Tuesday, March 14, 2017

SNAP Implodes

Never once in my blog have I ever supported SNAP, even when they came out to support Archbishop Apuron for removing Father Paul for disobedience.  SNAP is anti-Catholic and has always worked to destroy the Catholic Church.  According to Catholic League (the bold is mine):  
“While SNAP claims that it is motivated by the interests of survivors, in fact,” the lawsuit says, “SNAP is motivated largely by the personal animus of its directors and officers against the Catholic Church.”
For example, Clohessy recommended that an alleged victim pursue a claim against the Archdiocese of Milwaukee, saying that every nickel it doesn’t have is money that can’t be spent on “defense lawyers, PR staff, gay-bashing, women-hating, contraceptive-battling, etc.” He then offered to refer the person to one of his lawyer friends.
The Catholic League is in an even better position than Hammond to identify SNAP’s hatred of the Catholic Church.
On July 8-10, 2011 SNAP held a national conference, open to the public, near the airport in Washington, D.C. There were approximately 110-130 people in attendance, all white, mostly female, aged 40-75 (mostly seniors or near seniors). They came from only a few states.
We know this, and much more, because I paid for two persons to attend the conference and report back. I subsequently published the findings online in a report, “SNAP EXPOSED: Unmasking the Survivors Network of those Abused by Priests.” Copies were sent to all the bishops.
Here is how one of our confederates summed up his experience. “The recurring theme of the conference was the evil nature of the Catholic Church. The word ‘evil’ was used repeatedly to describe ‘the institution.’ There was no presumption of innocence: accused priests were spoken of as if they were guilty, and this was true of all the speakers, including the attorneys.”
It was no surprise that Jeffrey Anderson was one of the speakers. No one has ripped off the Catholic Church more than this diminutive lawyer from Minnesota. A former hippie and recovering alcoholic, in one settlement alone he netted half a billion dollars. He once described himself as a “dedicated atheist.” His goal, he plainly admits, is to “sue the s*** out of them [the Catholic Church].” His hatred runs deep: He has sued the Vatican on several occasions, trying to hold the pope responsible for priestly misconduct from Boston to Bombay. He has never won.
Father Thomas Doyle, a Dominican, is another recovering alcoholic who has big problems with the Catholic Church. He blasted the Church for promoting “fear, power, and guilt,” saying that Constantine, not Jesus Christ, founded the Church.
Another speaker, Terence McKiernan, founder and president of BishopAccountability, told the small gathering of Catholic haters that he would like to “stick it to” New York Archbishop Timothy Dolan. He also accused him of “keeping the lid on 55 names” of predator priests. On several occasions, I personally asked McKiernan to provide me with his list of names, but he never responds. It’s a lie, and he knows it.
Richard Sipe, a former Benedictine monk, told the seniors, “The Church is corrupt,” and proceeded to make many unsupported accusations. He knew no one would challenge him because they all came to hear horror stories.
It would be a serious mistake to assume that this is just venting, idle banter coming from some malcontents. No, this is the mindset that drives SNAP to plunder the rights of priests. Take SNAP president Barbara Blaine. She has justified raids made by Belgian police on Catholic churches, and is adamant in her conviction, expressed at the conference, that while accused priests may have a legal right to countersue, they have no moral right to do so.
Clohessy was once asked about the rights of priests, and when pressed about what he means by pursuing “credibly accused” priests, he could not provide a clear answer, saying only that “there’s all kinds of criteria” determining what that means. In practice, SNAP makes no distinction between an accusation and one that has been substantiated.
The contempt that SNAP has for the rights of priests is bad enough, but it pales in significance compared to its own conspiratorial savaging of innocent priests. Take the case of  Father Joseph Jiang. SNAP accused him of sexually abusing minors.
SNAP said it knew who the victims were, but when pressed it could not name a single person. When ordered by a federal court to provide evidence, it refused to do so, resulting in sanctions. This was one reason why U.S. District Court Judge Carol E. Jackson accused SNAP of defaming Father Jiang. The Hammond lawsuit was right to seize on the judge’s ruling. 
The court declared that “it has been established that the SNAP defendants conspired with one another and others to obtain plaintiff’s conviction on sexual abuse charges and that they entered into this conspiracy due to discriminatory animus against plaintiff based on his religion, religious vocation, race and national origin.” Moreover, the court ruled that “the SNAP defendants’ public statements about plaintiff were false and that they did not conduct any inquiry into the truth or falsity of these public statements, but instead made these statements negligently and with reckless disregard for the truth.”
That’s quite an indictment. SNAP officials conspired to make false charges against an innocent priest and did so because they hate the Catholic Church.
What makes this even more sickening is the fact that when SNAP learns of real sexual abuse, it does nothing about it. To be specific, David Clohessy is quick to condemn bishops for not reporting suspected priests, yet he never called the cops in the 1990s on his priest brother, Kevin, after learning that he abused a minor. 


