Tuesday, October 11, 2016

Let The Light Of Truth Shine

Everyone wants to be assured that the Church is spending money the right way. Everyone wants to be assured that there are no financial mismanagement and corruption in our Church. This goes the same for our government.  After all, when we hear of government corruption, it bothers us because we expect the people we voted to do what is beneficial for the people rather than for themselves.  

Focus on whether there is substantial evidence or not.  The truth needs to be told.  Focus on documentations rather than stories and rumors.  The FIRST sign that there may have been some sort of financial mismanagement was in the Deloitte and Touche report in 2014, which can be found here.  

After Monsignor James was removed for financial mismanagement, Joe Rivera and a small group of Catholics held a press conference at the steps of the Cathedral to refute the Archbishop's claim of financial mismanagement. They addressed the Deloitte and Touche report.  However, their press conference said nothing about the funds taken from Catholic Cemeteries to pay for Monsignor James' anniversary dinner, which was the reason he was removed. You can read the story here.

Through an Internal Review, more misappropriation of funds were discovered.  After the Internal Review was made public, Joe Rivera and the former board did NOT come out to address these issues at all.  

Is it true that Monsignor James took $13,000 from Catholic Cemeteries to pay for his anniversary dinner?  Yes, that is a fact.  Is it illegal to use corporation funds for personal use?  Yes, that is a fact.  Is there substantial evidence that Monsignor James used funds from Catholic Cemeteries to pay for his anniversary dinner? Yes. The evidence are the two checks he signed.  Did Monsignor James reimburse the funds he took for his personal use?  Yes, that is a fact.  And this fact is irrelevant because the law clearly stated that it is illegal to use corporation funds for personal use. 

The former cemeteries board under Monsignor James publicly stated that they knew about the funds and approved of it; however, they never produced the 2014 minutes as their evidence.  According to Jackie Terlaje, there were no minutes granting such approval.  Jackie Terlaje and the former Board have now released a full report of substantial evidence against the alleged misuse of funds. Their full report can be found here.  According to PNC news:  
The report includes numerous credit card statements, a couple of contracts and catholic cemeteries checks signed by Benavente paid to the Agana cathedral in the thousands of dollars.
The credit card statements show that the credit card belonging to the Catholic cemeteries, was used for things like dinners, hotel stays at the Shangri-la in Makati, accommodations in Chicago and Boston, a stay at PIC worth over $1,300, medication, travel, and other charges.

Also in the report are two burial contracts, one for Benavente and another for Frank Santos. The contracts are for private family plots that are both valued at $190,000 each, but in the contract the charges appear to have been waived.
Finally, there are checks signed by Benavente payabe to the Agana Cathedral Basilica for the repayment of church loans.
If a person suspects that a crime has been committed, the right thing to do is to contact the civil authorities.  That has already been done.  It is important to submit any substantial evidence that one has of any criminal activity.  The truth should be known.  In order to get rid of corruption, the evidence need to be examined and the truth be told.  In order to get rid of darkness, the light of truth needs to shine brightly.   

58 comments:

  1. Diana, you claim that a man is innocent until proven guilty in defending Apuron's case. Why does this not imply to Msgr. James? The evidence against Apuron are the victims that came forward - you said that maybe there is a misunderstanding and that the civil authorities should be involve as to deem whether the accusation has ground.

    The evidence against Msgr. James is the signed checks and other financial documents. Why are you so quick to judge? You are so obviously biased.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Dear Anonymous at 4:10 pm,

      If you read my OP, you would have noticed that I have always wrote "alleged" misuse of funds. It is "allegation" because he is innocent until proven guilty in a court of law. I did the same with Archbishop Apuron. I always said sexual "allegations". The signed checks are not a judgement. Those signed checks are factual documents. It is simply up to the court to decide whether he was in the right to have those signed checks made out to his anniversary dinner.

      Delete
    2. Nonetheless, your post are obviously bias making you which only goes to show that you lack credibility.

      Delete
    3. Its not the signed checks that show your judgement, its the complaint to police and the AG, the refusal to submit to the Apostolic Administrator and the vindictive public release of the 140 page report. These show a hatred and animosity beyond wanting the truth to come out.

