This is my response:To the community of the Neocatechumenal Way, Hon said he had another message."Number one, I pray for them, I really pray for them," he said.Hon's second message to NCW followers was to be more open and inviting and that, in addition to having good intentions, the leadership within the NCW needed to develop a willingness to talk and open lines of communication. He explained that while he had undertaken efforts to contact NCW leadership, he was unable to really establish a dialogue with them.
Dear Archbishop Hon,
Let us be honest here. It was NOT difficult to contact the leadership of the NCW. As a matter of fact, you removed him. Father Pius was the Head Catechist of the NCW in Guam and the Rector of RMS. You were able to contact him and tell him that you are removing him as Rector of RMS. Father Pius was obedient and stepped down.
What good intentions did you do? You removed the leadership of the NCW and targeted the parishes that have the NCW in them. You took out RMS priests without their knowledge. You never contacted them nor wrote them a letter, telling them of their new assignment. And you were fully aware of where to find them. The first time they learned of their new assignment was through the Umatuna.
Imagine waking up in the morning and opening up the Catholic newspaper only to find that you were assigned to a different parish or to DOC effective about TWO DAYS AGO! And to top it off, you replaced these priests who were walking in the Way with a Parochial administrator as if they were being removed for doing something wrong. These two priests have appealed their case, which you refused to listen. With all due respect, the person who was unwilling to talk and open lines of communication was YOU.
Not true at all. All the priests were asked to turn in their papers for reshuffling weeks before the actual assigning of parishes.
ReplyDeleteDear Anonymous at 1:30 am,
DeleteForced resignation without a reason is illegal and not in accordance with Church law. This is why some priests refused to turn in their resignation.
Diana, the same was done to Monsignor Benevente and father Paul. Both weren't given ANY notices and were either locked out or kicked out. The only person who was UNWILLING to talk was brother tony but yet you worship him and trash archbishop hon. Do you see the hypocrisy in this or are you just blind because you are a DEFENDER to the NCW ways?
ReplyDeleteOne thing with archbishop hon, at least he didn't say "they" made him do it and stood by all his decisions unlike brother tony who RAN from the island.
Dear Anonymous at 1:32 am,
DeleteThis is incorrect. Father Paul and Monsignor James did not wake up one morning and found their names in the newspaper, telling them that they were removed. Father Paul received a letter from the Archbishop telling him to resign due to disobedience, which prompted Father Paul to write a letter to his parishioners and even turn to the media. Monsignor James was personally told that he will be removed due to financial mismanagement, and that gave Monsignor James to write letters to others to tell them of his situation.
According to canon law, if a priest is to be removed or transferred, he must be informed in writing (code of canon law 1748).
You are SO right, dear Diana. Hon had a hatred for the neocatechumenal way and he wanted and worked very hard to destroy the seminary. It was only prayers that stopped his onslaught.
ReplyDeleteThis is so funny because Fr. Pius has said prior at the visit with Archbishop Krebs, that Archbishop Hon is a friend of the way. haha
DeleteDear Anonymous at 9:33 am,
DeleteActually no....he never said that. You got your Archbishops mixed up. It was Krebs who was a friend of the Way because he initially told some people that the jungle was a hate blog. We learned later that Krebs changed his opinion. That is why we also bypassed Krebs once know the name of the new bishop and gave the name of the new bishop straight to the media.
so you dont like any archbishop who is ambivalent to the way. makes complete sense. too bad the Lord chooses who He chooses..
DeleteDear Anonymous at 11:26 am,
DeleteIf you recall, the Way did not give any complaints UNTIL it was made known that Archbishop Hon intends to remove Archbishop Apuron without due process of the law. Then, you hear us complain because it is an injustice to judge and condemn a man guilty without due process of a trial.
You neos have judged Fr. Gofigan AND Monsignor Benevente without ANY due process. Are you that hypocritical that THEY weren't given ANY due process till archbishop hon came to guam? They were ultimately CLEARED after they presented their cases and yet you still seem to judge them as guilty.
DeleteDear Anonymous at 11:58 am,
DeleteDid you forget that they filed their case in Rome? With their case in Rome, Archbishop Apuron could not do anything for them except wait for Rome to give the verdict. Their due process was held up in Rome. Ready my comment at 12:10 pm. They were cleared by someone who obviously targetted the NCW and the priests who walks in the Way.
