One has to wonder why the jungle is in a rush to "defrock Apuron." Archbishop Hon had already asked Pope Francis to remove Archbishop Apuron so that he no longer holds the title "Archbishop of Agana." He failed to do that. It was Pope Francis who made the decision to allow Anthony Apuron to continue holding his title, so why are the protesters going against Pope Francis' decision. Archbishop Hon already accepted the pope's decision. The Sunday protesters should also do the same.
After all, Archbishop Apuron is already undergoing canonical trial. If he is found guilty, then he will be removed as Archbishop of Agana, and they will receive what they wanted. All the Sunday protesters had to do is wait for the outcome of the canonical trial. So, why are they in a rush? Why not wait for the result of the canonical trial? What are they afraid of that they cannot wait?
Is it possible that the reason they want Archbishop Apuron's title removed NOW is so they can implant into the minds of ALL people that Apuron is guilty even without having gone through a trial? If his title was removed, it would be easy to spread the propaganda that Archbishop Apuron is indeed guilty of those sexual allegations and even pressure the next Archbishop (his successor) to rescind the deed restriction. The fact that his title was removed would speak volumes and leave no doubt as to whether he was innocent. Nevermind the fact that he did not go through a fair trial.
Is it also possible that they are afraid that he would be found not guilty? Lately, Tim Rohr has been voicing his opinion that Archbishop Apuron will be cleared of sexual molestation and that Rome cannot be relied on. This raises some questions. First, how would Tim Rohr know that Archbishop Apuron would be cleared, and secondly, if we cannot rely on Rome, then WHO are we supposed to rely on? Surely, the jungle is not saying that we should rely on Tim Rohr over Rome?
Perhaps, it also time to re-visit this post that I published on June 19, 2016, which can be found here.
Like you said Diana, Leo Tudela is an open and shut case. The church can pay him without going to court. But did he also sue the Boy Scouts of America?
ReplyDeleteDear Anonymous at 4:58 pm,
DeletePlease stick the OP. I agree with you about Leo Tudela, but the sexual allegations between Archbishop Apuron and his accusers is not an open and shut case. Archbishop Apuron is currently going to trial for the sexual allegations. The question is why is the jungle in a hurry to defrock him and without a trial? Why not wait until the trial is over?
What happens if AB Apuron is found innocent by Rome?
DeleteDear Anonymous at 5:22 pm,
DeleteFrom what I understand by our catechists, he will return to Guam and file a defamation and libel lawsuit against ALL his accusers. Whatever evidence was used in Rome to prove his innocence will also be used in the civil court in Guam.
What about Tim Rohr????
DeleteDear Anonymous at 5:37 pm,
DeleteTim Rohr and CCOG along with a few others will also be included in the defamation and libel lawsuit.
I did read in JW that Tim was expecting Apuron to be cleared by Rome. I also remember Tim saying in his blog that even if Apuron was cleared of the sexual allegations, he still lied about RMS and gave the property away.
DeleteA real conspiracy any Jail Time ?
DeleteDear Anonymous at 5:58 pm,
DeleteThe conspiracy itself is a criminal act and the penalty depends on the judicial system. You can read more in the following weblink:
https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/conspiracy
Diana, Tim said Apuron will be cleared Cruz the NCW has infiltrated the Vatican. That's why Tim said not to rely on Rome.
DeleteDear Anonymous at 6:50 pm,
DeleteI think you meant to write "cuz", instead of Cruz. At any rate, Archbishop Hon said that Pope Francis would be closely monitoring the trial of Archbishop Apuron; therefore, I doubt that anything fishy or underhanded will occur. I do not know what the outcome of the trial will be, but we will find out when it is done. All the protesters have to do is be patient and wait.
Pope Francis will make a verdict that has to be accepted by anyone. The same goes with the RMS.
DeleteDear Diana,
ReplyDelete"From what I understand by our catechists"
How do your catechists know? By divine inspiration?
Dear Anonymous at 7:48 pm,
DeleteBefore he left to Rome, Archbishop Apuron stated that there will be two trials: one is canonical and the other is a civil trial. He is going through the first one, which is a canonical trial. This trial is held to determine whether he is guilty or innocent of the sexual allegations. Our catechists only repeated what the Archbishop said before he left to Rome.
Dear Diana, could you explain, please, how could the outcome of a canonical trial have any influence on the outcome of a civil lawsuit?
DeleteDear Anonymous at 6:19 am,
DeleteThe canonical trial is about the Archbishop being accused of sexual molestation by Roy, Walter, Roland, and Doris. The civil lawsuit is also about the Archbishop being accused of the same thing by the same people. If evidence is found in the canonical trial showing the Archbishop's innocence, that evidence will also be used in the civil court.
