Thursday, October 13, 2016

Comments For Mr. Terlaje

In the last OP, a Mr. Terlaje expressed his concern about accountability in the NCW.  And this concerned expression was made under the OP regarding the alleged misuse of funds by Monsignor James.  Although the thread was a bit diverted from the original OP, it nevertheless remained within the boundaries of money and accountability.  

The NCW cannot hold money in a savings account. Also, we do not collect money during the Eucharist as they do in the parish. Collection of money are made for a specific purpose and must be used up.

For example, a case of wine cost $100, and there are 20 brothers in our community.  Everyone contributes $5.00 in the trash bag and everyone is able to afford to put in $5.00.  The case of wine is brought to our community.  There is the accountability.  It is the same with ordering flowers. 

Below are two excellent comments addressed to Mr. Terlaje (spacing are mine):  

Good Morning Mr. Terlaje

At the end of the weekend a bill is issued reporting the total cost for all expenses incurred at the hotel. The bill is split according to the number in attendance. Those who can, pay. Those who are unable, dont. Those who are happy to give more, give. Its as simple as one, two, three. The collection is then taken straight to the counter for payment. No one leaves the premises with a huge sum of cash. Only the exact amount needed for full payment is collected, no overage. So yes you are right in regards to who ever collects, they use it down to the last penny.

Now in regards to the money you donate to your respective parish; if you are either writing checks or indicating your name on cash donations then there is accountability to determine your end of year contributions. However, this does not apply to those donating to the trash bag for the mere fact that they do not want it to be known the amounts they have contributed. Also, the collections are made with a specific intention and with an exact amount. For example, if the community needs to purchase a case of wine for the Eucharist then a simple collection is made, only enough for the case of wine. In this situation, whoever is tasked to make the purchase is then the one who takes with him the cash collection. Accountability is guaranteed when this person delivers the case of wine. If someone offers to incur the cost entirely then he is most likely asked to make the purchase himself. Therefore avoiding any need for accountability.

You wont understand anything of this if you are looking at the NCW as a formal association, club or organization. As is always stated, we are an itinerary, a way of formation. More so, we look to each other as family, as brothers and sisters.

This comment below is from DCI:  

My previous comment was going to be my last on this topic but Mr. Terlaje said he gets a receipt at the end of the year for his donations which prompted this comment. So I can only assume then that he makes his donations by check, or he attaches his name to cash he donates as mentioned by Anon. at 1:25 am.

So I want to pose one question to Mr. Terlaje.

So Mr. Terlaje, you get your receipt at the end of the year, because we assume you write a check and or attach your name to your cash donations, what about the majority of parishioners who donate by cash, how do they get their receipt? What if when the basket of collections/cash make it to the back and people counting the money count 1000 dollars and they decide to keep 200 of it and only report 800.

Okay, that was more than one question. But the questions are in the same line of questioning that Mr. Terlaje is asking about accountability in the NCW. Which is as I have shown is very much the same as the parish collections with regard to cash contributions.

To reiterate one last time to Mr. Terlaje that I know how much the three night stay at the hotel with meal cost, so I can choose to pay at the hotel counter or I can simply throw the money in the trash bag and not worry about it. This is the same for every brother who attends the convivence.

Mr. Terlaje that invitation for you to attend a Catechesis stands in perpetuity. :-))



  1. Be careful and be cunning as doves if you attend the catechesis.

    1. Dear Anonymous at 10:33 am,

      The catechesis is always public. If we were actually preaching incorrect teachings, we would be hiding it rather than making it public.

    2. Then why don't you entertain questions and conversations about the catechesis?

    3. At 1:12 PM; I can't speak for others in the Way, so below is how I see it.

      I'm a Catholic but it does not mean that I know everything about the Catholic Church and its doctrine. In fact I know very little, four years ago I learned how to do gospel by chance, I'm still trying to learn how to do morning prayer which to me is quite complicated. My wife though makes it look very easy. I depend on her to guide me through morning prayers. If you were to ask me about where to find the morning or evening prayers in the book, I would only be able to show you the book. I would not however be able to show you the readings in the book.

