Friday, July 7, 2017

The Year Of Reparation

Related imageThe year of reparation opened on July 6th with a Mass at the Agana Cathedral. Unfortunately, it went off with a very bad start.  Criticizing and judging another Bishop is not the way to start a year of reparation.  

Judging others is something we are all guilty of. However, the important thing is reconciliation.  Christ favored reconciliation above all else that he told his disciples to leave their gifts at the altar and go first to reconcile with their brothers (Matthew 5:23-24).  Christ instituted the sacrament of reconciliation because He knew that we would fall into sin.  The first step to reconciliation is to recognize our sins.  As we continue our walk, it gets easier to recognize when we have judged others. Before, we could not differentiate the difference between our personal opinions and an unfair judgement against a person.  

Let us take, for example, some of the people who run late for the celebration of the Word and preparation in the NCW communities.  Speaking from experience, even a small thing as tardiness can get some impatient people so frustrated to the point of making judgments against them.  Of course, these are small judgments....... but personal judgments, nonetheless.   
   
A personal opinion would be "there is no excuse for anyone being late for preparation."  This is a personal opinion. It is definitely not a factual statement because some can cite valid excuses for being late.  Also, the statement does not specifically target the latecomers by name because it is addressed to everyone.  

An unfair judgment against a person would be "Jane does not care that she is always late.  If she did care about us, she would be on time."  This is a judgment against Jane because the person is saying that Jane is inconsiderate and uncaring. The statement attacks the person's character rather than the tardiness. When we unfairly judge a brother or sister, we personally ask his/her forgiveness so that we can be reconciled with them. This is the Christian thing to do. 

Both the picketers and Archbishop Hon made the mistake of judging Archbishop Apuron without due process of the law. What would Christ have done as the Good Shepherd?  He would teach the picketers and Archbishop Hon not to judge others.  How do we know that He would do this?  Because that is what He taught His disciples (Matthew 7:1-2).  

Unfortunately, rather than teaching the sheep not to judge, Archbishop Hon followed in their footsteps as he went to Rome to convince the Pope to remove Archbishop Apuron's title and appoint someone else to take his place. Archbishop Hon was so focused on removing Archbishop Apuron that he was blind to see what the jungle was actually doing behind his back as they worked to lift the statutes of limitations in the Guam Legislature.  Apparently, he only learned about the bill when he was in Rome. And it was already too late when he issued a message from Rome to the Guam clergy to oppose the legislation. The bill had already passed.     

Pope Francis, on the other hand, taught that we are to pray for others instead of judging them.  According to Vatican Radio:

Pray for others instead of judging them
 We see that the Lord gets "a little 'get angry here," said the Pope.  He calls us hypocrites when we put ourselves "in God's place."  This, he added, is what the serpent persuaded Adam and Eve to do: "If you eat this, you'll be like Him." They, he stressed, "wanted to take the place of God.":
"For this, being judgmental is very ugly.  Judgment belongs only to God, to Him alone!" the Pope exclaimed.  It is for us to "love," to "understand, to pray for others when we see things that are not good" said the Pope, inviting us to talk kindly to others so that they may learn from their mistakes: "But never judge.  Never. And this is hypocrisy, if we judge." 
Why is it hypocrisy?  Because we have all made judgments against others. All have sinned.  Priests and bishops are not immune to judging others.  According to the Pacific Daily News: 
Archbishop Michael Jude Byrnes said Thursday he doesn't think Archbishop Anthony S. Apuron will ever be able to successfully return to Guam as the leader of the church.
"I think it would be a disaster if Archbishop Apuron were to return as bishop of record," Byrnes said during a news conference Thursday.
"That's my opinion, my estimation.  It's based on nothing that I heard of from Rome but sincerely from my own experience," Byrnes said.    
The above is not a personal opinion.  It was a judgment by a Bishop against a brother Bishop. There was a time when I had also judged the Apostle Peter of being an unfit leader (see my post here).  If I had a choice, I would have picked the Apostle John to be the leader. Why? Because Peter denied Christ three times and John was at the foot of the cross when Christ was dying.  John was there beside Christ as He died and Peter was nowhere.  However, it was Peter whom God chose to be the Vicar of Christ.  It was God who saw that Peter was fit enough to be the leader of the Church, and who am I to question God's judgment and choice?    