In addition, if the Archbishop is found innocent, he will be filing a defamation and libel lawsuit of his own. During the course of the trial, if conspiracy is found, criminal charges such as fraud will also be brought forth. In other words, if it is proven that these alleged victims are not victims at all, fraud will be charged against them and all others involved in the crime.
Diana, what kind of possible evidence are you exactly talking about? In a canonical trial conducted by church officials, the evidence is mostly spiritual like good behavior, prayerful life, honorable character, submission to the Pope, etc. These are 100% inadmissible at a court of law.
DeleteWow, a police investigation against the victims?! This would not send the right message about the Catholic Church to the world! The new bishop won't permit this.
DeleteDear Anonymous at 8:34 am,
DeleteOn the contrary, they will be evidences that was turned such as Denton's report to the Vatican.
Dear Anonymous at 8:39 am,
DeleteI recent published a post about a Chinese Catholic priest who sued SNAP, some members of the police department, and his accusers. He won the case. I also posted an article about a woman who defraud the Catholic Church by making a false claim that she was raped by a priest. These things do happen.
As a matter of fact, it happened here in Guam with superintendent Jon Fernandez. A person came out and told the media that she and her friend were told to say that Jon Fernandez sexually harassed them. One girl came out and told the media that the sexual harassment was false and never happened.
It's interesting that you mentioned the Jon Fernandez's case. There seems to be a parallel with that case and the Archbishop. The governor believes that Fernandez is a victim of a political conspiracy.
DeleteDiana, the Chinese priest's case is only one example. More like the exception. Why do you think this case is similar to that case?
DeleteDear Anonymous at 11:23 am,
DeleteI was not comparing the two cases. I said there are people who make false claims and gave the examples using the case of the Chinese priest, the case of the woman who defraud the church, and the case of Jon Fernandez. This is why the sexual allegations are "allegations". The alleged victims are "alleged" victims while the accused goes through a trial.
The situation with Leo Tudela is an open and shut case. The situation with Archbishop Apuron and his accusers is still an open case because Archbishop Apuron is claiming that he is innocent. He swore before Pope Francis that he is not guilty of those sexual allegations and therefore fighting for his name and reputation. The canonical trial will decide whether he is guilty or innocent of the sexual allegations.
Anon. 11:23, the case with the Chinese priest is not an exception. If anything, it shows that if Archbishop Apuron is wrongly accused, he can take it to court and even win, just like the Chinese priest.
DeleteCardinal Joseph Bernardin was accused of sexual abuse by former seminarian Stephen Cook back in the 90s. Cardinal Bernardin had never sued Stephen Cook back. He faced the allegations with a peaceful mind, without any desire of revenge.
DeleteCardinal Bernardin was vindicated, as during the litigation process, Stephen Cook realized that he was wrong. Would have Cardinal Bernardin decided to sue back the accuser, he would not have ever been vindicated, but perhaps convicted on false changes.
Of course, Archbishop Anthony Apuron is free to sue as many people as he seems fit. He can sue the accusers, their lawyer, the JW group, its leader, the CCOG and all the folks picketing around. The question is: would he ever be vindicated?
Diana, can the docs that Tim Rohr posted in JW be used in the archbishop's canonical trial? He posted the lawsuit that Denton, Tudela, Quintanilla and Sondia filed on the archbishop's birthday. It has a statement from Fr Louis Broulliard. Can Rome use that doc now that JW made it public?
DeleteDear Anonymous at 7:05 am,
DeleteYes. In fact, that is the reason why Vatican City has been looking into the jungle. Tim Rohr has proudly been showing off how many times Vatican City has logged on to his blog. But what he does not know is that the lawyer defending Archbishop Apuron was looking for the evidence of conspiracy. Archbishop Apuron has claimed that he is innocent of those sexual allegations and that Tim Rohr has plotted to remove him.
I already found that Tim knew about Roy and Walter long before Mae Ada called in on the radio talk show because it indicated that on his blog. Tim also wrote in his blog in 2014 that he was not interested in removing Father Wadeson, only Archbishop Apuron. That was in his blog. So, the defense lawyer for Apuron is aware that Tim has been working to remove Archbishop Apuron since 2014.
Diana, where is the conspiracy? JW has always been very forthcoming about a plan to challenge the archbishop considered corrupt by many. The charges had to be made with care because of oppressive church practices. The law against abusers had been passed and signed into effect just a couple weeks ago. This required extra cautiousness in contacting the victims and collecting their testimonies.
