out to the victims would NOT be the same as acknowledging the "alleged crime" it would be following the principles of the policy. So I guess your assumption is wrong.

  12. Hold on, folks. In case you missed it, new arrival on island to help with the mess that is the Guam Catholic Church today. This guy not to be messed with! Most likely a solution will be reached that zealots of both sides will not be happy with.
    Someone on JW once wrote "be careful what you ask for" (referring to sexual accusations)...and with how the Apuron case is going, it seems higher ups are worried about what else could come out. Enter: the man to save the day...or the church.
    How much are YOU willing to give up in order to settle?

    1. Is it someone from archbishop Apuron's prestigious law firm in the mainland coming to meet local boy David Lujan in the courtroom? Will this lawyer shut him and the victims down to save the church? This should be good.

  13. A post from Fr. James Martin, SJ about Brian Gergely from Pennsylvania who was abused as a 10-year-old altar boy by his pastor in 1980. Mr. Gergely was found hanged recently.

    May he rest in peace. I post this not only to express my sadness at this tragedy, but to remind all of us, if anyone needs any reminder, of the terrible and long-lasting effects of sexual abuse. From what I have read and learned since 2002, many victims find it hard to come forward even after many years because of the psychological effects of the abuse; many continue to battle the effects for decades after the original abuse; many quite naturally lose their faith; and many face thoughts of shame, and suffer temptations to suicide. Please pray today that Mr. Gergeley may finally find the peace that the church stole from him as a boy.

    Is THIS the fate you and your followers are hoping for those who have the courage to accuse archbishop Apuron of sexually molesting them, Diana?

    1. Dear Anonymous at 7:28 pm,

      These alleged victims came forward in the limelight of the media and never once lost their faith. Now, they are seeking half of a million dollars. As someone pointed out under this thread, even the mother of Joseph Quinata is asking for money, and she was never a victim nor called a liar. They say that justice is blind. Therefore, in the eyes of man's justice these victims are "alleged victims" and the accused is presumed innocent until proven guilty in a court of law. All accusations are "allegations." That may seem harsh, but that is man's justice.

    2. Diana,

      Here is the link to the Archdiocese of Agana Public News Release dtd. May 31, 2016.

      May 31, 2016
      ATTACKS AGAINST ARCHBISHOP CONTINUE AS PREDICTED Another malicious and calumnious accusation against the Archbishop has surfaced; this time from the mother of a man who has been deceased for eleven years. The Archbishop strongly denies this accusation as he had done so before.

    3. Diana, you said "even the mother of Joseph Quinata is asking for money, and she was never a victim nor called a liar."
      Maybe you forgot to read the press release from the Archdiocese when Ms Concepcion came forward. The first sentence said "Another malicious and calumnious accusation against the Archbishop has surfaced; this time from the mother of a man who has been deceased for eleven years"
      The word calumnious that was used comes from the word calumny which is the making of false and defamatory statements about someone in order to damage their reputation. So even if the word "liar" wasn't used the word "calumnious" was. (Point #1)
      The press release doesn't name the "mother of Joseph Quinata" directly but it says "the mother of a man who has been deceased for eleven years" and only one person who has been in the news fits that description. (Point #2)
      So maybe Ms Concepcion was never a victim like you pointed out. But the Archdiocese press release claims she was making a false statement (aka lying). So "the mother of Joseph Quinata" was "called a liar" after all.

      That's probably why she's suing too. You think?

    4. Dear Anonymous at 2:22 am,

      It was referring to what her son told her, not to anything she said. She was relaying a message. Her son never told her that. He said something else, and she misheard it.

    5. Did anyone notice in the news that's the dying wish of Doris Concepcion's son was to be buried in Guam. That was 11 years ago. After coming out with this story of sexual molestation, she was able to fulfill her son's dying wish? Why couldn't she do that 11 years ago? Could it be she didn't have the money 11 years ago? But now, she has money after she came out saying that her son told her he was molested by the archbishop?

    6. Diana you mean to say that the woman "misheard" her dying son? How do you know that?

    7. Diana, what is your evidence for asserting that:

      "Her son never told her that. He said something else, and she misheard it. "

      Something more than your prejudice please.

    8. Dear Anonymous at 10:57 am,

      I gave my answer. If I was dying due to illness, I would want a priest to be there to give me my last rites. I would repent and ask forgiveness for my sins so I can get to Heaven because God gave me that opportunity. Why should I waste it on revealing the sins of someone else 40 years ago especially if I do not know if that person is alive or dead? When dying from an illness, I would not waste that opportunity. Most people prefer to die that way, but we do not choose how we die. People can die suddenly without receiving the chance of getting the last rite.

