RESPONSE VISITATION REPORT OF
THE REDEMPTORIS MATER SEMINARY OF GUAM
BY THE BOARD OF
DIRECTORS RMS
The report on the seminary prepared by the Visitation ad hoc Committee shows a lack of
knowledge on the seminary's reality but, most of all, fierce bias and prejudice.
However, in the interest of clarity and for all people of good will who love
the Church and the truth, we will answer the main points addressed in the
report:
1.
REGARDING THE “DIOCESAN” IDENTITY
The report of the Committee questions
the “Diocesan Identity” of th RMS
without understanding what “diocesan”means.
The RMS is a diocesan seminary duly erected by the Ordinary of the Archdiocese,
as acknowledged by the Visitation Committee Report; thus, the nature of the RMS
is “diocesan” by virtue of the fact that the Ordinary has established the
institution (CIC. 238 §1). Additionally, the Articles of
Incorporation of the RMS specifically identify the Sole Member of the
Corporation, as the Archbishop of Agana. More
important, the Statutes of the Redemptoris Mater
seminaries have been approved by the Holy Father and by more than one hundred
cardinals, archbishops and bishops. However,
the Report elaborates a rough “theorem”
trying to demonstrate that the Seminary is not diocesan, therefore preparation
for priests is bad, that priests formed there are bad and that therefore it
must be closed. Let us examine it point by point:
Report (Point
1): A legal opinion by Attorney Jacques G. Bronze (see Appendix V) was
presented to the Archdiocese of Agana and holds that the land which is
currently being used by the RMHF and RMS is not
owned by the Archdiocese of Agana (“Bronze Opinion”).
ANSWER: The
Bronze Opinion, arguing that the property has been alienated and therefore the
seminary is no more diocesan, is unfounded and ridiculous. The proper
authorities for the determination of this issue were, first, canonically, the
judgment of the Pontifical Council of Legislative Texts by Bishop Arrieta stating
that there was no alienation whatsoever by Archbishop Apuron; second, the
Government of Guam by the Department of Land Management who has issued
certificates of title confirming the ownership in the Archdiocese of Agana; third,
the Articles of Incorporation that in art. XII, iii state that the Archbishop is the sole
administrator of all the temporalities of the RMS; fourth, the opinion of
the Lewis-Roca law firm, specialized in corporation sole laws, stating that the
ordinary has never lost control of the property or of the Corporation and that
therefore the restriction of use, decreed by the ordinary to establish the
juridical person of the seminary (CIC. 114 and 120 §1) and to protect its stability, can be freely revoked by the
ordinary or his successor.
Report (Point 2): The statutes of the RMS are
specifically designed to form presbyters for the “New Evangelization” as
understood by the Neocatechumenal Way. As a
result, the seminarians’ formation does not prioritize the importance of
parish ministry, parish management and the general familiarity of the
seminarians with parish life.
ANSWER: The Neocatechumenal Way is a way of Christian
initiation into faith approved by the Holy See and supported by the last four
Popes, Pope Francis, Pope Benedict, St.
John Paul II, and Pope Paul VI (Statutes of the NCW art. 1). To form presbyters for the “New Evangelization”
is not a characteristic of the Neocatechumenal
Way, as it is made clear by the St. Pope John
Paul II’s Ad Limina message to CEPAC
on Dec. 5, 1999.
The majority of the priests
formed in the RMS are serving in the parishes of the Archdiocese: Fr. Alberto (Mount Carmel), Fr. Antonino
(Nino Perdido), Fr. Edivaldo (Our Lady of Peace and Safe Journey), Fr. Kryzstof
(Santa Rita), Fr. Julius (San Dimas and San Dionisio) are pastors serving in
the parishes of this Archdiocese performing daily masses, baptisms, weddings,
funerals and performing many other pastoral duties; Fr. Michael is vicar at
Dulce Nombre de María, Cathedral Basilica, Fr. Edwin is vicar in Our Lady of
Lourdes, Fr. Vincenzo is vicar in San Vicente in Barriagda, and are serving
under priests not from the RMS and obeying them. The priests formed in RMS take care of all
parishioners; there is no distinction between those who attend the Neocatechumenal
Way and those who do not. Seminarians
also participate in Archdiocesan events: the parish fiestas, constant
liturgical assistance at the Cathedral, days of recollection, walk for life or
any other special event The seminarians do pastoral works in the parishes in
different periods of the year, getting to know the people, the difficulties, the
sufferings, and the realities, giving them a tremendous affinity and love for
the parishes and its parishioners. The priests formed at the seminary
are incardinated in the Archdiocese of Agana; thus confirming the diocesan nature
of the RMS.