  1. Rohr and gang are the arm of SNAP on Guam! Everything they do in Jungle Watch, CCOG and LFM is dictated word by word by SNAP officials. Joelle Casteix is their commander-in-chief.

    They still support atty Lujan who wants to "sue the pants off" of Vatican and Pope Francis for "a 2000 years history of sexual abuse and cover-up in the Catholic Church". This is what David Lujan voiced and openly demanded in the newspapers. The Jungle group is still supporting atty Lujan, this self-admitted church renegade, standing behind him 100% without ever questioning his conduct!

    This is all SNAP business whose only parasite purpose of existence is to pillage and maraud the Catholic Church from its assets and rob its standing of respect and dignity all around the world.

  2. What Sunday picketers actually defrock is common sense only! Ha-ha...

    They only eliminate reason and logical thinking from their own minds. This is the only fruit of their tireless cooking themselves under the scorching sun. If this is what they wanted, then they must be very happy. ;(

  3. Diana the plot against the archbishop is getting more and more interesting because the v.r of the cathedral is not gonna be at the cathedral anymore father Paul Monsignor and father Jeff are continuing to take out people who knows the truth about the archbishop trying to silence people who support the archbishop

    1. Is Anonymous @ 9:43 AM the same Anonymous @ 8:47 AM from the 3/2 post "Alleged Victims Refused to Testify?" The reason I ask is because both comments have the SAME bad writing style.
      In the 3/2 post 8:47 Anonymous mentioned "the plot" (against the archbishop) and said the move of k57 to the Acanta Mall was fishy because that's where Richard Untalan had his office. I went to check out the area for k57's new station but guess what? I couldn't find Richard Untalan at Acanta Mall.
      In this post 9:43 Anonymous mentions "the plot against the archbishop" again. This time Anonymous says that the vice rector of the CB is "not gonna be at the cathedral anymore." Where does 9:43 Anonymous think Fr. Jucutan is going? To Acanta Mall with Richard Untalan?

    2. Anonymous @ 9:43 AM maybe there's no plot to worry about. Maybe Fr. MJ will be going on the pilgrimage with Fr. Edi.
      Remember: Other people were wondering about Fr. Edi and Diana said he went to a pilgrimage.
      Then AB Byrnes said Fr. Edi is on leave. Doesn't really matter if it's pilgrimage or leave.
      Maybe Fr. MJ & Fr. Edi are together and will meet up with others who are traveling.
      Maybe Fr. MJ is also on leave and he'll be coming back in Oct with Fr. Edi.

  4. I go to Church to Pray to God to say I'm grateful, not to march down the sidewalk with a sign hating their own Bishop, because of one man Tim Rohr, if you want to call him a man, that so-called man causing a lot of division in the Church with all his lies,lies, lies,maybe the way needs to protest!!!

    1. The NCW will never protest. We are taught to take the position of Christ. Which is to always tell the truth, but when push comes to shove allow the enemy to kill us as Christ did.

    2. Yes you did. You all bragged about a letter writing campaign to protest Archbishop Hon's efforts.

      I hope you still have ink in you pens after this weekend. You may want to also make some signs. And no, it will not be persecution, but you all will twist the story like always.

    3. Dear Anonymous at 9:45 am,

      Letter writing is not a form of protest. The letters we wrote were letters of complaint, informing the Vatican of Archbishop Hon's actions. Protests include public demonstrations, sit-in, boycotts, and petitions. But letter writing does not fall in that category.

    4. Even Archbishop Byrnes recognized that even though the picketers are carrying anti-Apuron signs that they are PRAYING as they walk.
      I asked if they are praying for what their signs say.
      Some said yes they want Apuron out.
      Others said they're praying to be able to accept whatever God's will is.
      They said that if God wants Apuron to return they're asking God to help them accept his will without complaining.
      If God wants Apuron to retire they're asking God to help them to accept it without telling their Neo family members I told you so.

  5. Anonymous 2:PM ''EXACTLY''

  6. This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

    1. Dear Anonymous at 12:49 pm,

      That is not a moratorium. The NCW can still celebrate the Eucharist in small communities in accordance with what Archbishop Byrnes laid out. So, we can still have our Eucharist celebration. See the weblink below:


    2. Diana @4:19 is correct. NCW communities can still celebrate the Eucharist in small communities at whichever parish they are connected--they just need to work with the pastor to set the schedule. Of course, they will also have to conform to the norms set by AB Byrnes as well.