      Do you honestly think the court is going to act in this matter? Hardly. The Archdiocese has already cleared Mons James, and the current Cemeteries Board has called the matter closed.

      So now what? Its simply a smear campaign. When you see no action from the judicial system in relation to this you will have to admit the same. And you will have to take back any accusations against Mons James, just as you defend Fr Luis by claiming that he wasn't criminally prosecuted.

      Delete
    4. Diana, you make this bigger than it is. People perceive this accusation as a payback. It is no accident that the reporting to the authorities was timed for the same day as the announcement of clearing Fr. James from all charges.

      Taking revenge on Fr. James is obviously the tit-for-tat logic of the Old Testament. Tooth for tooth, eye for eye. This is what we see here. Atty Jackie Terlaje could do that, she is not speaking for NCW. She is just a lawyer. But you do, Diana. You speak for NCW and you proclaim tit-for-tat in the name of NCW.

      It is not the spirit of Iuvenescit Ecclesia. It is not Christian. It is not Catholic. Archbishop Hon is well justified for being angry with NCW and Archbishop Apuron. Don't you agree?

      Delete
    5. Dear Anonymous at 4:48 pm,

      Most of what I say in the OP are facts. The rest are opinions. I did not make any accusations. Here is the OP:

      1. OPINION: "Everyone wants to be assured that the Church is spending money the right way. Everyone wants to be assured that there are no financial mismanagement and corruption in our Church. This goes the same for our government. After all, when we hear of government corruption, it bothers us because we expect the people we voted to do what is beneficial for the people rather than for themselves.

      2. OPINION: Focus on whether there is substantial evidence or not. The truth needs to be told. Focus on documentations rather than stories and rumors.

      3. FACT: The FIRST sign that there may have been some sort of financial mismanagement was in the Deloitte and Touche report in 2014, which can be found here.

      4. FACT: After Monsignor James was removed for financial mismanagement, Joe Rivera and a small group of Catholics held a press conference at the steps of the Cathedral to refute the Archbishop's claim of financial mismanagement. They addressed the Deloitte and Touche report.

      5. FACT: However, their press conference said nothing about the funds taken from Catholic Cemeteries to pay for Monsignor James' anniversary dinner, which was the reason he was removed. You can read the story here.

      6. FACT: Through an Internal Review, more misappropriation of funds were discovered. After the Internal Review was made public, Joe Rivera and the former board did NOT come out to address these issues at all.

      7. FACT: Is it true that Monsignor James took $13,000 from Catholic Cemeteries to pay for his anniversary dinner? Yes, that is a fact. Is it illegal to use corporation funds for personal use? Yes, that is a fact. Is there substantial evidence that Monsignor James used funds from Catholic Cemeteries to pay for his anniversary dinner? Yes. The evidence are the two checks he signed. Did Monsignor James reimburse the funds he took for his personal use? Yes, that is a fact. And this fact is irrelevant because the law clearly stated that it is illegal to use corporation funds for personal use.

      8. FACT: The former cemeteries board under Monsignor James publicly stated that they knew about the funds and approved of it; however, they never produced the 2014 minutes as their evidence. According to Jackie Terlaje, there were no minutes granting such approval. Jackie Terlaje and the former Board have now released a full report of substantial evidence against the alleged misuse of funds. Their full report can be found here.

      9, OPINION: If a person suspects that a crime has been committed, the right thing to do is to contact the civil authorities. That has already been done. It is important to submit any substantial evidence that one has of any criminal activity. The truth should be known. In order to get rid of corruption, the evidence need to be examined and the truth be told. In order to get rid of darkness, the light of truth needs to shine brightly.

      Delete
    6. My Dear Diana;

      You referenced "Focus on documentations”, how or where in the Cemetery Contract does it indicate that the plot is "FREE"...
      I see the word "WAIVED" regarding the Easement...
      I see the Total Charges being $190.000
      Please elaborate regarding the cemetery contract...

      In reference to the Credit Card Statements, I too use a Company Credit Card which I use to pay for everything, so my name is all over the place. This is why most companies pay an accounting or bookkeeping service, unless the company hires their own.
      This paid service, based on the current practices guides you to a better business future.
      So, I’m not clear on which of these credit card statements, are indicative of financial mismanagement, please elaborate regarding the statements.