      It's the same for me if you ask something about the Catechises, I can tell you where and when but I would not be able to dialog with you on it contents because although I went through the Catechises twice, I just don't know it well enough to try and explain from beginning to end, and I think it is important to start at the beginning and take it all way to the end. The Catechises is quite long but every minute is worth it. There is going to be a light bulb that will come on and you will make the connection of so many things learned in the past as a catholic. There was a point in where I was like...OHHHHH so that's why they do it like that...

      The best way to get answers is to talk to a Catechist or go to a Catechises, so that you get answers to your questions first hand instead of second hand which may not be reliable.

      I think perhaps this comment is no help to you, but may serve as proof that I'm not qualified to comment on the subject of catechises, and I'm going to guess that it is the same with many of the brothers.


    4. Well, presumably if the catechists learn from the Directory, then they get it "second hand" anyway. So, why not make the Directory available. It is suspicious.

      I have a different experience. I was brought up in the Catholic Faith and taught to pray. I learned from the catechism at school and later, and studied apologetics. So, when I attended the catechesis, I found a lot of very objectional material and heard things quite contrary to the faith.

      The catechists were neither willing nor able to discuss those concerns though, as all they had was what they had learned, pretty much word for word, from Kiko's initial catechetical texts. The catechists of the NCw are not properly formed to capable of speaking about the actual teaching of the Church. Its a great shame and a scandal.

    5. Dear Anonymous at 8:28 pm,

      Can you name one of those objectional material that you heard, which is contrary to the faith?

    6. Dear Anonymous at 10:52 pm,

      Yes? And please do not cite the jungle's.

    7. Ok, well lets start with the premise.

      The Church speaks about a post-baptismal catechesis, which is fine, but the NCW sets itself up in a different way. Early on in the catechesis we are given a picture of the steps down into the font and the death of the old man and emergence of the new man. The the NCW proceeds with the steps down. However, the vast majority of those attending the catechesis are already baptised. They are treated as if they are not, and that they are just now beginning the descent. This is a denial of grace and baptism. We are treated as if we are pagans, disregarding our own formation and previous life in the Church. All of that is described as "infantile" and is mocked directly and indirectly. One of the priests at the catechesis actually mocked the recitatio of the rosary he was encouraged to do as a child! And thats just the start.

      The catechesis states that "the NCW community appears as a body in which the Church is made visible, becomes concrete and is fulfilled", hereby implying that the Church is not already visible, concrete and fulfilled. IN fact, one catechist stated "we are here because the Bishop believes that there is not a Christian community in the parish". I asked the Bishop if he said this, and he told me "no, I certainly didn't" and was quite shocked. Fortunately I have it recorded, so I could let him hear it for itself.

      Another example - saying that "God is not offended by your sin" demonstrates a contradiction not only with the teaching of the Church, but even with scripture;

      "Against you, you alone have I sinned. What is evil in your sight I have done"

      In fact the whole questionnaore on penance is a work of pyschological manipulation which itself contradicts the freedom of the individual as taught by the Church. Look at it again if you doubt me. Sin and Forgiveness are entirely described as being effected horizontally in the community rather than (or more particularly) vertically in relation to God. It is starkly wrong.

      I could go on and on, but you don't care anyway. There is nothing I could say that will change your mind, because you have been swallowed up already and you will never be able to extract yourslef.

      My suspicion is that you are the sort of person that is curious and asks questions which is why they gave you a (semi) leadership position. Its the surest way to avoid problems with question-askers, if they haven't already walked out.

      Finally, the whole catechesis implied that only in the NCW was there any hope of dicsovering true Christianity. In fact, one could say this is the whole "sales pitch". Certainly we can see this in every testimony given by NCW members, priests and bloggers.