That's right. They only complained when Archbishop Hon started to take actions unfavorable to the NCW like working to ask the Pope to remove Apuron and take steps to rescind the Declaration of Deed Restriction. If Archbishop Hon had continued to show partiality to the NCW like when he first showed up in June then Diana would have continued to mock Tim Rohr and others for criticizing Hon. But when Hon had a conversion and he started also listening to the CCOG side Diana started criticizing him too.
DeleteDiana just can't stand that Hon is so open about his conversion. In that same article Hon says he came to understand that some of the STAUNCHEST SUPPORTERS of the Church were also the HARSHEST CRITICS of the Church. He was also quoted as saying "They protest in order to PURIFY THE CHURCH." Ouch.
Dear Anonymous at 12:17 pm,
DeleteWhat partiality did he show? Since the beginning he targeted priests who were walking in the Way. The first priest who was removed was Monsignor David, and the rest after than were all priests who were walking in the Way.
As for those "critics of the Church", they were the ones who pushed Bill 326 into law that allowed "institutions (such as the Archdiocese of Agana) to be sued. That is the truth.
Rather than leading the protesters to Jesus Christ's teaching about judging and condemning a person without due process of the law, Archbishop Hon had only fallen with them as he also judged and condemned Archbishop Apuron without due process of a trial.
ReplyDeletepriests must be obedient to their Bishop's. If Archbishop Hon asked a priest to go to a certain parish than the priest should move.
A priest who is disobedient to his bishop is disobedient to the Lord.
The priests who were disobedient to Archbishop Hon should go to confession and seek forgiveness.
I hope they will practice their priestly obedience to Archbishop Michael Byrnes.
Dear Anonymous at 4:38 am,
DeleteThe problem here is that he did not even ask. Father Adrian and Father Edivaldo found out about their new assignment in the Umatuna. And their new assignment was effective two days prior to their finding out.
I think Adrian and Edivaldo did not show up during the meeting where every priest was asked to give their resignation letter for reshuffling.
DeleteDear Anonymous at 11:42 am,
DeleteLet us be honest. The reshuffling was a ruse. Archbishop Hon targeted the priests who were walking in the Way. Monsignor David was removed from his position and replaced by Father Jeff who is not walking in the Way. Father Adrian was removed TWICE: from his position as Chancellor and from the parish of Barrigada and replaced by someone not walking in the Way. Deacon Larry was removed from his position and replaced by someone not walking in the Way. Father Pius, the head catechist of Guam, was removed as Rector of RMS. The priests from parishes (such as Agana, Barrigada, Tamuning, and Chalan Pago) that have the Way in them were replaced with priests who are not walking in the Way. No other parishes were targetted.
That's true. The parishes that don't have the Way in them remained unchanged.
DeleteNothing happened to Fr. Krystov in Santa Rita so your deduction about favoritism is invalid.
DeleteDear Anonymous at 1:36 pm,
DeleteThat is because we got Rome to remove him. Had he stayed longer Father Kzystov would most likely have been next.
Right on Diana!!!!
ReplyDeleteDiana, you are shooting at the messenger. The information you share here has confidential source that is impossible to verify. You assume we should accept your declaration on face value without being able to check their validity. It is inconceivable that ordained priests do not learn about their transfer immediately after the announcements had been made.
ReplyDeleteWhat you say about Fr. Pius is one-sided. The issue had been the RMS from the beginning. If Fr. Pius wanted to save the RMS for the NCW, he should have contacted and lobbied Archbishop Hon, the only authorized bishop on island before the arrival of Archbishop Hon. Fr. Pius failed to do so. He placed his hope in Cardinal Filoni that might not have worked out for him as he fathomed.
You ire against Hon is completely out of place! Please, be forthcoming. The reason of conflict with the RMS was not Hon, but disobedience. You should acknowledge the real issues here. If Fr. Pius had allowed Apuron to rescind the deep restriction on the Yona property, then NCW would have a much better position now with the new Archbishop's arrival.
What Archbishop Hon is telling is that secrecy and behind-the-door deals are not an efficient way to protect your community. NCW has to learn to come forward openly and embrace those who want to learn the truth about this movement. If you have nothing to hide, then please, do not hide it!
By the way, Archbishop Hon, as of today, left the island. Are you going to keep shooting at him? Ask Fr. Pius if this is a wise strategy.
Dear Anonymous at 6L52 am
DeleteI did checked their validity. They did not know about their new assignment until they read it in the Umutuna.