    9. Anons @ 9:53 & 10:57: Diana must have heard the same thing I did. Sonny really told his mom that "Fr Tony blessed me" and somehow she heard "Fr Tony molested me." Honest mistake

    10. So you have no evidence then Diana? Simply you would prefer that it was that way? Obviously, this is all about you, and not about that poor man and his mother - not about the reality that he lived and dies in, but about you and how you would have behaved if you were in that situation. No evidence, no logic, no concern, just pure unadulterated prejudice.

    11. Dear Anonymous at 1:00 pm,

      Actually, that is very logical and realistic. It is not about me, but what the normal, average person would do.

    12. Anon 2:22, lol! People have opinion about Ms. Conception's charges and the lawsuit. If we have opinion, then we share it. Diana's opinion for one is very reasonable. This points out how shaky the accusations are. Ms. Conception's testimony is like the cuckoo in the next.

      She heard something her son was allegedly mumbling before dying. Perhaps she heard it correctly, perhaps she did not. We don't know for sure what his son meant by saying what he said. Ms. Conception gave her own interpretation but we may offer other interpretation just as well valid as hers. Ms. Conception is going for a large sum of money amounting to wages of 20 years of hard work by a regular worker! Pinch me, please, is this for real?!

      It was Rohr's decision to include Ms. Conception's testimony into the plate of accusations. So he is fully responsible if the ship will run on dry. Lujan will get his attorney's fee anyway, even if he deliberately loses the lawsuit. For a starter, what will Ms. Conception tell the jury when she will be asked about the nature of the alleged "molesting" of her son? When, where, how, who was there? Very simple questions that she won't be able to answer. The only question she will be able to answer is about how much money she wants to extort for her performance.

      Rohr tries to defend his folly of dealing with Ms. Conception because he feels it will be a dangerously weak point at the trial. He tries to fix the lousy patchwork he produced but he can't. We all know how a lousily built ship is falling apart to its pieces on the open waters when the waves of the ocean pound it persistently at its weakest point. Ms. Conception's failure of being unable to justify her accusation will have a domino effect on all testimonies that will fall one after the other.

      Achilles was a great Greek warrior in the Ancient times. He fought at the famous war at Troy. He had a weak spot on his heal where he was physically hold when his body was immersed in the miraculous water of divine protection. This is the famous Achilles heel, the weakest point of any person, structure or design. Achilles was killed by Paris the Trojan prince who threw his lance right into Achilles' heel. Just imagine the pain and suffering of Achilles who thought he was invincible because he forgot about his weakness. His fate was given in his heel.

      The same way, the fate of the accusations against the church and against the archbishop is in their weakest point, the Achilles heel of the whole story line which is Ms. Conception's simpleminded tale and transparent intention. Neither Rohr nor Lujan will ever be able to undo the damage Ms. Conception is causing by her incredible greed to her own camp.

    13. The PDN article quotes her as saying:

      “He said, ‘Mom, I know I’m not the devil’s son.’ I said, ‘No, you’re not’. And he said, ‘Come closer to me Mama, give me a hug.’ And I did,” Concepcion said. “And he said, ‘Mom, I was molested by Father Apuron.’ And I said, ‘Who?’ He said, ‘Remember the priest in Agat? He molested me when I was an altar boy.’ And my heart just dropped, because he was dying. I didn’t even know.”

      She never spoke to her son again. She said she tried to ask him if he had been raped by Apuron, but her son only gestured as he was being taken into surgery.

      Based on her story, he was telling her goodbye and to carry this burden forever with her whether he came out alive or dead. If you were about to die would you really do this to your mother?

      The PDN article that I got the quotes from is here:

  14. Oh gawd!!!! Who cares that she buried her son in Guam 11 years later.

    Look...stop it already. Diana has been going off about how Apuron is going to sue. It has been nearly 2 months since Roy accused him. Now we have a lawsuit. Does it matter who filed? I think not! What matters is that one was filed and ALL are subject to depositions.

    If you think about it, 500k is NOTHING! SO just be quiet already and let's wait.

    1. to think about it; hard to understand how the love of Jesus Christ can heal pain but for these called "victims" $500.000.00 can replace whatever. In the end...its all about money.


  15. Good grief diana when will you stop. The victims lives were destroyed by this evil man. $500 bucks is nothing for the pain they endured by his hands.

    1. Dear Anonymous at 2:21 pm,

      Where did you hear that they are asking for $500?


  16. Diana when will Archbishop Apuron sue?
    Sooner he sues the better.

    1. Dear Anonymous at 3:26 pm,

      First is first....he has to finish his trial regarding the sexual allegations, which is being held in the Vatican. Archbishop Hon is in control for now.