Archbishop Apuron has family, friends, relatives, and many supporters on Guam. This judgment does not sit well with his family, friends, relatives and supporters. The year of reparation started out with a judgement, and judgments do not bring healing and reparation to the Church.  It does not bring reconciliation.

78 comments:

  1. You're right that everyone makes judgments. AB Apuron also made judgments. I remember he falsely judged Fr. Paul. AB Apuron called Fr. Paul into his office and apologized to him. When we know that our judgments has hurt someone, the Christian thing to do is to apologize. Whether the person accepts or rejects our apology becomes the person's problem cuz Christ told us to forgive. Fr. Paul didn't forgive AB Apuron cuz he wanted a written apology. News report stated:

    "And although Father Paul says the Archbishop apologized to him, he says it wasn’t enough. 23

    “He did apologize but I’m looking more for a written letter of apology because also of the fact that I’ve been blacklisted especially in the states,” says Father Paul."

    http://pacificnewscenter.com/video-father-paul-say-archbishop-apologized-but-not-in-writing-so-he-will-move-forward-with-defamation-suit/

    AB Apuron made a personal and private apology when he realized he was wrong while Fr. Paul was the one who went public about the apology in the media. Personally, a bishop who admits his faults and apologize for his wrongdoing shows a good example as a leader. Not everyone has the humility or courage to ask for forgiveness.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Abp Byrnes is also a sinner. As we all are. All of us fall short, there is none righteous of humankind. Therefore how can you judge others? Apb Byrnes fell into the same trap as most, he assumed he is guiltless. It is a grave pitfall. Then he pushed the guilt on Apb Apuron and his family. Especially his family who did not even do anything. Why to judge them?

      The right thing for Apb Byrnes would have been to be humble in the name of the Lord. At His name every knee has to bend, even the knee of kings. Then you admit your sin, admit guilt. Admit that you are a sinner. We are nothing but two scoops of ash mixed with three scoops of sin! Admit that you are nothing but five scoops for a miserable man!

      Making a judgment is already bad enough. Who are you to speak like that?! Who do you think you are? Are you better? When you judge yourself better than others, that is the worst kind of judgment. The worst kind of hypocrisy. The worst kind of pride. You are nothing, but a sinner. I admit I am sinner. So you are no better, we are all sinners because of that! You should have listened to the Lord more carefully not to dive into that pitfall!

      Delete
    2. To lighten up the conversation let me recall the character of Steve Urkel from Family Matters who routinely ruined the whole kitchen, living room, etc. of the house he visited by awkwardly falling hard on everything breakable. No surprise, everything broke...

      Then he looked around over the ruins curiously saying, "Oops! Did I do th-a-a-at?!" with a crazy smile on his face. What would you have done?

      Well, you see the point. An apology is simply not always sufficient.

      Delete
    3. That's why we believe in Purgatory. Purgatory is the cleansing of sins. But it's also a temporal punishment for sins that are already forgiven.

      Delete
    4. Dear anon at 9:18 am, honestly speaking, I have no idea what you are talking about. Archbishop Michael is a very humble person, even as an Archbishop he is very modest and outgoing.

      You call Archbishop Michael a sinner. This is judgment. You cannot make a judgment like that on a sitting Archbishop. The neo is teaching that everybody is a sinner. This is wrong. You downgrade the saints, downgrade the religious. Only God knows who is a sinner and who is not.

      Archbishop Michael did not say he is better than you and me. He said the management of diocese resources and patrimonies has improved since Apuron was suspended. The financial discipline and oversight has improved. Accountability has improved. It is normal when you have a a bishop of record who is also a good governor of church matters.

