TimJuly 23, 2017 at 5:43 AM
Most if all of the material assets "owned" by the Archdiocese of Agana have their origin somewhere in a gift. But none of that matters. The Archdiocese is being FORCED to sell these properties to settle the sex abuse cases that the neocat regime of Apuron, Quitugua, and Adrian long since knew about but tried to hide.
Correction: The Archdiocese was placed in a position to sell these properties because the Junglewatch Nation worked to pass a law, bringing in lawsuit after lawsuit after lawsuit. Do not blame this on Archbishop Apuron because he was not on island when you worked to get this law passed. How sad....that the families who generously donated their properties out of love for the Church does not matter to you.
If the Archdiocese does not sell the properties, the court will take over and sell them for the archdiocese. Gennarini foresaw this which is why he set up RMS as he did and got Apuron to convey title to the Yona property to his control in 2011.
The only thing you did was victimize the innocent parishioners who will have to pay for these lawsuits. And these include the families who generously gave the Church their properties as gifts to be used for the people of Guam. These families are probably better off having the court take over. Why? Because the court is not going to go against their own civil laws that protect the donor's intent. After everything is taken away and nothing is left, that is the legacy the Junglewatch Nation left for the innocent parishioners.
Now to address your last sentence: "Gennarini foresaw this which is why he set up RMS as he did and got Apuron to convey title to the Yona property to his control in 2011."
The FIRST person who claimed that Archbishop Apuron wanted to convey the title of the Yona property was the jungle. On November 10, 2014, Tim Rohr wrote the following in his blog:
Fr. Pius tells people that these members were fired because they were trying to sell the seminary property. The next time he says this call him a "liar". In fact, SHOUT IT. The truth is that Archbishop Apuron was attempting to convey the title to the property to RMS, a corporate entity separate from the Archdiocese of Agana and controlled by a sleazy neocat New Jersey based Board of Guarantors.The following letter from Richard J. Untalan, who was the then-president of the finance council shows that the request to convey the title to the property "on which the Seminary is located" came from Fr. Pablo Ponce Rodriguez, Rector of RMS.
Below is a screenshot of the above statement:
The evidence that Rohr used showing that Archbishop Apuron was attempting to convey the title to the property of RMS was a letter written and signed by Richard Untalan dated September 8, 2011. You can read the full letter here.
You would think that the most credible piece of evidence would be a letter written and signed by Father Pablo rather than Richard Untalan. What is baffling of all is that none of the junglefolks ever questioned why Rohr did not produced the letter from Father Pablo? Why the letter of Richard Untalan, who we all know is a member of the Junglewatch Nation and who wanted to sell the seminary? A letter from Father Pablo requesting that the title of the Yona property be conveyed to RMS would have been much more credible.
What Rohr did not tell his followers is that there NEVER was a letter from Father Pablo. The former Board of Directors of RMS have the letter of Richard Untalan, but there is NO letter from Father Pablo. Imagine the surprise from Father Pablo's face when he received Untalan's letter. He had no idea what he was talking about. So, to the Junglewatch Nation, you have already seen the letter written and signed by Richard Untalan. Now, ask Tim Rohr to produce the letter written and signed by Father Pablo.
Therefore, the truth is......the accusation that Archbishop Apuron wanted to convey the title of the Yona property to RMS was started by the jungle. It never came from the Archbishop, the NCW, or even RMS. One then has to wonder......what was the real intent of Untalan's letter? For one, we already know that his letter was used by Rohr to discredit the Archbishop.
This is not the first time Rohr has done this. I have shown you how Rohr accused the Archbishop of allowing a sex offender to work at the Dededo parish, and then use a document by the Guam Parole Board as his evidence. The document from the Guam Parole Board does not have the Archbishop's name and signature on it (See the story here).
Now you have seen how Rohr discredited Archbishop Apuron by using a letter by Richard Untalan claiming that Father Pablo requested the title to be conveyed to RMS. He never showed the letter of Father Pablo simply because there was none. Father Pablo never made such a request.