    2. Diana 3.30pm comment says victims only asking $500.
      Four victims only $2,000.
      Lets donate to pay them send them home.

  17. Diana, when do you think our archdiocese is going to reach out to the victims? I know people have been talking about this, but seriously...when are they going to reach out?

    1. Dear Anonymous at 8:13 pm,

      They are "alleged victims." For now, Archbishop Hon is being wise in being neutral. Again, a man is innocent until proven guilty in a court of law. Perhaps, they are waiting for the investigation in Rome to finish.

    2. Is Archbishop Apuron guilty or is he innocent?

      I would assume that IF the archbishop is GUILTY of the crime, they will be reached out to. At this point, acknowledging them would be the equivalent as the church saying Archbishop Apuron IS GUILTY.

      Is not the archbishop also a human being? Are his rights not to be respected because we place a higher value on those who "claim" to be a victim? Are you saying we should condemn an innocent man without proving his guilt of a crime? Or do we simply take the accusations at face value and deny the Archbishop his rights and his dignity? Would that not also make him a victim of a crime?

      A trial is taking place as Diana has said. Be patient and obedient to our church leaders who are doing their best to bring unity and cooperation in the community.

    3. When did the alleged victims give their testimony at the trial?

    4. Dear Anonymous at 10:21 pm,

      According to news report, Archbishop Hon said that the Vatican have their written testimonies. They probably also have their recorded interviews on the radio since all of them spoke and were interviewed on the radio.

    5. Diana, why are you the only one who knows about a trial in Rome?

    6. Is hearing something on the radio evidence in a Vatican trial?

    7. Dear Anonymous at 1:23 am,

      I do not see why not. They were interviewed on the radio. They were asked questions such as why come out now after 40 years, and who did you talk to about the sexual molestation? Their interview on the radio can be added to their written testimony.

    8. Dear Diana,
      Anyone can tell you that if there was a legitimate trial happening, radio recordings won't be sufficient and they would need to question the accusers--since they are still alive. To claim that it is insults the intelligence of the Vatican officials!
      I highly doubt that the "trial" (if there is indeed one going on) is regarding the validity of the accusations. More than likely it is to assess the damage all this has caused the Church of Guam and Apuron's effectiveness---to decide whether or not to return him to his seat here.
      Like it or not, this news has gone world-wide and the Vatican definitely knows....as does the higher ups of NCW. It does not bode well for either of them for this to go on much longer.

    9. Dear Anonymous at 7:15 am,

      We are speaking about the Vatican. It does not run like America's court system with a trial by jury and certain pertinent evidence are kept out.

    10. huh?! You mean the Vatican will make a decision without certain 'pertinent' evidence? That is ridiculous for you to think that!
      Maybe no jury....but certainly all evidence that is necessary to make an informed decision will be considered.

    11. Dear Anonymous at 9:07 am,

      Read what I wrote. It is only in an American court system where pertinent evidence can be left out. For example, evidence obtained illegally without a search warrant can be left out despite that the evidence is pertinent to the case.

    12. Sorry...I misinterpreted what you wrote.
      But you would think that they would want to question the accusers further to ensure they are getting the complete account. It would be easy to misinterpret what is said or written and to make a judgement based on radio reports and written testimonies would be ludicrous!
      I have more faith in the intelligence of the Vatican that they would do more than that!

  18. What news report was that?

  19. Is this a secret trial? The kind that the accusers do not get to testify in?

    There has only been one accuser afforded the opportunity to speak with a church official, and justice for him remains in limbo.

    1. All the scandal and cover-ups are making me lose faith in our Church hierarchy. Pope Francis sure has a tough job cleaning up the mess.

    2. Anon @ 8:03 AM, it must be a secret trial where only the accused will get to speak. Like Diana said the Vatican doesn't run like the American court system.
      So maybe the accusers don't have to answer any questions and only the accused will be heard. As we know the church is good at keeping sex abuse stuff out of the public eye like in Boston. So yes, it must be a secret trial where the accusers are not included.

    3. Dear Anonymous at 5:37 pm,

      The written testimonies of the accusers are with the Vatican. The accusers are included through their own written testimonies and interviews. Walter Denton's interview with the Bishop of Arizona is also included in the investigation and trial.

    4. Don't Vatican trials have cross examinations like American courts Diana? Won't the Vatican want to cross examine the accusers in case there are questions about there testimony?

  20. Watch the movie Spotlight and you'll see how the church works with hiding their pedophiles and other sexual predators in the clergy.

  21. Diana,
    Many times I seen people say to watch the movie Spotlight. Have you seen it? Would you recommend it, too?

    1. Just finished watching Spotlight on Netflix. What an eye-opener this was for me and I'm sure for many more who watched it. Very interesting similarities to the situation on Guam.