Report (Point
3):. “Decision making on all levels, from the daily administration to the most
important matters of governance, is controlled by the leadership of the
Neocatechumenal Way”.
ANSWER: The seminary
is “controlled” only by the Ordinary; in this case, the Archbishop of Agana is
the Sole Member and sole authority of the seminary. Article 18 § 3 (Statute of the
Neocatechumenal Way) provides that the RMS is governed by the current norms
for formation and incardination of diocesan clerics (CIC canons 232-272 and
CCEO canons 331-366); these norms are approved by the Holy See, and cannot be
modified without its approval (cfr. Article 18 of the Statute). The fact
that the formators are from the Neocatechumenal Way and not from the
archdiocese does not affect at all the diocesan character of the seminary
since it is the secular tradition of the Church to use for the formation of
priests those charisms and experiences most suited for it: so the formation in
San Francisco is totally entrusted to the Sulpicians Fathers and in Fiji
to the Congregation of the Sacred Hearts of Jesus and Mary and not to
diocesan priests.
The issue with land management is not as done as you may have your readers believe Diana. The law was clear about anytime there is a correction made to the original deeds and there were FOUR that were issued. All of them FLAWED. So who is responsible for correcting those deeds if the agency that issued them four times was wrong? I do believe it should've been resolved in court to settle the truth.
ReplyDeleteDear Anonymous at 8:27 am,
DeleteThe only time you go to court is when there is a dispute. There was no dispute. The Attorney General has spoken. The fact that Senator Ada called off the oversight hearing for land management AFTER the Attorney General spoke is evidence that Land Management does not need to be investigated.
Also, certain facts stand out: It has been almost a year since CCOG has been collecting money from its members to bring a lawsuit against RMS in order to get the property back. But that is not happening. What are they doing instead? They are encouraging the Archbishop Hon to do something about it. In fact, CCOG have expressed that the Archdiocese should bring RMS to court to get the property back. So, what happened to the money they collected? Why not bring the lawsuit themselves. I see from the jungle that Tim Rohr is even suggesting that RMS be charged for rent. RENT????? HELLOOOOOO! And this is coming from folks who believe that the Archdiocese does not own RMS. So,what is wrong with this picture???
How about Bob Klitzkie and his jackals now? He wanted Hon to go home! Looks like, rather, Bob Klitzkie went home. Lol.
DeleteBob Klitzkie only wants the Yona property to be returned to the people of Guam. If Hon wants the same, then he is an ally. If Hon wants otherwise, then Hon is an enemy.
DeleteThe COGG is doing its best to be magnanimous and is allowing the Arch to settle it with you. Remember 'without litigation'. So out of love for Jesus Christ, return RMS to the archdiocese of Agana.
ReplyDeleteDear Anonymous at 10:22 am,
DeleteAs you can see, Archbishop Hon and Father Jeff have been quiet so far, and the clock is ticking. The deed restriction is still in place. So, what is CCOG's next step?
Archbishop Hon is saying the ownership of the RMS is not disputed. So what does he want? What does CCOG want? If the ownership is not an issue then who is lying here? Who plays the dummy and who is the real dummy in this picture??
DeleteThe question is who can use RMS? Who controls the property? The Apostolic Administrator should be able to make decision about RMS because he is the head of the Agana diocese right now. Do you see the problem, Diana?
DeleteThe donor was not notified as who will have access to the property. Even more, she did not know that presbyters will be trained and not priests of the Holy Order of the Catholic Church. RMS presbyters are greatly lacking pastoral care because lack of their education. A parish priests main mission is pastoral.
The problem, dear Diana, is that RMS was severed from the blood flow of the diocese and restricted to benefit NCW and its followers only. The people of Guam give their time, talent and treasure to the diocese, including RMS, but this time, talent and treasure is being taken away from them for the limited services of presbyters.
By the way, is it not Luther who calls his priests presbyter?