    8. Dear Anonymous at 11:30 pm,

      I said one thing, and you end up naming a few. Nevertheless, your comment deserves a post of its own. I will post your comment as an OP tomorrow as it is getting late, and I have work tomorrow.

    9. Let me guess, you'll say it isn't true and I misunderstand. Perhaps due to my infantile faith. Don't bother.

    10. Dear Anonymous at 11:41 pm,

      No, The Catechism of the Catholic Church talks about an infantile and a mature faith. What is said in the Catechesis is actually found in the Catechism of the Catholic Church. In fact, even Pope John Paul II said that a post-baptism is needed to help those who are already baptized to live the live like holy saints who follow in the footsteps of Christ.

    11. I know what the catechism states, and I know what a post-baptismal catechis should look like. However, as I said the NCW trat baptised Catholics as ignorant infants and pagans, as they poach them from the pews, and regardless of their formation. They mock tradition, devotion and the teaching of the Church prior to Vatican II - a council, let me remind you that had no intention of defining doctrine or altering one iota of the faith and morals of the Church.

    12. Like holy saints? Wow! Or following your catechist? The two are not the same! You say your catechist is a sinner! Following a sinner is not the same as living like holy saints.

    13. Dear Anonymous at 7:49 am,

      The Apostles were also sinners, but the converts followed them. God put everyone under authority so they can be humbled. Children are placed under the authority of their parents. Priests are placed under the authority of the bishops. Employees are placed under the authority of their employers. God made it this way so that when you get to Heaven, you also learn to be under the authority of God Almighty. If you cannot follow the authority whom God has sent, how can you be holy to even follow God?

    14. Dear Anonymous at 11:54 pm,

      The Catechists are correct. Look around you. We are truly ignorant infants and pagans. If we are truly Catholics, same sex marriage would not be passed on Guam. Yet, same sex marriage was passed by Catholics. A majority of Guam's lawmakers are Catholics. Many Catholics are living in sin with their boyfriends and girlfriends. The Catechists told you the truth. We are ignorant and blind like the pagans who condoned homosexuality, abortion, suicide, same sex marriage, and many things that are unchristian. We set up a statue at Two Lover's Point of two people who committed suicide. To honor two people who committed suicide is not Christian.

    15. "We are truly ignorant infants and pagans."

      Speak for yourself. If you mean pagan in the sense of "villager", then ok, but I suspect you mean it in the sense of a practitioner of superstition and false religion.

      Look, there is no doubt that we can all benefit from a catechetical program that can deepen our faith, but it is important to remember that not all Catholics outside of the NCW are supportive of these silly things you mention, nor are they necessarily ignorant, infantile or pagan in thinking.

      This is one of the main issues with the NCW method. It has no capacity to assess the individual, but rather is concerned only with the development of the "community". All individuals, regardless of their moral and faith development, are placed equally in a new community that is treated as though they are just beginning, and that everything they knew prior to it was wrong, mistaken or misunderstood.

      Nor is their any capacity in here to recognize the grace of baptism, and how that may operate in an individual.

      Note that the community becomes the focus, the idol. All things are done for the community, and the community will not "advance" unless the members concede that they are infants, sinners, ignorant and pagan.

      You know of the questionnaires and questions that are put to members, that present their experience in the NCW as the only valid Christianity. "Before I joined the Way I...." "After I joined the Way.." etc.

      This is a grave error. Had the question been - "Before I embraced my faith..." or " After I joined the Catholic Church.." there would be less likelihood of members identifying the NCW as the only "way" - something we hear in every testimony, and in the comments on this blog, like the ones that say "pray that God will take away your heart of stone and give you a heart of flesh" (meaning, join the NCW), or "the NCW has saved my parents marriage and I would have committed suicide if not for the NCW" (meaning, God only truly works through the NCW).