    3. Diana @ 4:19 PM: The definition of MORATORIUM is "a suspension or temporary prohibition of an activity."
      Sure you can have your small community Eucharist BUT "Pause"= MORATORIUM because NO NEW COMMUNITIES CAN BE FORMED.
      Get it? Roger-Dodger. Over and Out.

    4. Dear Anonymous at 6:50 am,

      Archbishop Byrnes did not suspend the catechesis. He PAUSED it. Got it? Roger-Dodger. Over and Out.

    5. Ha-ha, anon 6:50 am, it is your bitter-sweet awakening that you still cannot make any impact on the the way we celebrate Eucharist in our communities. We will be more powerful than ever because your demagoguery has been defused. The seminary won't be closed and the NCW will continue flourishing on Guam! Now, live with that assuarnce in your mind, my friend.

  7. Diana, is it possible to maintain our way of receiving

    1. Dear anonymous @1:17PM--
      I am not Diana, but here is what the letter states regarding communion:following the general instruction of the Roman Missal related to the communion:
      "The priest is to consume the body and blood of Christ as soon as he says the respective prayers, and he must do so prior to distributing to communicants. The communicants also must consume the body and blood of Christ as soon as the host or the chalice is placed in their hands. There is to be no delay."
      So, I would think you cannot.
      UNLESS you can produce the document that gives the approval from the Pope. Can you?

    2. Dear anon at 8:18 pm, is this your compulsion to interfere with other people's conversation? Nobody truly asked you because it is none of your business how we respond to the challenge. The only thing you are able to "produce" is your incessant hatred and contempt for Christ. Lol!

      Yes, it is definitely possible to maintain what we do! Our way of receiving the Eucharist is

      1. under two species and
      2. the bread is real one, baked before the Eucharistic celebration.

      This would never going to change, like or not! ;)

  8. Church in Guam ever have this Kind of problems before Tim Rohr came to the island???

    1. FYI Anonymous @ 3:01 PM: Tim Rohr did not create "this Kind of problems" in the Church.
      Until July 2013 Tim Rohr was the person who always spoke out for Archbishop Apuron and the Church.
      People were complaining privately about the division in the Church.
      Archbishop Apuron proved the rumors of a division in the Church were true in January 2006 when he went on KOLG with Pale Mike & Fred Rodrigues. Tim knew what Apuron did but did not write about it until 8 years later.
      Archbishop Apuron threatened 3 Filipino priests in 2008. People were complaining privately about it. And then a small group protested and made Apuron mad. Tim knew but did not write about it until 6 years later.
      Archbishop Apuron tried to get rid of Fr. Paul in July 2013. People were complaining privately about it. But this time Tim started writing about it on Junglewatch.
      Tim Rohr started Junglewatch in 2010 but that year he only posted 6 times. Same thing in 2011 & 2012: 6 posts.
      But in July 2013 he started to use Junglewatch to keep the facts straight. There were lots of rumors floating around and Tim separated fact (Fr. Paul was locked out of his room) from fiction (Fr. Paul was leaving island). And of the 213 posts in 2013 I'm sure most of them came AFTER Fr. Paul was removed.
      NCW wasn't even mentioned on the blog until after Patty Arroyo asked if there was a connection between Apuron getting rid of Fr. Paul & the NCW.
      After the Apuron-NCW Connection was made things got so bad that Apuron even asked Fr. Paul to have Tim Rohr "cool it."

      So the short answer to your question is: TIM ROHR DID NOT START THE PROBLEMS OF THE CHURCH IN GUAM. APURON DID.

      PS-If Apuron left Fr. Paul & Msgr. James alone he'd still be here, the Invitation to Joy would still be going on, RMS would still have the Yona property and all would have been hunky dory. All the complaining about the NCW would have been private.

    2. 3:01 pm:
      Actually, no. Where are local people are not known to be publicly rebellious, he is aggressive and relentless when it comes to the Catholic Religion. Tim Rohr calls out and brings attention to anything that he sees as being contrary to its teachings---inclusive of its leaders and any practices. Aside from this whole NCW battle, I recall very clearly his fights against abortion,
      and same sex unions.

    3. Dear Anonymous at 6:41 am,

      You stated: "PS-If Apuron left Fr. Paul & Msgr. James alone he'd still be here, the Invitation to Joy would still be going on, RMS would still have the Yona property and all would have been hunky dory. All the complaining about the NCW would have been private."

      This sounds more like blackmail. You say this with such certainty as though you knew for certain that the four alleged victims would not even come out at all. You say this with so much certainty as though everything that has happened was controlled and planned.

      Furthermore, let us not forget that what Father Paul did was the same thing Archbishop Apuron told him to do regarding the sex offender. Now that Father Paul is in a higher position being the rector of the Cathedral, he suddenly have no problems keeping people like Joseph Lastimosa who repented from doing any volunteer work of any kind at the Cathedral.