      Delete
    5. Dear anon, you are nose diving into pitfall. You are the one who call Archbishop Byrnes a hypocrite of worst kind. It is a misjudgement.

      Delete
    6. Dear Anonymous at 2:48 pm and 2:50 pm,

      Anonymous 9:18 am also said that we are all sinners. Archbishop Byrnes is included. That is not a judgement. That is the truth.

      Delete
    7. Diana you cannot state the truth. Only God can. Only God knows who is a sinner and who is not. Under Archbishop Byrnes the money matters of the church had improved. Do you deny that?

      Delete
    8. Diana, I agree that all people in the neo are sinners. It is what you volunteer to be by open admission and free testimony.

      However, the Catholic Church teaches otherwise. You are a potential sinner by original sin. But once you are baptized, you can overcome temptation and resist sin. This is the teaching of saints and doctors of the church.

      It is only God who can say who is a sinner and who is not.

      Delete
  2. Archbishop Byrnes says in his press conference that hes basically met with everyone, or that his view is the same as the majority.
    ??????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????
    What he needs to do is come out of the chancery and meet with the real people. Hes been surrounded by none other than those who are biased and hate Archbishop Anthony.
    I received an invitation for a Hike up Mt. Lamlam with Archbishop Byrnes recently. Who was inviting? Not Archbishop Byrnes, suspiciously it was from one of Rors daughters.
    We are far from peace and more is about to go down especially with the new delegate to the NCW.

    Pas!
    -Jokers Wild

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Jokers Wild, I'll bite: Who is the new delegate to the NCW?

      BTW: I also received the "invitation" to the Mt. Lamlam Hike. It was on Facebook so hundreds of people were "invited" so it wasn't an exclusive invitation. I couldn't make it because I had another event already scheduled but do you really think there was a vetting process to keep out NCW members from joining the hike?

      Delete
    2. Do you really think that Archbishop Byrnes isolates himself in the Chancery and doesn't "meet with real people"? Consider this:

      Archbishop Byrnes drives himself to events like fiestas using some app on his phone to get to his destination. He travels alone and is easily accessible to the people. He is open to meeting members of his flock. Brother Tony always had a driver and entourage to surround him and only allowed certain people access to him.

      Archbishop Byrnes started his "Updating the Faithful" series to let his flock know what is going on in the Archdiocese. He introduced the Taskforce for the Protection of Minors, revealed the needs of Catholic Social Services, introduced the new leaders of Kamalen Karidad and announced the Year of Reparation through the series. He has invited the media up to the Chancery and he answers questions from them without first requiring that the questions be submitted in writing. When was the last time Brother Tony opened himself to the media? He usually provided a recorded message for the media to air but he would never expose himself to direct contact with them. When the media approached him (even before the sexual abuse allegations came out) he turned and almost ran the other way.

      Archbishop Byrnes is open to having people visit him at the Chancery. I know people and groups who have had appointments with him to discuss their concerns. I was one of many who tried to see Brother Tony back in 2013 to ask him to restore Fr. Paul Gofigan to Dededo. At first I was told he was on the phone and I needed to wait. After 45 minutes I was told that he was not in the office. I never did get to see Brother Tony at the Chancery and I could never get anywhere near him at fiestas.

      In the 7 months that Archbishop Byrnes has been on island I've been able to encounter and interact with him in person on 3 separate times. That's not something I can say about Brother Tony even in the past 7 years prior to his leaving the island. So when it comes to meeting "with the real people" it looks like Archbishop Byrnes has done much better than Brother Tony who surrounded himself with his NCW brothers and sisters who hate anyone who is not walking Thee Way.

      Delete
    3. Dear Just Wondering,

      Archbishop Apuron is NOT Archbishop Byrnes. Archbishop Apuron is a very shy individual. That is his struggle. Nevertheless, it is still wrong to judge a brother Bishop without knowing his side of the story. For every story, there are two sides.