      Thank You

      Delete
    7. Dear D. Anthony,

      It says: "Easement (crypts, lots, niches, etc.)". Notice the ones in parenthesis? That is all waved. The sum total is $190,000. Below that it says "Less: A. Credit/payment". Next to that is the word "Waived."

      According to the report, there were credit card expenses used and lacking supporting documents. Do you also use your company credit card to pay for your medication?

      Delete
    8. My Dear Diana at October 12, 2016 at 12:21 PM

      From personal experience, my family (parents) have a Family Plot, having paid in full back in the mid 80's, what we pay at time of use is the easement, and the ADA funeral service...

      As for the contract, regarding the “Benavente Private Family Garden”, for the price, the Garden better be big…
      From what I see "WAIVED" it is the easement (the right to burial) and per your "Less: A. Credit/payment", which I read as the DOWN PAYMENT at 18% which is also "WAIVED"... so what is (18% of $190.000)…

      Still DO NOT see “FREE”, I see $190.000 for a Family Garden

      Thank You

      See website below…
      Rights to Lots and Vaults
      A cemetery lot owner’s rights are contractual and subject to the ordinary rules of contract law.
      In nearly all jurisdictions, one who purchases and has conveyed to him/her a lot in a public cemetery does not acquire the fee to the soil.

      He/she acquires only a right of burial therein which has been variously designated as an easement or as a license or privilege.
      Ebenezer Baptist Church, Inc. v. White, 513 So. 2d 1011 (Ala. 1987).

      Put simply, this means you do not own the land or have ownership rights of any type to any particular land.
      Instead, you have an easement or license to use the land for the purpose of keeping your loved one’s remains there.
      http://stimmel-law.com.previewdns.com/articles/the_basic_law_pertaining_to_cemeteries.html

      An example of a Cemetery Price Breakdown
      The prices for cemetery burial generally break down into the following items and price ranges:
      Item Price Range
      Plot $1500-$2500
      Mausoleum crypt $4500-$8500
      Endowment care $150-$250
      Burial vault or grave liner $500-$2500
      Opening and closing $1000-$1500
      Headstone or grave marker $500-$4000
      Installation of headstone or grave marker $450-$850
      TOTAL (for plot burial) $4100-$11,600
      https://www.everplans.com/articles/how-much-does-it-cost-to-be-buried-in-a-cemetery

      Delete
    9. The jungle already have the bishop Apuron guilty with Tim store bought victims,or is that alleged victims, the Bishop innocent until proven guilty, because in this country the accused is considered innocent until proven guilty according to Law, because he has rights

      Delete
    10. You don't see free? So, why did you pay for the use of the easement while Benavente get his for free?

      Delete
  2. Fact: Monies collected in the convivence trash bags goes to pay for NEO leaderships wages and first class accommodations on airfare and hotels.

    Fact: Properties donated to the NEO leadership is sold and the monies made from the sale of these properties are divided to the NEO leadership, presbyters, community leaders as lots.

    Fact: The NEO leadership does not account any of these monies towards their non-profit status because the money is divided to fill the leaderships pockets to include Father Pius, Archbishop Apuron, Community leaders and presbyters pockets to spend it as they please.

    Fact: Diana will never post this on her website.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Dear Mr. Terlaje,

      Where are the documents to support your so-called facts? I, on the other hand, have receipts of the hotel we paid using the money from the trash bag in our retreats. I have receipts of the wine and the flowers we ordered or purchased to be used for our celebrations. Where are your documents?

      Delete
    2. Dear Mr. Terrlaje..... LOL LOL LOL

      Delete
    3. I really LOL when there are comments like Mr. Terlaje's. It is so off base that it really is funny as heck. Hahaha...still laughing.

      DCI

      Delete
    4. I'm not surprised that you're laughing. Anyone that gives away property and money because your leadership asks for it has to be crazy. No accountability with the trash bag money, only receipts. That only means that it was spent. How much was collected? How much was spent? What's the remaining balance and where does it go? I'm feeling really bad for all of you, really bad.

