Monday, November 21, 2016

Dr. Eusebio Produced Evidence

Former member of the Redemptoris Mater Seminary's board of directors hasdisputed the claims of a Carmelite nun who said Archbishop Anthhony Apuron asked them to lie about a $2 million gift to buy the seminary. 
Dr. Ric Eusebio says Mother Superior Dawn Marie may have been misinformed when she said Archbishop Apuron asked them to confirm that the Carmelites knew the money would go specifically to a seminary for the Neocatechumenal Way. Dr. Eusebio produced email, which he says shows Mother Stella Maris, now diseased, did know from the start.
"You cannot say 'Redemptoris Mater Seminary' without saying the Neocatechumenal Way - is not involved because the vocations for the seminary mainly come from the Neocatechumenal Way," said the physician.
But Bishop Michael Byrnes last week dissolved the board, and asserted his control over the seminary.  Dr. Eusebio says he knows of no plan for any lawsuit to stop what Bishop Byrnes  has done. "He has all the jurisdiction, the authority, the everything," said Eusebio. "If he decides that he wants someone else that's up to him. But what we would hope is that we could have an audience with him so that we could explain what our position is."
Dr. Eusebio also countered critics of Apuron, who claim that he transferred control of the seminary to the NCW through a 2011 deed of restriction. Eusebio said Apuron never relinquished his control, and sought the deed to protect the RMS, adding, "The common knowledge is that I hear is that the Archdiocese Financial Council was concerned about  debts of the archdiocese."
Dr. Eusebio also said Apuron believed there was an effort to sell the seminary to pay the debts, to which Apuron replied, "Over my dead body."
This is my take on this whole thing.  Archbishop Apuron was NEVER dealing with Mother Dawn.  He communicated with a Mother Stella Maris, who is currently deceased. The emails that Dr. Eusebio produced showed that the Carmelite nuns in Missouri DID know that the money was for a Redemptoris Mater Seminary.  Now THAT is what Tim Rohr and Mother Dawn did not know.  Tim Rohr got the wrong nun, which would explained why she was unaware of the name of the Seminary.  She simply did not have the full information.
However, it was Mother Dawn who came out and revealed the donor in 2014.  She informed both Tim and Patti Arroyo.  In 2016, she decided to have a press release and blame Archbishop Apuron and Father Pius for going against the donor's wishes.  The truth is they followed the donor's wishes.  The donor was fully informed that the 2 million dollars would be going to purchase the property to house RMS, and they never revealed that the donor were the Carmelites in Missouri.

59 comments:

  1. Diana, it is easy to fake an email from a dead person. How can this email be proof or evidence? A potentially grand larceny cannot be covered up by questionable evidence. Do you agree?

    By the way, could you enlarge your fonts in your post, please? It is so small that it is very hard to read. I apologize for my eyesight. Thanks!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Dear Anonymous at 8:19 pm,

      The email correspondence was taken at the time she was alive. Sorry about the font. I made larger.

      Delete
    2. Is there a place where can read these emails?

      Delete
    3. Oh okay that makes sense. So the email was definitely sent by Mother Maris when Mother Maris was alive? And not when she was dead correct?

      Delete
    4. Dear Anonymous at 11:32 pm.

      That is correct.

      Delete
    5. Dear Anonymous at 9:45 pm,

      Copies of the emails were attached to Dr. Eusebio's press release and submitted to KUAM.

      Delete
  2. This is just like the Father Jack scenario. Now Eusebio's only witness is someone that has passed away. This is just too funny.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Dear Anonymous at 8:58 pm,

      Actually no. There was no report and no documentation that Father Jack knew. Dr. Eusebio, on the other hand, has the emails.

      Delete
  3. Guam - Giuseppe Gennarini disclosed on K57 with host Patti Arroyo this morning that the declaration of deed restriction signed in 2011 was done in order to protect the Redemptoris Mater Seminary from any potential lawsuit.

    http://pacificnewscenter.com/local/9197

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Dear Anonymous at 9:16 pm,

      Exactly. How else did you expect people to get the property sold if not through a lawsuit? As I said, the Archbishop saw in 2011 that there were people who wanted to sell the property and pay off the debts of the Archdiocese. The only that can be done was through a lawsuit against the Archdiocese. The prophecy came true.

      Delete
    2. Dear Diana, the 2011 proposal from AFC was not about closing the seminary! It was about relocation as I heard, freeing up the Yona property. It seems to be too large and expensive to maintain, pay the utilities, etc. The impression was that a large luxury hotel is too fancy a place for a small seminary of a handful seminarians.

      Diana, think of this. The Yona property vacated, RMS would have found a more appropriate, modest location for its continued operation. Nobody wanted to close it! Nobody said that in 2011! Selling the Yona property was an option, considering that it was too large for the church to use. But selling would not have had anything to do with any kind of lawsuit!