      Delete
    4. The reason he does that is because it's not about him but Byrnes just makes be about him and only him archbishop Anthony follows god Byrnes just follows his will and only his will

      Delete
    5. let me respond to Anon@11:18

      I ever said that the Hike was exclusive. I was pointing attention to the one doing the inviting. I also never said anything about who was being invited, whether they were NCW or not, it wasnt important. Stop twisting shyt!

      Guam is small. You already know who is the delegate to the NCW, dont ask. All I can say is that no one can be trusted at the Chancery with information. My source, a woman, is not even an NCW member.

      Pas!
      -Jokers Wild

      Delete

  3. year of reparation began with a bad start. Archdiocese further divided. Junglewatch nation divided. Support for Archbishop Anthony grew.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. "Junglewatch nation divided. Support for Archbishop Anthony grew."

      How is this bad?!

      Delete
    2. Reparation can't start unless canonical trial is over.

      Delete
  4. The phrase "If you have nothing good to say about someone, then it's best to say nothing at all" applies here. Yea, Apuron has family here. I wouldn't blame them for not showing up at the year of the reparation mass after what's been said about their family. The jungle and the media is having a field day of the word "DISASTER" mentioned by Byrnes in reference to Apuron.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. This saying applied to the dead at funerals. Lol.

      Delete

    2. Internal conflict within Jungle. Supporters defected supporting Archbishop Apuron suggesting a possible cou against him.

      Delete
  5. Diana, you keep silent about how Archbishop Hon justified his action. He talked publicly about Apuron's refusal to obey the Holy See.

    There was a mismanagement of a significant donation by restricting its use for NCW purposes. This was against the will of the benefactor. There was financial mismanagement of diocese resources to fund the RMS budget. Apuron refused to rescind the deed restriction without litigation as requested by Rome.

    These are facts, dear Diana.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Dear Anonymous at 8:47 am,

      First of all, I did no such thing.

      Secondly, Please stick to the OP. The title of this OP is the year of reparation, which has started out very badly.

      Finally, any deviation away from the OP will not be published. The purpose is to discuss the post.

      Delete
    2. Diana, you stated in your OP that it is a very bad start for reparation. I do not think so. You have to be forthcoming and factual with your support or opposition to the return of Archbishop Apuron. Archbishop Byrnes was just like that. It is very good start because it initiates an honest discourse.

      Delete
    3. Dear Anonymous at 7:51 pm,

      What you call factual, Archbishop Byrnes call his own opinion. When a person has a judgement against someone, the proper course of action is to approach that person privately and discuss the issue with him so that together, they can resolve it and come to a reconciliation. Publishing your two cents to the media about the person behind his back without hearing his side of the story is not going to bring reconciliation or reparation.

      Delete
    4. Archbishop Michael's opinion is based on facts. It is a fact that the money matters of the diocese were in a ruinous state when he arrived and took over the church. It is not a personal or private matter. It is a matter of transparency according to church policies.

      Diana, the truth is that you want to tell Archbishop Michael what to do and how to proceed with church business. You want to reduce church policy into private business. This is an error. Are you not way too assumptuous?

      Delete
    5. Dear Anonymous at 10:05 pm,

      Opinions are NOT facts nor based on facts.. That is why they are called "opinions." This has nothing to do with Church policies. Judging a brother Bishop on the first day of the year of reparation is not a very prudent thing to do. Judgments do not bring reparations or healing.

      Delete
  6. Diana, it is you who judge Archbishop Michael by accusing him to judge Apuron. He did not judge Apuron or Apuron's family. Archbishop Michael talked about the potential return of Apuron and not Apuron himself. This makes a huge difference!

    How would it be a disaster if Apuron would become the bishop of record again? First and foremost, financially. It is not a judgment on Apuron but on the financial situation of the diocese. Conflict resolution would instantly collapse. Parishioners would not be willing to support a recurring ruinous agenda. The collection basket would empty out again.