      You simply don't want to get it. If we are all truly ignorant, infants and pagans, what good is this blog? Why should we believe anything you say, if you admit to knowing nothing and being a pagan? Of course you don't actually believe this, or you wouldn't operate this blog. You actually believe that you know better than ordinary Catholics, because you are in the NCW.

    16. Dianna, being a 'sinner' is like being 'in relationship'. One day you have this great guy to hang around with, the next day you don't. If you ask, 'are you in relationship?" what do you say? It depends on when the question is asked.

      Today I am in relation, tomorrow I am not. The day after tomorrow I am in relation again There could be many reasons for this. By being in relation I don't mean anything in conflict with Catholic morality.

      The same is with being a sinner. Today I am a sinner and live in sin. But tomorrow, I repent and confess my sin and I am being absolved from my sin. I am not a sinner at that time, because my heavenly Father forgave my sin. However, the day after tomorrow I may fall into sin again. It all depends on the time when you are your question 'are you a sinner'.

      Your low view of human morality is not in line with good Catholic teaching. When CCC talks about being a 'sinner' it means we are capable of sin. It does not mean we actually commit sin! We are also capable to resist temptation, walk away from and abandon our sins! This is the freedom we have through the precious blood of Jesus who redeemed us!

    17. What?! The Two Lover's Point is not Christian? Are you going against Chamorro tradition now? How about Romeo and Juliet, then?

    18. "We are truly ignorant infants and pagans."

      Sweet Lord! Really? You eat salt as a ritual and we are those who are ignorant? You roll a die and take the chance as if the Holy Spirit had spoken? Still we are those who are superstitious? You open a Bible by random, send a boy to the another end of the earth by flipping coins? But you call us pagan?

      Diana, look into your own mind. What do you find there beyond the ignorance and paganism of the neo?!

    19. Dear Diana,
      The story of Two Lovers Point is a legend of Guam. A legend is a traditional story sometimes regarded as historical but unauthenticated. lol!

    20. Dear Mr. Terlaje,

      It does not matter. The fact that they honor a legend in which two people committed suicide can be interpreted as glorifying suicide. They also named Adelup in honor of Ricky Bordallo who was not only accused of crimes, but who also committed suicide. After his death, the suicide rate increased because people did not condemned the suicide. Giving him a place of honor also appears that suicide is glorified on this island.

      In the Catholic Church, Judas Iscariot was recognized as one of the 12 Apostles because he was picked by Christ, but that is as far as it goes. The Church never gave him a place of honor.

    21. Dear Anonymous at 4:44 pm,

      Are you saying that suicide is a Chamorro tradition?

    22. Dear Anonymous at 4:53 pm,

      Read my comment. I did not say "YOU" are pagan. I said "WE" (meaning you and me) are pagans. There are still some Chamorros who hike into the jungles, asking the taotaomonas to let them pass? Is that supposed to be Catholic? And please do not tell me that it is a Chamorro tradition to ask the spirits of the jungle to allow you to pass. When Father Sanvitores came to Guam, he brought Christianity to us. So, now you have to decide what to believe in......Christianity or the pagan ancient beliefs of your ancestors. You cannot have both. You cannot be a pagan and a Catholic at the same time.

    23. Diana, this sound silly a little bit. You emphasize the outcome of the story which is death. You also say that Shakespeare glorified death in the Romeo and Juliet? Whoa! It is the most beautiful love story ever written. The tragedy of Shakespeare's story was inescapable because of the violence of that age.

      Yes, in Catholic Italy during the Middle Ages there was a lot of violent death, murder in the society and blood revenge between families. This beautiful drama of young love is not a glorification of suicide but a condemnation of that violence!

      You neos should change first the society, eliminating violent death, murder and blood revenge! You should fight for social justice. Make your society more just and more human centered, before you start to condemn the individual, who is often a victim of inequity, violence, injustice and oppression.

    24. Dear Anonymous at 11:21 am,

      You stated: "This is one of the main issues with the NCW method. It has no capacity to assess the individual, but rather is concerned only with the development of the "community"."