DeleteYou have to make a credible point of argument that this is actually a "conspiracy" if you are to make the charge.
JW is a a wealth of resources and documentation considering the abuses of local church leadership. Your blog cannot compete with those facts. Tim was very circumstantial not to do anything that may jeopardize the evidence. If you call this conspiracy, then you are wrong. It is taking care of the facts.
As about depicting the sexual abuse by no-nonsensical terms, it is Joelle Casteix who explains that these details are not pornographic but descriptive, so that everyone could feel the unwanted impact and consequences this could have on you or on someone in your family that you care of.
http://theworthyadversary.com/author/jcasteix
Dear Anonymous at 10:05 am,
DeleteThe problem is in the inconsistencies in the story that Tim has been telling. There is nothing forthcoming about these inconsistencies. For example, Tim went on the radio talk show saying that he did not pursue any sexual allegations UNTIL Mae Ada came on in the radio and revealed that someone told her that he was molested by Apuron. However, the entry in his blog showed that Tim already knew about Roy and/or Denton because these two admitted that they confided in Father Jack about the molestation. Why the inconsistency?
Tim Rohr also admitted in the radio that he did not want Denton to go public first and that Roy was willing to go first. This does not sound like the victims came out on their own, but more like an organized plot as to who should be alleged victim 1, alleged victim 2, etc.
Diana, how would a reasonable arrangement of victims' testimonies, aimed to maximize public impact, invalidate the claims of those testimonies? This would only strengthen but not weaken the credibility of the charges.
DeleteDear Anonymous at 11:29 am,
DeleteIt lends reasonable doubt in their testimonies because each of the alleged victims spoke in the media. The media asked each of them why they suddenly decide to come out. Their testimonies are now in direct contradiction to Rohr's testimony in the media in which he openly confessed that "'we' (referring to himself and the alleged victims) did not want Denton to go public first and that Roy said that he is willing to go first."
The court won't consider what Tim Rohr is saying. How is anything relevant he published on JW? He is not part of the lawsuit filed against Apuron by atty David Lujan.
DeleteDear Anonymous at 11:55 am,
DeleteOn the contrary, Tim Rohr made himself a part of it because he admitted several times that he was the one responsible for looking for these alleged victims. The court is going to listen to both sides.
He only helped the victims to come forward. How would this make the charges less credible?
DeleteThere will be subpoenas issued for the church to hand over self-incriminating documents for the last 50 years about how sexual allegations were handled throughout the decades. This will have nothing to do with JW.
Dear Anonymous at 12:47 pm,
DeleteIf all he did was help the victims come forward, then why all the inconsistent stories?
The testimonies are consistent. This is all that counts.
DeleteDear Anonymous 2:01 pm,
DeleteNOT exactly. As I pointed out Rohr tells a different story than the alleged victims. Archbishop Apuron had claimed since the beginning that he was innocent and that he was a victim of a conspiracy to oust him out from his position. And that is what his lawyer in the Vatican is looking into and will bring forth in the canonical trial. If he is found innocent, those same evidences will be brought forth in a civil trial to prove his innocence against those allegations.
Light ON!
DeleteLOL
Diana,
ReplyDeleteJust wondering if you have noticed any Financial Reports published by the CCOG in regards to their organizations finances. According GCA(Guam Law) Title 18 this is supposed to be done annually. Maybe theyve done it but in the guampost which nobody reads anyways. Theyve been in existance since 2014 and I havnt come accross any report.
Pas!
-Jokers Wild
Dear Jokers Wild,
DeleteI have not noticed any publication of their financial report. Their actions lately have also been interesting. They have been collecting money from their members because they planned to take RMS to court. Yet, they have tried to push Archbishop Hon to take RMS to court and even went so far as to draw up papers for the Board of Directors and Board of Guarantors to sign.
Yep. They're taking the easy way out so they can keep the money their members contributed for the lawsuit, which they have been threatening for over a year.
Delete"All the Sunday protesters had to do is wait for the outcome of the canonical trial. So, why are they in a rush? Why not wait for the result of the canonical trial? What are they afraid of that they cannot wait?"
ReplyDeleteI believe they are afraid of obesity which is why they can't stop protesting.
The protestors should stop what they are doing. They are disrupting the Lord's Day and are a nuisance for the new and the old bishop alike. What business they have to take the sidewalk in from the the Cathedral? The Cathedral is for the Blessed Virgin and devotion to the Holy God. There is no more beautiful place on Guam than our Cathedral, adored by magnificent stone ornaments, colorful statues and paintings of the Holy Family.