What I said about Father Pius is true. Archbishop Hon claimed that he was unable to contact the leadership of the NCW, which is false. When he wanted him removed as rector, he was able to contact him.......plain and simple.
We have been open since the very beginning. We told you so many times that only the Archbishop of Agana and his successors can rescind the deed restriction. Father Pius could not do it nor could he force Archbishop Apuron to do it. We are also not here to lobby anyone. That is only for politics.
I was laughing last night when Fr. Jeff presented Hon an empty shoe box as a gift from the Archdiocese. I wonder whose idea was that? LOL!
ReplyDeleteWhat about your dear Adrian Cristobal. He's still not being obedient to the Catholic Leadership on the island. Then again, since the NCW is not Catholic that makes more sense now.
ReplyDeleteDear Anonymous at 11:13 am,
DeleteFiling for an appeal is not being disobedient. Every priest has that right if they feel that their rights have been violated by the Bishop. In the same way, writing letters of complaint to Rome regarding Archbishop Hon is also not disobedient. It is the right of the laity to bring to Rome's attention of what Archbishop Hon has been doing here. And we are Catholic. The Pope recognize us as Catholic and his acknowledgement has more weight than your prejudice.
And why did the bishop crucify Fr. Paul and Fr. James and go on the media to repot it? Huh?
DeleteDear Anonymous at 2:46 pm,
DeleteActually, it was Father Paul and Monsignor James who went to the media FIRST.
Hon is a temporary administrator of the diocese. That means that his job description was to ensure the diocese chugged along until either Apuron came back or a new bishop was assigned. Instead he came and decided that he was quickly going to make lasting changes like if he was the new ordinary of the place. That is NOT how Rome works. Rome works very slowly. Evaluating a situation and only taking action after careful deliberation. New bishop usually wait a year from their installment before they begin to do anything new in a diocese. Hon so abused his power that Rome had to step in with uncharacteristic speed to get him out of the way. Hence a new archbishop. In light of these facts the appeals to Rome by fr. Adrian and the refusal to submit resignation letters make sense.
ReplyDeleteYou are wrong, anon. Hon would not have rescinded the deed restriction. It was done by Byrnes. The appointment of a new bishop was calibrated to the 5-year anniversary of the deed restriction, because of the statute of limitation. Byrnes had to act quickly and decisively. Nobody would have been able to return the patrimony to the church afterward.
DeleteDear Anonymous at 4:13 pm,
DeleteThere never was any 5 year statutes of limitations on the deed restriction. Go back and ask Tim Rohr's to show you the document saying that there was a 5 year statutes of limitation since he was the one who started this false rumor.
The statutes of limitation is not always transparent. It might be hidden as a Public Law or federal regulation followed up on Guam. The problem is that even if you don't know it, it expires and takes away your chances to restore the Catholic church's patrimony to its rightful place, Archbishop Byrnes. You don't wanna risk that and get stuck with the neo in the property for good.
DeleteDear Anonymous at 7;:51 pm,
DeleteAgain, go back and ask Tim Rohr to provide the document saying that the deed restriction had a 5 year statutes of limitation. Find out the truth instead of swallowing everything he says.
I am glad Archbishop Hon is no longer here. He has made things worse.
ReplyDeleteHon has done an immense and irreparable damage to the catholic church in Guam. He has abused his power. Without any just cause and with no sufficient reason he removed Fr. Pius as rector of the RMS, he has threatened the stability of the seminary, he has removed several pastors without canonical due process, he has used his office and position to unjustly call for the removal of Archbishop Apuron without a court hearing, he has incited catholics to hate other catholics in the NCW. These are not the actions of a bishop, much less a Christian. He exonerated a priest who stole money and made him in charge of the patrimony of the diocese. These are the actions of a despotic, mad, power-hungry cleric with an ideological hatred to certain segments of the catholic faithful of Guam.
ReplyDeleteHis actions are bordering on the demonic because for a priest to do these deeds is absolutely scandalous! Hon, as a priest, knows he has abused his power. He knows he has inflicted great damage to the faith of the people. For this reason he is doubly and trippley culpable for his sins. He cannot be allowed to use his title and position to do as he wishes.
It is for this reason that we, the lay faithful of Guam, should petition the Holy Father to have Hon removed from the Roman Curia. Hon should never be allowed to inflict further damage on the local church. Hon is a total disgrace to the pope and the church. He has misrepresented the Pope by claiming to have papal power to do whatever he wished - even if it meant going above the law. He has been a source of great scandal and division to the catholic faithful.