      The NCW places people in community regardless of their intellect and abilities. We are not supposed to put all intelligent people together. That is not how it works. A community consist of a variety of people of different backgrounds, intellects, talents, different age and gender, and occupation. Each individual has something to give the community, and each person can learn from one another in the community. You are not ranked according to any level.

    25. Diana, if you say you are pagan, then probably you are right! But you have no right (and ZERO BUSINESS!) to call other people pagans.

      If you feel like a pagan, dear Diana, then shame on you! Go back to your cave, hide from the people and try to come to terms with Jesus Christ! He is the only way you need. But we who are following the true Catholic tradition and rites, we are surely not pagans. Not even if you say so! Lol.

    26. Dear Anonymous at 8:32 pm,

      Unlike Romeo and Juliet, there was no violence in the story of Two Lovers' Point. You have a story of a young girl who was being forced by her parents to marry someone she did not love. The parents felt the marriage would be good for her because the man they chose for her was well-to-do and would be able to take care of her. The girl was in love with someone else....someone whom her parents disapproved. Unlike Romeo and Juliet, the story of Two Lovers Point focused more on the two couple who chose to commit suicide. And a statue of them was erected at the site.

      The story of Romeo and Juliet focused on the feuding families. After their deaths, the two families reconciled. That was the focus of the story.

    27. Dear Anonymous at 8:37 pm,

      The truth always hurts. Look around you and open your eyes. Catholicism is losing ground. There are 85% Catholics on this island, and same sex marriage was approved. It was approved by Catholics. Many Catholics are living in sin outside the bounds of marriage, and they do not see anything wrong with this. Contraceptives are accepted by Catholics. This is what I meant by "paganism." Catholicism is being taken over by secularism.

    28. Diana, are you truly saying that forcing a young girl to marry someone whom she does not love is NOT VIOLENCE? You might have the wrong concept of what violence is...! A young girl is not a cattle that you sell out for money. Sweet Lord, do I have to explain this to you? Does the neo condone forced marriage among the "brothers"?

    29. Diana, the truth is that you say you are a pagan. Perhaps it is true. We don't say you are a pagan, it is you who say that of yourself. You also say we are pagans. But we don't say we are pagans, because we follow Jesus. It is you who say we are pagans. So who is really the pagan here?

      Yes, Diana, the truth hurts. The truth is that you accepted that you are a pagan, even though you say you follow Jesus Christ. But you still say you are a pagan. It is faithlessness. We have never ever accepted anything like that. We have never said we are pagans, because we are not! Does it hurt you, Diana?

    30. Dear Anonymous at 8:53 pm,

      It becomes violence when they beat her up. That never happened in the story. They only disagreed and argued about it, which is normal in all families. When I was a teenager, my dad did not approve any of the boys I went out with and forbid me to see them. He did not beat me up, but we disagreed a lot. The girl could have always said no to the man her parents arranged her to marry, and that would probably have solved the problem. But no where in the story does it say that because the story focused only on the couple who ended up committing suicide.

      The parents in the story were portrayed as the kind of parents who wanted what they thought was best for their child. They arranged a marriage for their daughter to someone who would take care of her so that she would not suffer financially. Although the intention was good, it was still wrong.

    31. Diana, you are in grave error. Forced marriage is not normal in any family!

      A marriage against the will of the girl is a rape. A forced marriage is like giving your own daughter to someone who will rape her. Your mind was infected my the neo that demands obedience. In fact, a parent cannot command the emotions of youngsters. If he does, it violence per se!

      90% of English literature is about the freedom that love must be given if you don't want to kill that love and those who feel it. Jesus Christ had never told you to marry someone whom you don't love!

      Romeo and Juliet had to die because they loved each other against the will of their parents. The Two Lovers had to die for the same reason. This is beauty, this is literature, this is art, not sin, dear Diana!