    The blatant financial mismanagement associated with the seminary would continue. This would deplete the scarce financial resources of the diocese at a time when civil lawsuits and settlements may eat up a big chunk of church possessions. Parishes will have to be combined, reduced or closed altogether.

    A diocese needs a responsible governor of church resources, especially at a time of financial crisis. This governor must be fit. Deeming someone unfit for a job, based on past performance, is not a judgment of this person's abilities but a recognition of facts. This was what Archbishop Michael told us.

    I hope you have the courage to go into candid discussion of the merits and demerits of the bishop of record that be.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Dear Anonymous at 9:02 am,

      The purpose of the press release was to give an update of the canonical trial of Archbishop Apuron. Archbishop Byrnes went beyond that. He gave what he erroneously believed to be his opinion or his own estimation of Archbishop Apuron's return. It was a judgment against a brother Bishop.

      From what I heard, there is now growing support of Archbishop Apuron. The Junglewatch nation, CCOG, and LFM have held three meetings as a result of their decreasing numbers. Furthermore, they do not represent the majority of Catholics.

      Delete
    2. Diana, Archbishop Michael made a hard decision to give up his position on the mainland and come here to Guam. He was promised a significant job. He is the bishop of record in Agana. He has the right to insist to his position. Even if Apuron is exonerated from abuse charges by Vatican, he may be restricted in restoring his full power on Guam. He should not be the bishop of record again. This is a completely appropriate message.

      Delete
    3. Dear Anonymous at 9:41 am,

      From what I understand, an Archbishop is obligated to obey the Pope. Also, the Pope made Archbishop Byrnes the coadjutor Archbishop until Archbishop Apuron is removed, has resigned, or retired. Judging a brother bishop is inappropriate especially if the goal is to bring about reparation.

      Delete
    4. Please explain how Archbishop Michael have judged Apuron? I do not see judgment here. Where there is no sentence, judgment cannot be either. There is no sentence over Apuron and Archbishop Michael did not suggest any sentence over him. So how can you say Archbishop Michael judged Apuron?

      Delete
    5. @ Anon. 10:04 am, look at the HEADLINES in the media!

      Delete
    6. Anon @ 10:37 AM the HEADLINES sell the papers so they will use the most inflammatory words possible to move their product.

      Delete
    7. The headlines were not written by Archbishop Michael. If you don't like the headlines, you may sue the newspapers. Archbishop Byrnes did not judge Apuron. He did not talk about Apuron but about his return as bishop of record of Agana. He warned about the mess that would ensue once a previous leader with unchanged habits returns to full power. This would be dangerous for Vatican and disastrous for us under the present volatile situation on Guam.

      Delete
    8. The only ones who caused all the disaster was the jungle. Apuron had nothing to do with the public law.

      Delete
    9. Financial mismanagement at the diocese, as evidenced for the past decade, has nothing to do with the public law.

      Delete
    10. Dear Anonymous at 2:37 pm,

      In a way it does. This 4 year controversy started with the removal of 2 priests. Monsignor James was removed for financial mismanagement. The historical timeline I published showed that the jungle was looking for ways to remove Archbishop Apuron after Monsignor James was removed. The first one to accuse him of sexual abuse was not Roy Quintanilla. It was John Toves.

      Delete
  7. Archbishop Byrnes should stop listening to Tim Rohr. His agenda is dividing this Archdiocese.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Rohr is out of the circles of Archbishop Michael.

      Delete
    2. No he's not because a few weeks ago he had a meeting with him so stop your lies and tell Timmy to stay out of the churches business

      Delete
    3. AB Byrnes should stop listening to Tim Rohr. The idea that it would be a DISASTER if AB Apuron were to return can only come from Tim Rohr. That's what Rohr has been saying in his blog.