    4. Anonymous 6:41 Am is that you Tim, again on Diana Blog?

    5. 6:41 here and I'm not Tim Rohr. I've met the man a couple of times at the Legislature. And I remember seeing him on TV supporting Apuron about anti-casino, anti-same sex marriage, etc. This was before a friend introduced me to his Junglewatch blog.
      Once I discovered Junglewatch, I would read everything that had to do with Fr. Paul.
      From what I can see myself and from what people have told me Tim Rohr isn't the kind of person who acts and writes anonymously like me and the rest of us here and in Junglewatch.

      Funny that Diana @ 7:58 AM thinks my PS "sounds more like BLACKMAIL" because I think Apuron's sexual past is what opened the door to the NCW because they're the ones who BLACKMAILED Apuron. What I said was that if Apuron had left both priests alone, NONE of these things (ESPECIALLY THE REVELATIONS OF APURON'S SEXUAL ABUSIVE BEHAVIOR) WOULD HAVE EVER HAPPENED!!
      Since Hindsight is 20/20 I'm pretty sure Apuron would have left the priests where they were if he could relive 2013 & 2014 and he'd still be here today.

    6. Let me see, Church Property, might be up for sale, fake victims paid off,real estate man Tim Rohr, nice Commission? like he said a easily 40 million,yeah a nice Commission, Apuron sexual past opened the doors??? more like all the lies the jungle started, and he would not left not only a Rapist but murderous on Church grounds,would you ever let that happen Anonymous 4:53 PM

    7. Anonymous @ 2:14 AM, records show that Apuron himself had allowed that very same person you refer to as "a Rapist but murderous" to work at Sta. Barbara in March 1999 5 years before Fr. Paul was ordained. A copy of the parole document can be seen on Junglewatch. Please explain WHY Apuron approved of the man being on Church grounds in 1999, fresh out of prison but not in 2013 after living quietly and with a family 14 years later?!? He was much more dangerous in 1999 than in 2013.

      Apuron's sexual past definitely opened the doors. Junglewatch started in 2010 with 6 posts. 2011 had 6 posts. 2012 had 6 posts. Most of the posts were on the topics of same-sex marriage, abortion and other current events issue.
      As a matter of fact before the very first post on the Fr. Paul controversy there were 11 posts in 2013 including a July 16 post on Trayvon Martin. Fr. Paul wasn't mentioned until Tim Rohr posted the July 23 PNC TV report on Apuron's removal.
      Tim Rohr did not write the first post "The Chancery V Gofigan" as a way of documenting the local controversy until July 25. But Tim Rohr did not only write about "Chancery V Gofigan" in 2013. He also wrote about Obamacare, married priests & the local ordination of Anglican convert Fr. Richard Rojas, Miley Cyrus & pornography, homosexuality in the Church, MLK & Kennedys, non-NCW-related liturgical abuses, Guam as a Divorce Mill, etc. etc
      As a matter of fact the first mention of the NCW didn't come up until August. And at the end of August there was a short post that read:
      "TO BE CLEAR! A copy of my response to a comment implying that this blog is "an arena of persecution" of the Neo-Catechumenal Way: JungleWatch is not concerned with the NCW. IT IS concerned with the liberty of its clerics who feel free to rewrite the catechism to justify their aims. IT IS concerned with the liberty of clerics who feel free to disregard instructional norms from Rome (I have it on record). IT IS concerned with clerics who feel their authority trumps canon law."

      Of the 213 posts of 2013 it's clear that Junglewatch did not only focus on Chancery (Apuron) V Gofigan since Tim Rohr continued to post on other issues. But even Tim Rohr had to admit that suddenly his blog was receiving more hits in 2013 than in the past 3 years when he posted:
      "Today is September 15. Two months ago, on July 15, one day before Fr. Paul Gofigan was handed a letter demanding his resignation as pastor of Santa Barbara Parish, this blog had a total of 345 page views over the course of two years since it was begun.
      Today it has 19, 246.
      In those two months I have, as before, posted my views on a variety of issues. However, I'd be fooling myself if I thought people were suddenly interested, at the rate of 315 views per day, in anything other than the Chancery vs Gofigan affair and its tangential issues."

      Apuron shot himself in the foot when he removed Fr. Paul in July 2013. If he had not done that there would be no "Chancery V Gofigan" posts to attract readers to Junglewatch. Tim Rohr would have continued to post his views on current events or moral issues like abortion. Nobody would be reading Tim Rohr's blog. Tim heard stories about "Apuron & the Agat Boys" even while he was Apuron's PR guy. But Tim Rohr never said anything.
      If Apuron had not taken action against Fr. Paul none of Apuron's sexual abuse victims would have ever come forward.