    32. Dear Anonymous at 9:01 pm,

      The ones who feel insulted when the reality of the truth is proclaimed are the pagans.

      John 9:41 Jesus said, “If you were blind, you would not be guilty of sin; but now that you claim you can see, your guilt remains.

    33. Dear Anonymous at 9:11 pm,

      I never said that forced marriage was good. I agree that forced marriage is wrong. But the story of Two Lovers Point was NEVER about forced marriage. Below is a story about Two Lovers' Point in a Guam website. NOTICE WHAT IT SAYS AT THE END OF THE STORY. IT SAYS:

      "Since that day, Chamorros have looked to the jutting peak above Tumon Bay with reverence. The two lovers remain a symbol of true love--a love in which two souls are entwined forever in life and in death. Forever after, the high point on the cliff was known as Two Lovers Point."

      Nowhere in that story did it say that since that day, parents no longer have forced marriage. Instead, it says that the Chamorros look at the cliff with REVERENCE because it symbolized LOVE. Really? True love is suicide?????

    34. Dear Diana,
      How come you never post my rebuttals to this conversation? Is it because what I say will separate the wheat from the chaff? You do know the scriptures when it says what eye has not seen, what ear has not heard and no mind has imagined what God has prepared for those who love Him. Share my messages or are you trying to protect the flock from the truth I speak.

    35. Dear Mr. Terlaje,

      If you wish to spread propaganda, then please post in the other blog. I prefer my blog to be a blog in which dialogue can take place so we can reach an understanding.

  2. First of all, you did not mention the tithes. Where is the accountability for that? On what do you spend the proceeds of the tithes.

    Also, what about the money and assets acquired from the second scutiny? How do you account for that?

    Finally, I've been to the catechesis, and I know what is taught. There are points that contradict the Church teaching. There are also omissions (eg the concept of grace is almost completely overlooked). If you actualy teaching what the Churhc taught, you would make the catechetical directories public.

    1. The tithes serves the same purpose. When the community starts to tithe, we use the money collected from the tithes to purchase the wine, flowers, bread, and other consumables used for the celebration, which is held twice a week: the Eucharist and the Celebration of the word. The tithes are also used for the evangelization. After all, how did you think the mission families and itinerants survive without money? When a mission family or itinerant arrives, they are either placed in the seminary or a brother's home. The money is used for their food and other needs until they find a job and can live on their own. It has always been the communities who helped the itinerants and mission families during the evangelization. Like a family, we help each other out especially the brothers in dire need.

      As for the second scrutiny, any money and items that was given by the brothers is not kept by the NCW. All items are sold, and all the money is given away. A small portion goes to the Archdiocese of Agana as donation and the rest is given to the poor. A family living in poverty and who is NOT walking in the Way is identified, and that money is given to them. That is the truth.

      You do not know what is taught at the catechesis. You already came with a pre-judgement, believing in rumors like Archbishop Apuron hiding in the seminary.

    2. So, everything you have written in the OP is deceptive. The use of money in the NCWis not simply to pay for costs assocaited with convivence or celebrations or even for liturgy. You have extra money and things that you distribute to members of the community, to individuals outside of the community and for other purposes.

      And yet, you say "The NCW cannot hold money in a savings account."

      Why can you not have a savings account? What is the difference between having a savings account or keeping cash under the mattress? Is it purely a legal thing, so you don't get found out?

      Where is the accountability for the cash you hold? Where are the books showing how the money is distributed? Do you expect us to simply take it on trust that it is all used aprropriately?

      How ridiculous.

      You say " A family living in poverty and who is NOT walking in the Way is identified, and that money is given to them. That is the truth. "

      Prove it. Where are the receipts? Where are the minutes of your meetings to show how you "identified" this family in need?

      As for your last comment, you are wrong. I was one of those that actively supported the NCW by donations and iun other ways. After hearing the content of the catechesis I realised that the NCW was not teaching the same things as the Catholic Church. So I changed my mind about the support I had been giving.