Dear Anonymous at 10:59 am,
DeleteNo. The dispute had always been the ownership. The jungle claimed that the Deed Restriction "conveyed" or "transferred" the property to the RMS. In fact, that was the "Bronze Opinion."
The donor knew that the property was for the Redemptoris Mater Seminary because it was the donor who paid the bank loan. The bank loan specifically stated that the purchase of the property was to house the RMS. The donor is not stupid enough to give money freely without knowing what the money would be used for. Simple as that.
The Catholic Church also used the word "presbyters." And Luther was Catholic. He later on went to build his own church, but he was Catholic.
Luther was not a Catholic. He rebelled against Catholicism. He is the founder of Protestantism. He rebelled against the greed, egocentrics and selfishness of the Catholic church of his time. Because there have been people, priests and bishops who wanted the exclude the poor and powerless from the benefits and wealth of the church. They wanted to keep all the wealth for themselves. This is no different today.
DeleteTo Anonymous 10:59pm:
DeleteThe RMS is a place of formation for those who want to become priests. The Archdiocese of Agana owns the property! The Apostolic Administrator has authority to govern the archdiocese in administrative matters. Archbishop Hon is not the successor of Archbishop Apuron! There is a difference. Archbishop Apuron is still Archbishop of Agana but the full authority will go to his successor. If you notice, Archbishop Hon was pleading with the Holy See to remove Archbishop Apuron and to appoint a successor. Why? Because Archbishop Hon knows that he does not have the authority to lift the deed restriction because he is not a corporation sole or a successor of Archbishop Apuron.
As to the priests that serve in the parishes that you labeled as Neo Priests, these men come from different countries but the true people of Guam will accept them and show them the hospitality of the Island. You on the other hand have a negative influence by Tim Rohr and maybe you listen to every word he says or even worship the ground he walks on. But nonetheless, be open to people and accept them. We can all co-exist but there is always someone who wants to divide the Church.
Dear Anonymous at 12:49 pm,
DeleteBefore Luther became the founder of Protestantism, he WAS Catholic.
Anonymous @ 4:43 PM: So only the Archbishop of Agana can lift the deed restrictions, correct? Archbishop Hon is just here temporarily and has no power whatsoever regarding the RMS. So the deed restrictions still apply. The property will belong to the neocatechumenal way pretty soon.
DeleteDear anon at 7:29 PM, what do you mean it will belong to the NCW? Are you talking about a transfer of ownership?
DeleteThis is very interesting! Hillary Clinton was caught supporting a revolution called "Catholic Spring" in 2012 by the advice of campaign manager John Podesta!
ReplyDelete--> In the 2012 email, Voices for Progress President Sandy Newman lamented the Catholic bishop's opposition to contraceptive coverage and suggested that a "Catholic Spring" was needed to bring about change in the Church's policies.
"There needs to be a Catholic Spring, in which Catholics themselves demand the end of a middle ages dictatorship and the beginning of a little democracy and respect for gender equality in the Catholic church," Newman wrote. <--
http://christiantimes.com/article/clinton-campaign-chairman-plotted-revolution-in-catholic-church/64514.htm
Now, remember, when did Tim Rohr start his Junglewatch fighting against the Catholic Church on Guam calling it a dictatorship and Archbishop Apuron a dictator? Yeah, exactly! In 2012-2013. Yuck, Tim! Now we know what happened then. Now we know how you started this. You were hired by and got paid by Podesta to do the dirty job for the liberals!
Look at Hillary's campaign against bishops' authority. The same Tim Rohr has been doing for 4 years! Democracy in the church? Defying the bishop's decisions by picketing? Exactly! Gender equality and the gay lobbies supporting Tim Rohr's blog? Bingo!
Now we know who you are Tim! Now we know who is sponsoring Junglewatch. Now we know whose political interest are you pushing on unsuspecting Guam! What a shame... Please, pray and apologize to us, faithful Catholics of the One True Church, that we may forgive your betrayal.
Joelle Casteix from SNAP, Sanduy Newman of Voices of Progress, Billy Pesch an abortion advocating Guam lawyer, Tim Rohr's Junglewatch and the CCOG:, these people are all in one accord to bring down the Catholic faith and the Catholic church! They are sponsored at an extend by the Hillary Clinton campaign!
