First, Tim Rohr says that the canonical trial is NOT about the sexual allegations. Now, he is saying that there is no canonical trial. And you still swallow everything he says even when he offered no substantial evidence. Both Archbishop Hon and Archbishop Byrnes stated that there is a canonical trial. In fact, Archbishop Byrnes said that the canonical trial is on its second phase. So, Is Tim Rohr's saying that both Hon and Byrnes are lying about the canonical trial???? Go back and ask Tim Rohr's to produce substantial evidence that there is no canonical trial since that is now his stance.
By the way, Archbishop Apuron already gave the evidence to the Vatican lawyer defending him in Rome. He does not have to be in Rome just as the accusers do not have to be there to testify. The Vatican already collected all the evidence including from the accusers who willingly and openly spoke to the media.
I hope Christ can be born in us all so he may give us the grace to love our enemies in the truth.
ReplyDeleteHAVE A VERY MERRY CHRISTMAS......LADY DIANA o<:))
ReplyDeleteMerry Christmas from our community to yours.
ReplyDeleteJoy.
Please let us not forget Saint Joseph; a model for fathers who was first afraid but said yes to the Lord.
ReplyDeleteand Mary who first did not understand but also said YES to the Lord.
Where will all the children be if their parents did not say Yes to the Lord?
He's not in Rome defending himself at his canonical trial because there's isn't one.
ReplyDeleteDear Anonymous at 12:21 pm,
DeleteFirst, Tim Rohr says that the canonical trial is NOT about the sexual allegations. Now, he is saying that there is no canonical trial. And you still swallow everything he says even when he offered no substantial evidence. Both Archbishop Hon and Archbishop Byrnes stated that there is a canonical trial. In fact, Archbishop Byrnes said that the canonical trial is on its second phase. So, Is Tim Rohr's saying that both Hon and Byrnes are lying about the canonical trial???? Go back and ask Tim Rohr's to produce substantial evidence that there is no canonical trial since that is now his stance.
By the way, Archbishop Apuron already gave the evidence to the Vatican lawyer defending him in Rome. He does not have to be in Rome just as the accusers do not have to be there to testify. The Vatican already collected all the evidence including from the accusers who willingly and openly spoke to the media.
Thank you, Diana for clarification.
DeleteIt was you Diana who said he was in Rome. Now you change your tune, because AAA was spotted in the Bay area.
ReplyDeleteDear Anonymous at 5:32 pm,
DeleteAt that time, I knew he was in Rome. However, I do not stalk the Archbishop by checking the airlines every now and then.