    3. I finished the second scrutiny a couple years back. The family we identified did not even go to our parish,but they were living in very poor living conditions. When we gave the money to them, we tell them that the money came from the parish, and the parish priest is there with us. People don't know that the money came from the Way because we don't announce that it came from us. We always say that it came from the parish, and the parish priest is always there to accompany us. It's also our hope that the family we help would eventually come to the parish, not because the parish gave them money.......but because the church is there to save their souls.

    4. Dear Anonymous at 12:4 pm,

      It really does not bother me that you do not believe us. That is not my problem. As the anonymous poster pointed out, we are not a club or an association. The NCW is an itinerary of Christian formation. Christians act as family members, as brothers and sister who help one another. This is how a Christian is supposed to be formed.

    5. That's true. When Dr. Eusebio formed his organization, he even used the word "families." Catholic Families For Apuron. In they Way, we think in terms of families.

    6. Dear Diana at 1.24. Perhaps you misunderstand. I have no problem with support being given to families that are struggling. Of course, that is a good thing.

      However, as you have pointed out yourself, the NCW claims that it has no material assets of its own, and that it is not an association or a group or a movement or an organisation, but merely a way of Christian formation. So, in that sense, how is it that you have money to distribute to these people. You say you do it on behalf of the parish, but in what way is the parish involved? Does the parish record that gift of support? Is it noted in any financial record?

      In fact, if the NCW doesn't have material assets, how can it give material assets (ie money)? you can see why I am sceptical. You say one thing, but do another.

      Obviously, the easiest answer would be for any money collected in th course of the NCW activity, to be given to the parish, who record the income and distribute it as the parish sees fit. That way the parish council or other relevant body can have oversight on the flow of money, and it would avoid the perception that this is an "off-the-books cash transaction, something that is obviously against the financial regulations that we are obliged to follow.

      But, by all means treat Christians as your family. Perhaps you can start by being less secretive defensive and vindictive, because a family that behaves like that is really just a mockery of a family.

    7. Dear Anonymous at 2:32 pm,

      The NCW does not have money. It's members earn income from their regular jobs. If there is a need in the community, the brothers in the community will give out money to meet those needs. I decide where my money should go, Anonymous. Each member decides on their own who and where they will donate their money.

    8. If the NCW "has no material assets of its own" then it shoudn't be able to collect cash or other assets in tithes or at thwe second scrutiny. You know this, and have admitted as much but you can't face it. Quite astounding.

    9. Dear Anonymous at 8:23 pm,

      As individuals who spent three nights in a hotel, we can pay for the service of the hotel. The NCW is not the one who spent three nights in the hotel. It is people. The NCW is not a person and therefore cannot pay the hotel bill. The NCW is an itinerary or a plan.

      In other words, when we travel we have a travel itinerary. We are the ones who pay for the travel because we are the ones who travel. The travel itinerary is only the schedule of our flight of how you get from Guam's airport to another airport in Japan, etc. The itinerary does not pay the travel expense. It is the people who follow the scheduled flight plan who pay for the travel expense. The NCW is similar to a scheduled flight itinerary. It is a schedule of how to get from a neophyite to precatechumenate, etc.

    10. Isn't the tithe the same thing as church donations like Mr. Terlaje eluded to? What is the difference if they are not the same.

    11. Dear Anonymous at 10:40 pm,

      We only tithe once a month. By the time, the next month comes around, the tithe is all finished. The beauty about having tithes is that you no longer need to pass the trash bag whenever the community needs wine, bread, candles, flowers, and other consumable things we need for the celebration. The monthly tithes take care of all that.

    12. Do you take us to be fools. Do you seriously claim that the cost of consumables amounts to ten percent of the income of the community members? The truth is that the cost of the consumables is virtually nothing out of the combined tenth.