DeleteCCOG called for reelecting those liberal pro-abortionist senators who helped them to pass Public Law 33-187, the anti-Catholic bill: Rory Respicio and Judy Won Pat are the two most ardent liberal Democrats and Frank Aguon, a Democratic ally and supporter of Hillary Clinton.
When I read statements like "return the yona property to archdiocese" I wonder if people have any idea of what they are talking about or they are just repeating misinformation they have gullibly believed. Or maybe they have very evil intentions. Let's look at the history here.
ReplyDeleteThe RMS was erected and housed in a little house. When it became clear that this seminary would flourish and be of crucial importance for the evangelization of the pacific, it became clear that it was necessary to rehouse the seminary. Volunteers from the NCW drove around the island looking for a place to either build or to convert for use of a seminary. The yona property was a failed hotel up for sale. NCW members negotiated a price that was spectacularly lower than the original worth of the place. Donors were contacted to give money for the erection of the RMS. The property was bought by the archdiocese with donor money for purpose of the seminary.
Explain how the phrase "return the property to archdiocese" fits into this timeline. The property was bought by archdiocese and the property was bought for the RMS. From hotel it went to being diocesan land for the use of the RMS seminary.
Be honest and say what you really want: you want to force the archbishop to sell the property so that it can pay for benavente's thefts and be converted into a casino so that the moral life of our island can take a further plunge into the muck. You have already gotten rid of the archbishop the n. 1 force holding back casinos on island. And then tell us how much of the cut you have been promised. stop hiding behind phrases like "return property to archdiocese". it is a false statement that wants to stir the mob like the silly old ladies who attack people making them think there is an injustice. Whoever perpetuates this lie is deeply deeply evil.
And when they slander the priests who are formed there I would like to point out that that are slandering the Lateran university that stamps their diploma. RMS yona IS the Lateran university. If priests out of yona RMS are not formed then neither are any of those that come out of the Lateran university. Think!!!
If only people would use a little reason instead of hyped up feelings we would be all better off.
So prove it. Show documentations that they want to sell the property to be converted into a casino. The people have spoken when they voted no to casinos. How is it possible that it will be converted to a casino at this time?
DeleteProve that the seminary is approved by the Lateran university. If any documentation is shown, then the jungle watch people will stop.
Your argument is nothing but hearsay and hot air!
Bias against the seminary. LOL.
ReplyDeleteThis is what is commonly called a ballsy statement.
If you refer back to who was on the visiting seminary visitors committee, the five priests listed are as follow:
Fr. Romeo Concovar
Fr. Julio Cesar Sanchez
Fr.Jeffrey San Nicolas
Fr. Patrick Castro
Fr. Tom Mc Grath
Both Fr Mc Grath and Fr Castro, are well respected and aging priests, who have always showed great restraint and neutrality in all they do.
Fr San Nicolas, is the Delegate to the Apostolic Administrator.
Fr Sanchez is the Vice Rector of RMS
Fr Concovar is the Rector to St John Paul the great seminary.
If we are to believe Ricky Eusebio, the fact that both the vice rector of RMS and the Rector of St John Paul the great were part of the Ad Hoc committee, should not be taken in consideration, to determine the good founding of his accusation of Bias.
Dear Anonymous at 10:17 pm,
DeleteWe also believed that Father Jeff was neutral. His true colors shone after he was placed in a higher position. If he can change that much, how much more the rest who we thought were neutral?
Dear Anonymous at 10:21 pm,
ReplyDeleteThe two seminarians that you left out but were here in 1999 were Jun Acebuche and Daniel Herrera. The fact that the RMS seminary has been operating since 1999 and continues to operate with very little coming from the Archdiocese is evident that most its funds come from outside the Archdiocese.
1. 9 paragraphs - 6x $ mentioned
ReplyDelete2. "For where your treasure is, there will your heart be also." Mt 6:21
3. ric vs MR. ROHR (interesting way of writing names)
Do have the documents of the money coming in?
ReplyDeleteWe haven't not seen accounting of the early 2000s. It is said during that time when nobody raised questions, hundred and hundred thousands of dollars were channeled secretly to the RMS account.
ReplyDeleteDear Anonymous at 9:40 am,
ReplyDeleteTim has always said that there was money laundering at RMS; yet, he never report it to the police nor did he ever showed any evidence of it. It is all rumor.
CCOG says they want the CONTROL of the seminary property back to the archdiocese. They don't talk about the ownership anymore.