Therefore, we the lay faithful MUST petition the Pope to have Hon removed from the Roman Curia once and for all! He cannot be allowed to use papal power to abuse people in the church!
Where is your proof that a priest stole money when he was cleared after a thorough investigation? Btw, brother tony never even pursued an investigation and just rushed to judgement because "they" told him to. But wait, only the NCW deserve their day in court while others wait for years to even get a chance to present their case, right?
DeleteDo you see how the irony in all this is? Or are you all just in complete denial of the facts? Right now there is a chance to wave an extended olive branch and all this drama still goes on. Mocking gifts given to an outgoing archbishop wasn't about the type of gift but the thought of giving him something rather then the nothing you neos gave.
The saying it's the thought that counts and not the gift should've been something more meaningful then the actual gift. And might I add that fr. Jeff mentioned it was from the WHOLE archdiocese and not just from himself. That in itself should've meant something. But I'm sure none of you see that.
I don't think Archbishop Hon left kind of impact on the Guam church. Whatever he did was not his own will or his own action. His personality is transparent, not special or characteristic. He did what he was told to do. He was sent by Pope Francis and he did what the Pope wanted from him. His will was Pope Francis' will and his action was Pope Francis' action.
DeleteThis might be difficult to swallow for a neo, because the neo needs someone to blame. But honestly, Hon is just too small of a piece of cake. His impact is so negligible that as soon as he left, he is already forgotten. In a couple week and you will be asking: what? Hon who?
The big issue is Archbishop Michael because he is staying here. He is said to be an Alpha Without Borders charismatic evangelizer. He collaborates with the Anglicans and the Lutherans. You would say no, but it is true! There is a real danger that Archbishop Michael will try to convert Guam Catholics into Alpha. This is the real problem.
Now, if we'll have Archbishop Michael trying to convert us to the Lutheran faith then we have to say 'no thanks'. We count in this on our Christian brothers in the NCW. Because whenever there is skirmish between Catholic and Catholic, that is a skirmish. But when the Protestants are making a move on the Catholic faith, we have to show unity and resolution to fight them back. I see great avenue with limited agreement with the NCW. But nothing more beyond that.
Dear Anonymous at 7:36 pm,
DeleteYou stated: "Right now there is a chance to wave an extended olive branch and all this drama still goes on."
Olive branch? It was never enough for you. Monsignor David was removed, but that was not good enough for you. You wanted more and the protests continued. Father Adrian was removed, but that was not good enough for you, and the protests continued. Father Pius was removed, but that was not good enough for you, and the protests continued. Father Paul and Monsignor James were cleared, and still we saw that was not good enough for you, and the protests continued. The deed restriction was rescinded, and still the protests continued. So, what olive branch were you speaking of when protest after protest continued even when things you wanted were given to you a little at a time?
You are correct. We did not give any gift to Archbishop Hon. After all, what did he give us? Even his farewell speech to the NCW was an insult to us. We praise and thank God that Rome acted for our benefit.
Hon is too small of a piece of cake. He is forgotten as soon as he left Guam. Hon who...? Anybody remembers?
DeleteSo please neos, just stop picking on a person without significance. Try to find someone else to blame.
Yep. Fr. Jeff gave Hon the credit for bringing AB Byrnes to Guam when he had nothing to do with it. Hon even took that credit for himself when in fact he did not even know the name of the new bishop until he read it in the front page of the newspaper. It was the media who announced AB Byrnes before Hon did.
DeleteTHERES PROOF! Are you serious? Monsignor James misused funds from the Church! THATS NOT RIGHT! How do you not see that?!
DeleteOh yes. Protest after protest continued even when things we wanted were given to us a little at a time BECAUSE there is STILL one more R left.
DeleteRestore the priests (Fr Paul & Msgr James) ✅
Return the RMS (property) ✅
Remove Apuron still pending
So the protest after protest will continue.
Dear Anonymous at 8:53 pm,
DeleteSee my response on the weblink below:
http://neocatechemunal.blogspot.com/2016/12/homily-of-archbishop-byrnes.html
Am I the only one that noticed that anon at 7:47 is threatening Byrnes?
DeleteAnon 11:26, "too bad the Lord chooses who he chooses"?
ReplyDeleteNot TOO BAD at all. The Lord appointed Archbishop Apuron, and you all disrespected his authority. Then you call yourselves Catholic, but you literally blasted and attacked your archbishop. That is so sad what you guys have done. Then we have a new bishop and now you guys don't like him because he said the NCW is "valuable."