      Diana, you know too well that the ideas of lawsuits came much later. It is anachronism, a backward projection in time to talk about lawsuits in 2011! Selling the Yona property without any kind of court procedure was the sliver line that was cut by the resistance of NCW. But the selling, if done as proposed. could have provided much needed funds to come straight with the archdiocese's finances!

      Again, don't you think it was a viable solution? It did not include any kind of litigation! however, the proposal was rejected by the NCW and Archbishop Apuron. Now, the situation has changed tremendously. By the archdiocese's report about RMS, Archbishop Byrnes made a decision that opened again the window of opportunity to settle the RMS issue peacefully without closing or litigation.

      Delete
    3. Dear Anonymous at 9:30 am,

      There were about 30-40 seminarians. We had over 40 at one time. You also need a place to hold more than 10,000 books.

      It was the NCW who found this property for the seminary, and it is appropriate for them. Most of the money to support the seminary does not come from the Archdiocese. The Board of Directors even cut off all funding from the Archdiocese so you can keep your money. The decision is now up to Archbishop Byrnes. Yet, I see that CCOG already has plans for that property without even hearing what Archbishop Byrnes has to say about it.

      Delete
    4. Diana, it is not about my money. I am not even CCOG, although many thing CCOG says rings true to me. You are apparently not interested in convincing people about your truth. I chose the side of CCOG about the RMS because what I read about the handling of this valuable asses scares me. You just put forward a message that in many parts looks like biased on one side.

      Those people who donate to the RMS do so because they are NCW members. I assume they are good Catholics and would give the church, anyway. But rather, they only donate to the NCW and not to the archdiocese. Their money is not church money, but becomes NCW money. The church is denied its fair share of that. Don't you see a problem here?

      Delete
    5. Keep my money? What do you mean, Diana?! I will support Archbishop Byrnes when he reforms the seminary according to the true teaching of the Catholic faith. There won't be an exclusive and luxurious Kiko seminary on Guam. But there will be a place where real priests of the Catholic religion are educated. I will donate whatever I can afford to make the seminary a real one!

      Delete
    6. Diana, why do you need a hotel designed for 400+ guests for housing 30-40 seminarians? The library should have a separate location with public access for all Catholics.

      Delete
    7. Dear Anonymous at 10:21 am,

      What happens when he decides that he likes the seminary just the way it is. When he learns that the seminary is affiliated and accredited by the Lateran University in Rome (which is called the "Pope's University) you do not think he is not going to be impressed by that??? He will certainly be very impressed by it. What seminary do you have in mind can outdo an RMS that is affiliated and accredited by the Pope's University?

      Delete
    8. Diana @ 10:33 AM coming from Detroit and having much more experience with things that would astound islanders (as labels like the "Pope's University") I don't think Archbishop Byrnes is easily impressed.
      Affiliation with or even accreditation from the "Pope's University" doesn't automatically make it outstanding. Look at all the schools fully accredited by WASC on island and yet our schools produce kids who have difficulties with reading, writing and basic math just like how RMS produces presbyters who can barely speak English or preach a decent homily.
      Get it???

      Delete
    9. Dear Anonymous at 10:17 am,

      What I do with my money is none of your business. If I decide to donate to RMS, that is my choice to make. If I want to donate to the church, that is also my choice. Why do you dictate to us where and whom we should donate? We never told you where and who you should donate your money to.

      Delete
    10. Dear Anonymous at 10:44 am,

      He will be impressed because the Lateran University in Rome is equivalent to Harvard University.

      Delete
    11. Diana, at 10:50, it is not my business, right. But it is the business of the church in some sense, because it is money devoted to Catholic purposes. RMS seems to funnel funds away from other worthy causes.

      Delete
    12. Diana, please, publish my comment about the email Dr. Eusebio submitted to the media. It is available now at JW. Thanks

      Delete
    13. Dear Anonymous at 11:14 am,

      Which comment in JW would that be? There are about 9 comments in there.

      Delete
    14. Anon 11:05am:

      I don't understand why you think the Catholic church should dictate what you do with your donation. You are basically saying that it should stop you at the entrance of the church, ask if you will be putting into the collection during the mass, and then tell you what you should put on the envelope before you put it into the collection box.

      For example, you want the church to tell you that your donation should not be for the building fund or the power/water bill but should go to the homeless.

      And you want the church to tell you this because....?

      Delete
    15. And 11:05am...you're comment tells me that you want there to be person outside the entrance of the church not just to dictate how the money coming in should be spent but also to screen who can and can't come in based on what group they are affiliated with.

      Delete
    16. No, anon 4:39, it is not what was said. What was said is that when you give to the black trash bag at the neo, then you don't give it to the church. You give it to private use of the NCW and not for the purposes of the diocese. Simple as that!