ReplyDeletehttp://www.postguam.com/news/local/catholic-lay-organizations-prepare-for-legal-action-on-yona-property/article_043ae4b2-9381-11e6-9f54-735c1c196131.html
Dear Anonymous at 8:07 am,
DeleteThat is incorrect. According to the Guam Daily Post:
"CCOG has repeatedly claimed that the RMS property is not the property of the Archdiocese of Agana and that ownership of the property was relinquished by Apuron under clandestine conditions outside the purview of ecclesiastical law and against the advisement of the then-Archdiocesan Finance Council, Sablan said.
“It was done covertly to hide the fact that Apuron was directly conspiring against the Holy See,” Sablan said previously."
They can bring it to court if they want. We already know that the sole intention of purchasing the property was to house the Redemptoris Mater Seminary, and there are documents to support that. The Deed Restriction granting them the use of the property in perpetuity is aligned with the intended purpose in purchasing the property in the first place.
As the weekly protests by Catholic activists continued yesterday outside the Dulce Nombre de Maria Cathedral-Basilica, leadership of the respective lay organizations said they are preparing to take legal action in order to return control of the Redemptoris Mater Seminary property in Yona to the Archdiocese of Agana.
DeleteDiana, I would thread very cautiously here. If the benefactor was mislead then NCW can lose a lot of credibility. What is written in a bank loan application might not stand at court as evidence. If the letter of donation does not mention NCW then it is not right to get sole right of using the property in perpetuity.
DeleteEven is the legal hurdle would be cleared, the impact on the faithful could be devastating. Pope Francis may be tilted against the NCW forever, siding with Archbishop Hon, because of the deplorable acquisition practices of the NCW.
Dear Anonymous at 9:13 am,
DeleteAre you saying that they now believe the property to belong to the Archdiocese of Agana? If so, then they owe an apology to Archbishop Apuron and the people of Guam because they have always been claiming that the property does not belong to the Archdiocese. The deed restriction only gives the RMS the USE of the property. As Dr. Eusebio stated, the intended purpose of purchasing the property was to house the Redemptoris Mater Seminary.
Dear Anonymous at 9:21 am,
DeleteAs I said, there are documents showing that the intention of purchasing the property was to house the Redemptoris Mater Seminary.
These documents may stand or may not stand at court. The benefactor may testify at court that she was deceived. There are a couple pitfalls that could change the outcome of the lawsuit one way or the other.
DeleteThe problem with RMS has always been that an alien body, called board of guarantors, has veto power over decisions pertaining RMS. The Bronze report interprets this veto power as effectual alienation of the property. The Lewis-Roca report does not deny the veto power of the alien body but claims it is not effectual alienation.
Even if the RMS is owned by the archbishop, the perpetual use of the property was given away against the will of the benefactor. This must be corrected. Otherwise people will see this as a property grab, independently from the decision of any court. NCW may get a label that won't help its integration into the Catholic church.
Dear Anonymous at 11:24 am,
DeleteThe former finance council knew that the intention of purchasing the property was to permanently house the Redemptoris Mater Seminary. The Deed Restriction is aligned with the document signed by the former finance council.
It does not matter what the former or any financial council knew or did not know. What matters is if the benefactor was fully informed or she was deceived.
DeleteIf the money was used for the purpose of NCW, that the benefactor was bot aware of, then she was in effect deceived and the money she provided was stolen. NCW does not want to continue with this stigma attached its operations, does it?
Dear Anonymous at 12:10 pm,
DeleteThe money was used to pay off the Bank of Guam, which was a loan to purchase the property for housing the RMS. The money did not go to the NCW. The RMS Board of Directors have all the evidence with them that the seminary is a diocesan seminary affiliated with the Lateran University of Rome. So, please go ahead and bring it to court, so we can settle this once and for all.
Your wish will come true, Diana. Today's PDN says CCOG is preparing for a lawsuit to get RMS back to the Archdiocese of Agana.
ReplyDeleteDear Anonymous at 8:09 am,
DeleteThey are preparing for a lawsuit to get RMS back to the Archdiocese? CCOG said that a few months ago. When are they actually going to file the lawsuit?
Just like you Diana said that CCOG, the laity and countless others have written to Rome and nothing. Well look around you, Rome still not listening? Be careful cause it's a fine line when this actually goes to court. Then what would you say, "bring it on"? Careful what you ask for cause you might get it.