We have already heard our popes say they approve. Are you seriously going to listen to Mr. Rohr? Over our pope?! Over the successor of St. Peter?!
sweetheart, if the man apuron was all good through and through, nothing would be happening to him. Sometimes karma takes the long way around....
DeleteDear Anonymous at 9:17 pm,
DeleteI am a Catholic. I do not believe in Karma. Scripture says that even bad things happen to good people. Read the Book of Job.
Anon 9:17 if you believe in Karma that is paganism.
DeleteKarma is the golden rule
DeleteIt's about Tim Rohr hatred for the bishop Apuron, he's like magnet of hate he's draws the Jungle folks hate towards him, TOO BAD!!
ReplyDeleteI think every good person should hate Apuron and all his helpers because of hundreds of children they raped and the permanent damage done to the good people Of Guam. Why is he not locked up already.
DeleteDear Anonymous at 2:36 am,
DeleteAnd what about Joseph Lastimosa, who raped and killed his victim? Should every good person hate him too?
Yes of course. But he is not in the same league as Apuron, only one victim versus hundreds.
DeleteDear Anonymous at 7:51 am,
DeleteActually, Joseph Lastimosa also attacked another woman, but her husband intervened and he fled. All crimes are heinous. And in God's eyes, both murder and child sexual molestation are mortal sins. In the eyes of man's law, murder carries a much heavier sentence than child molestation. In fact, in some states, the penalty for murder can be capital punishment whereas child molestation and rape can carry a life sentence, but never the death penalty.
First, as Christians hatred is never what we are supposed to harbor for another person. Why? Because every man and woman is made in the image and likeness of God.
DeleteSecondly, when you say, "Yes of course. But he is not in the same league as Apuron, only one victim versus hundreds."
This thought reveals that you believe that the law is subjective and can be applied whenever you feel like it. The law is the law.
A person can be accused of assualt whether they pushed someone or punched them in the face. That person can be a teen, adult, male, female, or someone you would least expect to do such a thing. But regardless of who committed and was deemed guilty of the crime, it's still a crime in the eyes of the law.
In the same respect, the law also states that a person is innocent until proven guilty even if you "think" or "suspect" he or she is guilty. If you cannot prove it, he or she remains innocent. PERIOD.
How you treat that person is up to you, but if you were in that person's shoes how would you feel? How would you feel if everyone, strangers on the street and close friends and family members, looked at you with suspicion and whispered behind your back about a crime or act you are accused of committing? And everytime you stand up for yourself or someone stands up for you, you get pushed back and the accusations continue and the suspicions escalate. How would you feel when the people you care about don't listen or believe you?
And if you can imagine the suffering, then maybe you will at least have enough compassion to be patient and wait in silence until the results of the trial are over.
That you keep dredging up the sins of someone who actually repented for them is why I cannot stand with you on this. Tim has his flaws and I disagree with him much, but you are despicable for bringing up Lastimoza when he has been silent and living a repentant life with his family. You bring no goodness to your side by doing this.
DeleteDid you do this to distract and to use him as if you'll gain supporters?
I'm sorry, but that's just disgusting of you.
Dear Anonymous at 10:40 pm,
DeleteYou misunderstand my intent. I brought Lastimosa's name up to show how disgusting the hypocrisy is from the jungle. Lastimosa was repentant and they forgave him. Father Brouillard was repentant and even asked for forgiveness, and they are ready to crucify him. Only Anonymous 7:51 am admits that Lastimosa should also be hated.
Diana, you censure comments on here. I'll have one last go. All i'm asking is have the victims given evidence at Apuron's trial. I would guess not. How can you have a trial without witness testimony?
DeleteDear Anonymous at 4:21 am,
DeleteThe Vatican already have the testimonies of the alleged victims. There are no testimonies from any WITNESSES because the witnesses (such as Father Jack) are all dead.
The victims are witnesses to their rape. When did the victims give their testimony to the Vatican court. I have only read this on this blog.
DeleteDear Anonymous at 7:49 am,
DeleteThe alleged victims are alleged victims rather than witnesses. The Vatican got their testimonies from the media and internet. All their testimonies that they spoke about the sexual allegation on the radio talk shows, newspapers, and internet were obtained by the Vatican. Archbishop Hon also sent some of those documents to the Vatican.
group who hate Archbishop Anthony. work together. Almost name them. priests involved in plot against Archbishop Apuron.
ReplyDelete