DeletePlease, stop protesting and go home. Enjoy a good Sunday prayer with your family. You kids will truly like it. It has more value and more benefit for all good Christians, especially for your family, than shaking your fist in bitter anger whatever you are protesting against. For what?
As far as I can see from pix on JW nobody in the protest line is shaking their fist in bitter anger. They're just carrying signs. The signs tell why there protesting. They want to get rid of the archbishop.
DeleteDear Anonymous at 8:43 pm,
DeleteThey want to get rid of him without due process of the law. They already condemned him. So sad.
Maybe the protestors remember how Fr Paul and Msgr James were removed without due process of canon law.
DeleteMaybe the protestors are angry at how the archbishop condemned both priests.
Catholics don't believe in karma but if they did that could describe what's happening to the archbishop.
Or maybe it's just that the archbishop is feeling the golden rule in reverse. What the archbishop did to others is now being done unto him. Ouch.
Dear Anonymous at 10:04 pm,
DeleteActually, they were waiting for their due process in Rome. It was Archbishop Apuron who removed them and their case was filed in Rome. But for some reason, Father Paul had a difficult time contacting his canon lawyer, and I have no idea what was up with Monsignor James.
What is golden rule in reverse? Is it tooth for tooth, eye for eye? It is very Old Testament!
Delete9:41 AM Anon the golden rule says to do unto others as you would have them do unto you.
DeleteThe golden rule in reverse is others will do unto you as you have done unto them.
Diana says the protesters want to get rid of the archbishop without due process of the law.
10:04 PM said that since the archbishop didn't give the priests due process before removing them which is what canon law says he was supposed to do now the protestors want the same "no due process" to be done to him.
That is all.
This comment came from Mary Lou Garcia Pereda:
ReplyDelete"Since it sounds like there will be some new faces on the picket line on Sunday, here are a few tips …
• Maintain a distance of 6 feet between picketers as we walk in a single file.
• Keep walking and do not stop to accommodate those who want to cross our picket line.
• Focus on praying or singing without responding to those who disagree with our action.
There are people who complain (loudly enough for us to hear) that we're making it hard for them to get into the church building and there's a woman who usually tells us that we should go inside instead of marching outside.
Do not answer them.
Just keep marching."
Their demonstration is not peaceful because they're making it difficult for people to go into church. I'm not in the NCW, and it's the parishioners they are hindering from entering the church.
They call themselves Catholic yet won't even allow their "brothers and sisters" into the cathedral to worship. They are preventing people from spending time with the Lord at mass and that is wrong.
DeleteLOL Anons @12:05 PM & 3:46 PM
DeleteThese people have been protesting the 9:30 mass for 4 or 5 months now. If they were standing still and blocking the entrance to the church then they'd be "hindering" people from entering or "preventing" people from spending time with the Lord at mass. BTW this is not the only Sunday Mass available at the cathedral. If people choose to go to the 9:30 mass knowing that there are protestors then they should plan to go in the side entrance like I do when I have to be there.
FYI the demonstration is "peaceful" because the protestors aren't doing anything but praying and singing. Making it difficult to enter the church makes the demonstration INCONVENIENT but it doesn't make it "not peaceful."
Why? They want Archbishop Apuron strip from his faculty and they (CCOG,LFM etc.) want him not buried at the Cathedral when he dies. They want him not to be a priest when he dies. That is the truth..Now that is purely evil. Nazi were like that to get their Priest be in Vatican to destroy within.
DeleteBlocking the entrance is passive physical violence! What would these people do if someone wold cross their picket line? It is a situation ripe for physical abuse. Would picketers push, hit and insult this person? Very probable!
DeleteThis kind of violence must be captured on video and handed over to the police department as soon as possible. How about the unavoidable searching of bags of protestors for hidden machetes and other concealed weapons?
The greatest right the founding fathers provided us is the very right exercised to end British rule. Those who gather outside Cathedral have every right to be there just as those inside have every right to assemble. These rights are inalienable. These rights are a constant and are here when it does or does not suit you.
Delete@anonymous 9:49 Come on now! I've seen people walk through the line with nothing as much as a glance. Bags of machetes?! All they carry are signs and the deadly umbrella. I did see several old ladies carrying rosaries. Be careful they might just choke you with them. I know what concealed weapon you might be talking about! Its those old men with canes! I saw one of them do a back flip onto a car and pulled a hidden sword out of it! Don't tell anyone I told you!
DeleteThe pope is the only one who can remove Archbishop Apuron's title. Archbishop Hon went to Rome to ask Pope Francis to remove Archbishop Apuron, and his answer was NO. So, they can protest all they want. The pope is not listening to their protest. I do not know how long the canonical trial will be. If it lasts for two years, then I suppose their protest will go on for the next two years depending on the outcome of the trial.