      Delete
    4. Arch Michael has his own mind. It might be scary for you but he does think for himself. He is also in hot line with Vatican sources who tell him the dangers of the situation.

      Delete
    5. Rohr is problem in Guam.
      He divided our church.
      Pit friends against friends.

      Delete
    6. Rohr buying Byrnes to promote himself.

      Delete
  8. So he can't judge but u could? As always, u say that most of the accusers are lying. It's okay for u to judge but it's not okay for others to do so?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Dear Vince D.,

      Where did I say that??? I have always called them "alleged" victims, and their accusations are "allegations."

      Delete
    2. Diana you stated Archbishop Michael judged Apuron!

      Delete
  9. let me tell you a song and its from bryan adams and its called everything i do and what it says i would do it for it for you and if we take martyrdom for a life to spread the good news to the people we would happily take the martyrdom then be somebody who doesnt

    ReplyDelete
  10. But why are you so diffensive about ur bishop?

    ReplyDelete
  11. July 6th 2017 Archdiocese split into fractions. NCW can live side by side with traditional catholics of Guam. Those feeding division ones who need to go.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Nobody will go. We are living on an island. We all belong to this island. Nobody can force anyone to go from their home and from their belief. We have to learn to live together as faithful Catholics and of Guam accept the other as such.

      Delete

  12. Think deeply,speak gently,love much,laugh often,work hard,give freely,and be kind. Archbishop Apuron not guilty. Evidence incomplete.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. We are not talking about guilt at this point. We are talking about the financial ruins the diocese has to face because of the sins of the past. We cannot go back there ever again!

      Delete
    2. "Brood of vipers!" Who said that? The Bible teaches that you have to say things as they are. Jesus is not the meek and mild guy you think He is. Jesus is a role model for people to stand up and tell it into your face! Be straightforward in condemning bad behavior so people have a chance to improve their morals. Let your light shine before others! Get a clue from Matthew 12:34 and 5:16.

      Delete
    3. Dear Anonymous at 3:03 pm,

      Sins of the past? And who did you think was responsible for the public law today? Who introduced and worked to get this law passed in order to take away all the assets of the Church? Who lifted the statutes of limitations? Who made it possible for anyone to sue the dead? If that law did not exist today, no lawsuit can be brought forth.

      Delete
    4. Diana, the sins of the past existed even before the statutes of limitation were lifted.

      Delete
    5. Dear Anonymous at 10:21 pm,

      How would you know for certain when the lawsuit opened up the door for scammers to take millions of dollars from the church. How can anyone know who are the real victims and the scammers when there are no investigations and only settlements? There are people coming out suing the dead whose past records were unblemished. You even have people who were NOT altar servers coming out suing the Church. This controversy started with the removal of 2 priests.

      Delete
    6. Diana, why did not you publish my reference to Bruillard? He admitted wrongdoing. He talked about sins of the past that existed even before the statutes of limitation were lifted.

      Delete
    7. Dear Anonymous at 2:34 pm,

      Yours must be one of the comments I accidentally deleted. So many comments are coming in under this topic, and some of them have nothing to do with the OP.

      Delete
  13. Dear Diana, there is a difference between judging someone and making judgments on a situation.

    AB Byrnes clearly said that he was not judging Apuron, but rather making judgments on how to bring the division in the church to an end. His assessment was that Apuron's presence would make it impossibly hard to reconcile the divisions in the church - and that would be a disaster.

    He even said that it didn't matter whether Apuron was found guilty or not, but because of the mess in the Archdiocese, it would be very bad for him to return.

    So stop being so precious and prejudiced against him and give him a chance to sort things out. He's doing a pretty good job so far, don't you think?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Dear Anonymous at 1:45 pm,

      In other words, you are saying that all the financial mess in the Archdiocese is all Archbishop Apuron's fault. (Never mind the fact that there is evidence showing that Monsignor James misuse the cemetery funds for his personal use.). This is no different than Tim blaming the suicide, abortion, and divorce rate on the Archbishop for the past 30 years. The truth is the whole controversy started with the removal of two priests four years ago. And how would Archbishop Byrnes know that the presence of Archbishop Apuron would cause a disaster? Archbishop Apuron is a son of Guam. This is his home, and some of his family members are here.