      Delete
    5. So on top of the $220.00 per person fee, there was also a trash bag that went around where each person threw away their income to help pay for the event? Correct?

      Delete
    6. Dear Mr. Terlaje,

      They are laughing because we all know that your so-called facts are "fictional." :-) There is an accountability, and there are usually more than two people counting the money. We just had our four day Beginning of the Year Convivience at a hotel. Did you really think the hotel would make us stay there and feed us meals for free? The cost at the Beginning of the Year Covivience was $220 per person. This included the room and meals. This money to pay for the convivience did not come from the parish. It came straight out of the pockets of those who attended the convivience.

      Delete
    7. I don't find it funny when the NCW charged $220.00 per person for the hotel room and meals and still have them put money inside a bag where more than two people count it. What was this extra money used for Diana? Do you see where I'm going with this? No accountability. This money was used to buy what? A dozen roses, white zinfandel? Champagne?

      Delete
    8. Dear Mr. Terlaje,

      The trash bag went around to collect the $220 from each person to pay for their stay at the convivience. The trash bag was not sent to give out our income or ten percent of our income. Before we send out the trash bag, we always announce what the collection would be for. There was no announcement of throwing in your income or ten percent of your income. There was an announcement telling us the cost of the hotel, which includes room and the meals that amounted to $220 per person. And the trash bags went out to collect $220 from each person.

      An announcement is ALWAYS made before any collection to inform the members of what they are collecting for. Even if one is going to collect money to give the seminary, an announcement is made to inform the brothers what the money is used for and then the bag will go around. There will always be more than one person counting the money. The amount is recorded by the counters and given to the Responsible. In the case of the Beginning of the Year Convivience, it was given to Debbie who was the one in charge of dealing with the hotel. The money was not given to Father Pius.

      Delete
    9. The Neocatechumenal way does not have a parish so I'm not worried about it coming from a Catholic Parish. I know it comes from NEO income and they can spend it any way they want to. I'm in agreement with that, however, I'm not in agreement that there is no accountability with the NEO money and that it can be spent on anything other than the convivience. Like salaries, clothes, and other gifts by the neo leadership to one another. NO ACCOUNTABILITY!

      Delete
    10. Dear Mr. Terlaje,

      What makes you even think that there was extra money??? Were you there to count it? What makes you think there is no accountability? I am a Co-Responsible, and the brothers in my community do not pay me any salary. I also know that the Responsible in my community is not paid a salary from the brothers in the community.

      Delete
    11. I'm just saying what if 20% didn't put the required $220.00 in the bag and only 80% paid. What do you do then? Does the bag go around once more or do you send the selfish 20% home?

      Delete
    12. Diana, aren't you uncomfortable as a woman to be referred to as one of 'the brothers'?? Can you please explain? Just a question of mine. Thx

      Delete
    13. Dear Diana,
      How many of the neocatechumenal patrons attended the convivence? 200, 300, 400 max? I bet it was a pretty expensive celebration with flowers and wine.

      Delete
    14. Dear Anonymous at 1:39 pm,

      Someone in my community once explained to me that the use of the word "brothers" when addressing the entire assembly is meant as "brethren", which means "members." Therefore, women are included.

      It is similar to the word "mankind" or "man". These words are also understood to include women such as the following sentences:

      1. "Mankind", the angels, and all things were created by God.

      2. "Man" has been known to adapt to the environment and can even change it.

      Delete
    15. terlaje...1:52 pm HOW MUCH IS THE JUNGLE NATION PAYING FOR THIS CONSPIRACY, OF TRYING TO TAKE THE BISHOP DOWN AND HIS CHURCH ??????

      Delete
    16. How about Tim trash talk bag donations, does he get is he on his exempt,maybe it call gift, 11 kids and all, seems he has a lot of time on his hands,not enough properties to sell, maybe he's waiting for the church properties.

      Delete
    17. What is to stop the "responsible" or some other NCW leader from saying the cost per person was $220 when it was actually, say, $150? There are no public records, no books that can be audited. And as the commenter says above, what if 20% can't pay that amount? Who picks up the difference? And what if someone couldn't pay at the time, but gave money later. What happens with the surplus?