DeleteDear Anonymous at 9:13 am,
DeleteActually, Rome is listening, and you will find out next week. As you already saw, Cardinal Filoni stepped in and did not allow LFM into the seminary.
Filoni can step in all he wants but the truth will prevail in court. Lol
DeleteDear Anonymous at 9:55 am,
DeleteYes, the truth will prevail in court. :-)
The donor wrote Apuron a letter in 2015 stating specifically that she had NEVER heard of RMS or the Neocatechumenal Way. Read THE ULTIMATE TREACHERY above tab.
ReplyDeleteDear Anonymous at 10:29 am,
DeleteThe donor wanted the money for a Seminary, and that is what RMS is. The intention of purchasing the property was to house RMS.
But the seminary was supposed to have been for the Catholic Church, not the Neocatechumenal Way. They were deceived just like the brethren from the NCW.
ReplyDeleteDear Anonymous at 12:40 pm,
DeleteDid you read the OP? Many of the priests who were ordained in the seminary are serving the parishes. These priests have conducted baptisms, marriages, and funerals for the parishioners of the parish they are assigned to. They have Mass in the Parish as well. Some of them went on to seek a higher graduate study in Rome. Father Miguel recently came back. After completing his thesis, he will receive a doctorate, which is the highest degree. The evidence is in the parish. People see them in the parish conducting Mass, baptisms, weddings, and funerals.
Anon 1240pm;
DeleteThe Seminary is for the Catholic Church, the NCW is part of the church. You were deceived to believe that the NCW is not catholic.
Diana, Where you there lastnite at the meeting? Great news! Dont tell anybody.
Pas!
-Jokers Wild
http://www.catholicnewsagency.com/news/pope-to-priests-and-religious-dont-be-content-with-mediocrity-64400/
ReplyDelete...this is not about who is superior, who is a foreigner, who is a liar, who is whatever what...our priests who have been on Guam for years - YEARS - have settled into this kingdom mentality and now, God who they have taken vows to Uphold HIS CHURCH sees the perversion of power, wealth, and lifestyle of HIS sons...HE is doing the cleaning up & correcting!! Don't blame the Way!!
Apparently there has been an accusation of abuse that has been submitted to the Chancery involving a local priest, jungle knows about it but they havnt said anything. This is the reason for delay in transfer to Lourdes.
ReplyDeletePas!
-Jokers Wild
Tim is trying to debunk Ric Eusebio's response, and he's doing a very poor job of it.
ReplyDeleteDear Anonymous at 12:58 pm,
DeleteI agree. Dr. Eusebio is a member of the Board of Directors of RMS whereas Tim Rohr has absolutely nothing to do with RMS. Therefore, the credibility is on Eusebio's side. Tim Rohr is only nit-picking where he can. Notice that he says nothing about the RMS priests serving in Guam's parishes? He manipulates his readers into thinking that the priests are only there serving the NCW communities. But a majority of Catholics are not blind. They saw the RMS priests in the parishes conducting Mass, baptisms, weddings, and funerals. Tim Rohr leaves these things out.
Diana, Timmy isn't refuting Dr. Eusebio's response. He's only going after the little errors like the date. I think Dr. Eusebio may have gotten the date wrong. If he got the date wrong, that is not a lie. That's an honest mistake. From Junglewatch:
Delete"1. Tricky Dick says: "To form presbyters of the “New Evangelization” is not a characteristic of the Neocatechumenal Way, as is made clear by the St. Pope John Paul II’s Ad Limina message to CEPAC (Dec. 5, 1999)."
This is seriously funny. The problem for Tricky Dick is...well, me. I actually look things up. Tricky Dick, like a trained parrot, just repeats what he's told. The Kiko's love to throw "the pope said this, the pope said that" around. And the reference to "St. Pope John Paul II’s Ad Limina message to CEPAC (Dec. 5, 1999)" is another attempt by Tricky Dick and his kiko-brains to shut down mere peasants like ourselves."
Then why cant you not accept the archdiocese recommendation about the seminary deficiencies when the RMS vice rector avreed to the deficiencies
ReplyDeleteDear Anonymous at 5:59 am,
DeleteHe never agreed to it. That is why he stood together with the Board of Directors of RMS.