      Delete
    17. Dear Anonymous at 5:18 pm,

      The trash bags is only passed around when there is a certain need such as paying for our three day retreat at the hotel.

      Delete
  4. So you mean there never was involvement of Mother Dawn at all??? She had nothing to do with any of this? This should be the headline! Why would she do such a thing? Poor Archbishop suffering more outrages. Let's pray harder, brothers.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. What on earth could be her motivation? I think you are pushing it, Diana.

      Delete
    2. Dear Anonymous at 7:32 am,

      Her motivation comes from the same reason why our young girls from the NCW were rejected. These are Guam girls who were inspired to enter the Carmelite order in Guam. But they were rejected.

      Delete
    3. Diana at 8:43 AM I'm getting confused. You say the Carmelites left Guam because there were no vocations. You said the girls who were inspired to join were rejected so that's why they were sent off island.

      But I remembered you gave another reason about why the girls went off island. You told us:

      Diana February 27, 2014 at 5:48 PM
      Dear Anonymous.

      First of all, to answer your SECOND question, New Jersey is NOT the seat of the Neocatechumenal Way. The Neocatechumenal Way doesn't have a seat or capital....not even in Spain where it begun.

      Secondly, to answer your FIRST question, the Carmelite nuns in Guam are of advanced age. In other words, they are elderly. One of the reasons they were relocated to Tamuning was due to their small numbers and their frequent visits to doctors and health services. Over the years, the number of religious sisters has been declining. This is true not only for Guam, but worldwide. Today, it's fortunate that we have at least one or two young girls in Guam who have answered God's call to join the Carmelite Order even if they are walking in the Neocatechumenal Way.

      In the Carmelite Order, the young girl would be trained in following the ideal life established by St. Teresa of Avilla. She would be trained as a nun to lead a contemplative life of prayer, spiritual readings, and manual work. Now that Guam's Carmelite nuns are so advance in their age and take frequent visits to the doctor or health clinic because some of them are ill, would they be capable of teaching an aspiring young girl this religious life, or would she be more of a caregiver? I am looking at this from a logical and reasonable perspective. Thus, I would think that it would be logical and beneficial if Guam's girls be sent off-island to a Carmelite monastary where they can be trained in living the ideal life of St. Teresa of Avilla. But I would also hope that someday, they would return to the island and take over the Carmelite Monastary here to be inspiring role models for Guam's women who hear God's calling.

      Finally, I would appreciate if the thread of this post is not derailed too much or too far off. This post is about God's calling and deals with the letters written by Mr. Aaron Quituga and Father Adrian. As I said in my post, I don't think Mr. Quitugua is ready for the priesthood yet. The seminary is not a place to discern whether one should become a priest or not. It is a place to prepare men for the priesthood. A person doesn't enroll into law school to discern whether he wants to become a lawyer or not. The purpose of law school is to prepare students into the field of Law. In a similar manner, a Seminary is a place to prepare candidates for the priesthood. And I also believe that every candidate should be screened before entering any Seminary.

      So which one is it Diana???
      Did the girls go off island because of your 2016 reason that they were rejected by the Carmelites?
      Did the girls go off island because of your 2014 reason that they would only be caregivers for the elderly Carmelites??

      Delete
    4. Diana, we have the screen shot of your admission that you are ignorant. Lol.

      Delete
    5. Dear Anonymous at 10:55 am,

      At that time in 2014, I was ignorant because I was not fully aware of how the girls were treated until recently when a friend told me in 2016. They were rejected. So, they left and found a carmelite monastery that accepted them.

      Delete
    6. Dear Anonymous at 11:19 am,

      When I am wrong, I was not afraid to admit it. πŸ™‚ I was ignorant at that time because I was not aware of how the girls were treated when they went to the Carmelites on Guam.

      Delete
    7. How were the girls treated? What is this about? Were they abused? This has to be reported.

      Delete
    8. Dear Anonymous at 12:12 pm,

      They were not abused. They were told that they would never make a good Carmelite nun or that they would never make it as a Carmelite nun. They rejected Guam's girls.

      Delete
    9. Rejection is abuse. Who said this to our girls? The Mother?

      Delete
    10. Then people who apply for jobs and get rejected should sue the company that rejected their application because it's abuse.

      Delete
    11. "They were told that they would never make a good Carmelite nun or that they would never make it as a Carmelite nun. They rejected Guam's girls."

      I'll bet it was a rejection of the girls' formation in the NCW that worried them.

      Delete
    12. Dear Anonymous at 5:16 pm,

      It had more to do with discrimination. The NCW does not have any formation for girls, only for men entering the priesthood.