      Its all cash; its all off the books; its open to money laundering and corruption. And if anyone says that the NCW are above corruption, lying and taking advantage of others - they surely haven't been paying attention!

      Delete
    18. Mr. Terlaje at 12:14; When you go to your parish for Sunday mass and put your money in the collection basket, do they give a receipt telling you how much was collected, how much was spent and where the rest of the money went? I'm going to guess they don't. But let me tell you where it goes.

      The money collected goes to pay the wages of the parish priest, utility expenses, employees, cars, trips to and from, hotel stays, and so on and on...some of the priest even use that money you gave to throw parties for themselves, or hotel stays in the Shangrila....I too have put money in the basket during Sunday mass at my parish and they don't tell me anything, and I don't expect them to nor am I asking them to.

      It is the same when I go to the convivences, I put money in the trash bag, and I always put more than what is required for myself because I can and because I want to, and also because I know that some of the brothers may not have the required amount and I want to help cover for those who do not have it. If after the hotel and food expenses are paid and there is left over, I wouldn't know nor do I care. I'm only happy that I attended the convivence, that I received a word, that I prayed and got to spend time praying and being with the Lord. This is what is more important than the money.

      Your talking about accountability? Why don't you check out the Catholic Cemetery finances and see if there is accountability there.

      I invite you to check out the next Catechesis and find out for yourself. Don't worry, it is free, and you can walk out anytime you like. If you stay, you can go to the convivence and see for yourself, and don't worry, if you don't have money, someone anonymous brother will cover you.

      DCI



      Delete
    19. It is so very funny to me that Mr. Terlaje is so focused on the money. And does not mention at all the value of the convivence or ask about it. It is because, I think, he values money more than he values his God. This seems to be the trend of people who just don't get it, who have been Catholics since birth and 50 years later still don't get it. This part is not funny at all and so I pray that God will give them the the wisdom so that they can get it.

      DCI

      Delete
    20. Dear Anonymous 4:18 pm,

      Debbie was not the only one who saw the bill. The people who counted the money also saw the bill because they needed to know the entire amount to be paid. And for your information, it was not all cash. Some wrote checks and others paid with credit,cards. Those who had credit cards had to meet Debbie at the front desk of the hotel so they can make their own payments there and include it with the total of the entire bill.

      Delete
    21. Well said Brother'' DCI''

      Delete
    22. All of you still don't get it. At the end of every year, my parish gives me a receipt for all of my donations to the church for tax purposes. That is called accountability, whereas your leadership says thank you and enjoy the show. End of story. You are so blind to the fact that I'm focusing on the accounting aspect of the neocatechumenal way. From the responses that I received from both Diana and DCI, my suspisions were confirmed. There is no accountability of funds and whoever is holding the funds has total control to spend it as they please down to the last penny. Good night.

      Delete
    23. Good night Mr. Terlaje. :-)

      Delete
    24. 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.

      Delete
    25. Yeah why MR.T worry about the Money? Maybe because the jungle Stop their money

      Delete
    26. 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. :-))

      DCI

      Delete
    27. Thank you but no thanks. I'm a Catholic.

      Delete
    28. Mr . Terlaje we are Catholics also but trying our best to be Christians

      Delete
    29. "Mr . Terlaje we are Catholics also but trying our best to be Christians"

      Yep, see, that is a stupid comment, that only makes strange sense to someone who has no idea what being Catholic means. And yet, they would be congratulated by their "brothers" for saying this!

      Delete
    30. Dear Anonymous at 8:30 pm,

      Actually, it is you who do not understand. All Catholics are Christians, but many of those Catholics are Christian in name only. A person who says to another Catholic, "Thank you but no thanks. I am a Catholic" is offering an insult. A true Christian would never throw insults to anyone.

      Delete
    31. Anyone who believes that Jesus Christ is Lord is a Christian. Being a Catholic is someone that worships and follows in the way of the Holy Catholic Church that our Lord Jesus Christ had built. We celebrate mass every Sunday and go up to the Altar to receive the Body and Blood of our Lord Jesus Christ.