    13. Dear Anonymous at 11:11 pm,

      Do you honestly believe that ALL the brothers give 10% of their income? You are just as gullible as the little ladies who believe that Archbishop Apuron was hiding at RMS.

    14. Ok, lets say they give 2%. The cost of consumables is nothing compared to the 2%

    15. In any case, you pass the trash bag around for those costs! You've already said so

    16. Dear Anonymous at 11:32 pm,

      The money is also used to help the itinerants and mission families.

  3. Dear Diana, This would perhaps the third time commenting on your blog. I do not come here often because I do not agree with the NCW, however, that should be another issue for another day. However, I do feel compelled to say what I am about to say because of a grave concern I have, not only for others but for my own family. I believe as do many others over the years that Monsenior James is a very conniving clergyman. Those who know him, know of his skeletons inn the closet,, ask around and you will be surprised, or perhaps it will come as no surprise. He came from poor beginnings and it does not take a genius to realize how much he has advanced his family and personal interest over the years. You see Diana, my nephew was one of his "pets" or more appropriately one of his "godsons" as he prefers to call them. I also have observed this clergyman since he was a seminarian. Do not be fooled by his charm. Over time, my nephew got uncomfortable with his not so priestly ways, without getting into details as this might expose who I am. Know, however that his ways and actions will shock the small but influential group behind him, and this group is a well intention-ed group, truly wanting the best for the catholic churches, but I wish they will dig deeper and inquire more of the past actions of this priest. My nephew is a handsome young man, it came as no surprise to me that all his other "godsons" shared similar traits with mine. Late night stays at the cathedral when he assigned there was common, we trusted him. Again, inquire more. I did appreciate all that the jungle has done as it exposed things that many were unfamiliar with, but when we realized he was, it seems, protecting Monsenior James, I decided to come forward with this comment. Anyone can see the difference in the jungles tone prior to Monsenior James being cleared and put in charge of the assets of the churches, this was the final straw for me and many others who remain silent about who this priest might be. The protests groups were created after monsenior James was fired. Do not let other issues distract you from the source of these ugly times. I was a st judes monday mass with a girlfriend who mentioned that the new finance members and cemetery directors are the Monseniors close friends, or at least most of them, one of them I noticed on the video was an avid protester on sunday mornings. Why would the archbishop put a protester in such an important position? Was he not at first trying to stop the protesters? Well the jungle blog seems to be a bit more gentle with the Archbishop Hon since the new appointments. We are convinced that in a matter of time, someone will have to speak up in order to get to the bottom of this, enough is enough adai! I remain Anonymous for fear of retaliation.

    1. Your reason to remain anonymous is warranted. Those other guys will call you a Liar and call you all kinds of names and make fun of you. So I totally understand.


  4. Anon 12:25 ur saying Msgnr James has dirty laundry? If so, this will not come from us but those who where victimize. We have no energy and money to go to the media. Majority of us don't have this such wretched revenge.

  5. The news media are obviously the publicity arms of LFM, CCOG and the jungle. The LFM attempted to enter the RMS in Yona, screaming, waving signs and showing disrespect for the seminarian and staff who stopped them at the entrance. Did they make an appointment? They claim their church money goes into the RMS and they have the right to enter at any time. I would like them to use the same tactic and attitude to try to intrude into any parish office. They may get the same reaction and stopped at the entrance by office staff since they made no appointment and because of their angry attitude and commotion. I would like to see them try to do that at the Governor's Office, the Superior Court of Guam, the Guam Legislature, the District Court of Guam. They will say 'Hey, I pay taxes which pays for their salaries and I am entitled to enter these offices at any time I like.'. The LFM would most likely get the same treatment by being stopped and prevented from entering these government offices. Let's take it to another logical extreme. The LFM may attempt to enter my home insisting that they have accounts at the same Bank of Guam I have my mortgage loan. They may claim their bank accounts are making it possible for the loan for my home and have the right to enter. When does the insanity end?