DeleteHo hum — the Pope is not listening to the protesters. He's only listening to the archbishop. He asked for help so the Pope sent Hon. The archbishop didn't like what Hon was doing so he asked for help and got Byrnes. The protesters had absolutely NOTHING to do with these actions from Rome. The sooner they understand that the better.
DeleteRight Diana?
Dear Anonymous at 2:11 pm,
DeleteArchbishop Hon went to the Pope to remove Archbishop Apuron so his title would be removed and a successor appointed. The Pope said no, and Archbishop gets to keep his title. The NCW wrote letters of complaint telling the Pope the things Hon has been doing. Within a month, the Pope responded by giving Guam a coadjutor bishop, and Archbishop Apuron continues to keep his title. The news of the new bishop bypassed Hon, and Hon got upset. The protesters did not get what they wanted.
This all is because Pope Francis listens to those who are in communion with him. We in the NCW are in communion with the Pope, according to our Statutes and practice of the NCW. Archbishop Apuron is in communion with the Pope because he is keeping the title of the Archbishop of Agana by the expressed desire of Pope Francis. That is why Pope Francis listen to us who are in communion with him.
DeleteQuintanilla and Denton are not in communion with the Pope. They made the charges with David Lujan. JW has conspired with Tim Rohr and CCOG to arrange Quintanilla first, Denton second and not the other way around. That's it about their truthfulness. But if you are not in communion with the truth then how and you be in communion with the Pope? That is why Pope Francis is not listening to JW.
It is only Tudela who is in communion because it is an open and shut case that is ready to be settled without challenge.
When you are in no communion with the Pope, please, do not be surprised that a libel and defamation case is brought against you. Why did you say that about the Archbishop at the first place? I mean all those who disrupted Catholic life on Guam are in libelous contempt by the lack of mercy they showed upon others. It is the reversal of do good as others do onto you.
I would be surprised if Archbishop Hon is in communion with Pope Francis. I mean Hon went to Rome to remove the title of Archbishop Apuron. No wonder that Pope Francis had to say NO.
DeleteIt is the desire of the Pope that the Archbishop of Agana remains in his office! Is this so hard to digest for some? If you cannot make peace with the decision of Pope Francis then you are out of communion with him. That simple! Archbishop Hon is not there, so I wonder what on earth can he do as an archbishop who is out of communion with Rome? Now, the question of the century: should not all those who are not in communion with the Catholic faith be excommunicated?
Now everybody just grasp why we need so badly Archbishop Michael Byrnes Coadjutor from Detroit to restore communion with the Holy Spirit on Guam.
For sure for sure Hon is not in communion with the Pope. After all Hon is the secretary for the Congregation for the Evangelization of Peoples.
DeleteDear Anonymous at 5:31 pm,
DeleteThis is why we need to always pray for our bishops and priests. The devil consistently attacks them. As you can see, Archbishop Hon, Father Jeff, Father Mike, and the rest of the Presbyterian council who voted to remove Archbishop Apuron have fallen. Instead of leading the sheep to Jesus and His Gospel TEACHING, they have followed the devil in judging and condemning a man without a trial. So sad.
So would then Hon be included into the libel and defamation lawsuit against all the opponents of Apuron?! Just curious.
DeleteDiana how can the protest go on for two years? It is ridiculous for you to encourage street protests for two years. Are you aware what is happening in Portland org? Encouraging same violence on the streets of downtown Agana is failing authority of Archbishop Hon Tai Fai savo
ReplyDelete
ReplyDeleteHis name is Archbishop Hon.
He is history.
soon be leaving forever.
Forget him
Diana In a comment you used the word Conspiracy.
ReplyDeleteMy question. Is the pope aware of a conspiracy against our beloved Archbishop Apuron?
Dear Anonymous at 7:12 pm,
DeleteYes, the Pope is aware of what was happening on Guam, which was the reason a Vatican delegation was sent on January, 2015. Archbishop Apuron also had a private audience with Pope Francis. Although he told the media that he invited Pope Francis to Guam, that was not the only thing that was spoken in that private audience.
Diana you told us there is a trial of Archbishop Anthony Vatican City. is it possible this conspiracy theory against Archbishop Anthony will be the Epiphany of truth for Archbishop Anthony.
ReplyDeleteThankyou.
Hilda Ogden
Tumon.
Diana, you said that Tim stated in 2014 that he wanted to remove AB Apuron. It's no secret that Tim wanted AB Apuron removed since the removal of Monsignor James, so how can that be seen as a conspiracy?
ReplyDelete