      Catholic

      Delete
    32. Dear Mr. Terlaje,

      Christ never said that you have to be a Catholic to get to Heaven. In fact, He said that not everyone who says "Lord, Lord will enter the kingdom of God, but those who do the will of my Father." And those who do His will are those who fed the hungry, clothe the naked, visit the sick and those in prison. It is these who will enter God's kingdom.

      And what about those who insult other people? Think about that for a moment. You could have always said, "Thank you, but no thanks." The fact that you had to add, "I am a Catholic" to another Catholic is only adding insult.

      Christ said, "Blessed are you who are insulted for your reward will be great in Heaven." So, who do you think will be in Heaven? The person insulted or the one who throws insults? Which of these is the true Christian?

      Delete
    33. Actually, Jesus Christ din't say anything about Catholics, nor did he ever mention the word Christian. He didn't say anything about the Neocatechumenal Way too.

      However, there is a dogma of the Church which states:

      "Ecclesiam nulla salus"

      Look it up.

      Delete
    34. Rather, "Extra Ecclesiam null salus"

      Delete
    35. Dear Anonymous at 11:39 pm,

      The first people who were called "Christians" were the converts of Antioch. That is in the Bible. The first time the word "Catholic" was used was in the first century by St. Ignatius, the Bishop of Antioch. Before the word "Christian" was used, the Apostle Paul called the converts people of "The Way."

      The Gentiles who wanted to convert to Christianity had to go through a series of steps. They were called "catechumens." You can say that this was the early RCIA program of those days. The NCW is like an RCIA program, but it is for those who are already baptized Catholics who want to deepen their faith and also for those who are not Catholics and want to convert to Catholicism.

      Delete
  3. In her 140 page final report, Jackie has released all the documents supporting what she says. Diana is right. That is what people should focus on. The evidence is there. Mon. James gave himself and a family member a free plot while the rest of us have to pay. And what is worse is the church is covering up for him. Our money is being misused to benefit him. This is an injustice. I'm no longer gonna attend Mass at the cathedral. If they can do this at the Catholic Cemeteries, then what are they doing with my donations to the cathedral? I gonna attend Mass at another church.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Mon. James is also a pastor at St. Anthony'. Now that he's pastor, can we trust him? Jackie has revealed some serious documents implicating Mon. James have misused funds to benefit only himself and family members. What's going to happen to the donations we put in at St. Anthony's Church?

      Delete
    2. When we give our donations to the church it is without any conditions and no longer ours. The parish will use it as they see fit. The point with the cemeteries is that money was paid for goods and services and a portion of that money was supposed to be set aside according to the contracts for continued care and maintenance of the cemeteries. Apparently it wasn't set aside. Moving forward,Mon. James is now the pastor at St. Anthony and since God gives the pastor special graces let us pray that he cooperate with them.

      Delete
    3. In time Monsignor will knock down walls in St.Anthony re build. He will collect donations travel over the world again spending St.Anthony money. watch see what happens. Soon as he begins knocking walls down time to travel. Shangrila here I come. Blue label anyone!

      Delete
    4. With Splash of water! Yum

      Delete
    5. 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.
      (I am posting this here too, for the people who commented here.)

      Delete
    6. I commend your post anon 12:28 pm.
      A seed was planted in my head about Msgnr Benevente that I could not believe and made me view him diferently. I said to myself that I would most likely take this to my grave because I do not know truth and if the Lord will judge me on this....why me?? Why do I have to hear of this?? Im a nobody....
      So I pray that the truth come to light and the Lord purifies his church here in Guam.....in His time
      at His will....and that he forgives me for the judgment in my heart...
      I pray also that if true that those who are affected ask the Lord for an advocate, the Holy Spirit to guide them to make the right decission.....

      Delete
    7. AT 9:42 PM.... why don't you relay that to the Jungle,Tim planted that in the heads of the people,to turn against their Bishop, and I pray for the True.+++ Just another nobody.

      Delete
  4. All the non neo Priest will regret this. They have open a Pandora box. Shingra La Msgr James...

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Anonymous @ 9:56 PM: Why did you say Non NEO priest? What's the difference between the NEO and non NEO priests?

      Delete