      The NCW only inspired the girls to enter the religious life. It should have been an honor for Guam's Carmelites that they were inspired to join their order. But the girls were rejected. It was a matter of discrimination.

      Delete
    13. Considering that the NCXW claims to form adult Christians, it is rather worrying when you say:

      " The NCW does not have any formation for girls, only for men entering the priesthood. "

      Delete
    14. Dear Anonymous at 8:48 pm,

      And that bothers you more than the unfair discrimination shown to these young girls. 😲 Shocking!

      Delete
    15. So is there going to be a discrimination lawsuit filed against the Carmelites by Ric Eusebio on behalf of the girls who were rejected?
      Or is that something the families should do?

      Delete
    16. Dear Anonymous at 10:22 am,

      There will be no lawsuit. The girls have forgiven them and are much happier being Carmelite nuns. They do not leave the monastery at all, but they are happy.

      Delete
    17. How many of these girls were rejected, Diana? Was Archbishop told of these rejections? We're the girls screened before the rejections? Did the Carmelite tell the reasons? Disturbing.

      Delete
  5. No where in the emails provided does it is the RMS or NCW mentioned. When referring to the seminary, that is all that is mentioned - a seminary. Is a cloistered nun in the states supposed to know the seminary on Guam and RMS? And even if she knew the name of the seminary, was she supposed to know the RMS is connected to the NCW?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Dear Anonymous at 8:48 am,

      Please use plain common sense. What other seminary could they be speaking of? What makes you think that the nuns believed it was St. Patrick's seminary in Guam and not the Redemptoris Mater Seminary?

      Delete
    2. St. Patrick's seminary? There is no St. Patrick Seminary in Guam.

      Delete
    3. Dear Anonymous at 9:15 am,

      Exactly my point. If I remember correctly, Archbishop Apuron and the donor also spoke on the phone. The donor was aware of the Redemptoris Mater Seminary.

      Mother Dawn was not the donor, and the new Mother superior who took over Mother Stela's position was mostly not fully aware of the whole information. Now that there are TWO seminaries on Guam, she may not even be aware of which seminary the money went to.

      Delete
    4. But the request from Apuron for a memo indicating the donation was to pay for the loan for the RMS took them by surprise, according to Mother Dawn. She stated that she was in the room with Mother Superior when the email came through and Mother Superior questioned it. When Mother Dawn came to Guam, she confronted Apuron about it.

      Are you now say that Mother Dawn made all that up?

      Delete
    5. Dear Anonymous at 10:03 am,

      First of all, that was the wrong Mother Superior. The letter that Tim Rohr had (which he never published in his blog) was NOT the donor. The donor who authorized the gift of 2 million dollars was Mother Stela whom Archbishop Apuron spoke and emailed to while she was alive.

      Like the new Mother superior, Mother Dawn was not aware of all the facts.

      Delete
    6. The new Mother Superior, and Mother Dawn did not know that the other Mother Superior knew....but YOU knew it??? A 2 million dollar transaction taking place from the Carmelites and no discussion with the other sisters as to its purpose....huh??
      And why, then, did Apuron tell Mother Dawn that Pius made him do it???




      Delete
    7. Tim says he's winning!!! he can get easily 40 Millon in today's market for the Redemptoris mater Seminary, did he win? and the Church lose, four years and it's all about Tim Rohr, nothing but a big joke taking of the Church money, a real Church guy

      Delete
    8. Dear Anonymous at 2:02 pm,

      Apparently, Mother Dawn was never involved in the transaction because she never mentioned Mother Stela.

      Delete
    9. A 2 million dollar transaction taking place from the Carmelites.
      And why, then, did Apuron tell Mother Dawn that Pius made him do it???

      Delete
    10. Dear Anonymous at 9:49 PM,

      Mother Dawn was misinformed. Apparently, she did not know that Mother Stela was the anonymous donor who authorized the transaction.

      Delete
    11. For the THIRD time: WHY DID APURON TELL MOTHER DAWN THAT PIUS MADE HIM DO IT???
      APURON SAID THAT PIUS AND "THEY FRAMED THE LETTER"

      Anons @ 2:02PM & 9:49 PM asked that question and you haven't answered.

      Delete
    12. Dear Anonymous at 10;29 am,

      The reason for my nonresponse was because only Archbishop Apuron can answer that question. I am not the Archbishop.

      Personally, I am surprised that she even got to see him. After all, the jungle, CCOG, LFM, and many priests often complained that he did not have an open door policy.

      Delete
  6. Diana, now you say that Mother Dawn never saw Archbishop Apuron about the letter? She said she was in his office. What are we supposed to believe? You are making confusion. Clarify. Please.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Dear Anonymous at 7:17 am,

      From what I gather, they never even heard of Mother Dawn. They have only dealt with Mother Stela, who is now deceased.

      Delete