      Delete
    2. Dear Diana, the financial mess and ruinous oversight of church resources is well documented. There had been serious issues of audit under Apuron. Who is responsible for the finances if not the number one leader of the archdiocese? He was governing of church matters. He cannot blame the disorder of accountability on Msgr James or any other priest. He was the boss. He did not do a good job. It is not a judgment, it is a fact witnessed by innumerable evidence.

      Delete
    3. Dear Anonymous at 3:09 pm,

      Based on the evidence that Jackie Terlaje shared with the media, I did not see Archbishop Apuron's signature on all the credit card charges made by Monsignor James on all those 5 star hotels he stayed in. In fact, there was no minutes when Monsignor James took out thousands of dollars to pay for his anniversary party. I also did not see the Archbishop's signature when Monsignor James gave away free plots to his family and a friend. Archbishop Apuron, on the other hand, was guilty for trusting the wrong people.

      Delete
    4. Yea, but archbishop did right thing in removing Mon. James for financial mismanagement once he discovered it.

      Delete
    5. Diana, Msgr Benavente's credit card is bad news. He was disciplined and resigned. However his credit card did not cause the financial ruins witnessed by a negative audit report of the money matters of the Archdiocese of Agana. Are you accusing Msgr Benavente by producing a negative audit report? Is not rather the responsibility of the bishop of record at the diocese?

      Delete
    6. Dear Anonymous at 9:44 pm,

      This is why the Archbishop removed Monsignor James. Even the Presbyteral Council at that time agreed that a change was needed. The Archbishop made the change. And rather than quietly accepting the change, Monsignor James went to the social media. This controversy started 4 years ago with the removal of 2 priests. Also, it did not help the Archdiocese when the jungle demands the faithful to stop their monetary contribution. It did not help when some Catholics follow a priest rather Jesus Christ. Priests are supposed to lead the sheep to Christ, NOT to themselves.

      Delete
    7. If the presbyter council agreed that change was needed and change was enacted then why didn't they also come together to reprimand Msgr. James when he went to social media? Them not coming together under the Archbishop only reflects poorly on the Archbishop's leadership. You can blame Msgr. James all you want but it ultimately comes down to there was NO unity to begin with. Why was that?

      Delete
    8. Dear Anonymous at 10:33 pm,

      The real problem is in the hearts of men. The greed, disobedience, envy, jealousy, and pride of some of the priests is the source of the problem. The lack of unity started at the clergy level. It took 2 priests to bring it down to the laity so they could use the laity to fight their battles for them.

      Delete
    9. And what did Archbishop Apuron do to try to fix the lack of unity "at the clergy level"? What was done before these priests took it to the laity?

      All I see is that had Archbishop Apuron created an "environment" of trust and obedience "at the clergy level" prior to those 2 priests going that far it may have not gone down to the laity. So, you can't blame the laity without looking at the connections:

      Archbishop Apuron -> Clergy -> Laity

      Archbishop Apuron × Clergy x Laity

      When the link to the head is broken, the body becomes paralyzed.

      Isn't it time for you to let go and see that Archbishop Byrnes is trying to restore that link? You publicly pointing out Archbishop Byrnes' fault does nothing to help the situation. You did exactly what those 2 priests did a few years ago. Instead of taking your problem to the bishop yourself, you went straight to the public sphere with this blog post.

      To put your words/judgment back at you, Archbishop Apuron is using you to fight his battles.

      Delete
    10. Dear Anonymous at 7:15 am,

      My response is in the following weblink:

      https://neocatechemunal.blogspot.com/2017/07/my-response.html

      Delete
  14. So if you have all the facts file a police report

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Dear Anonymous at 9:17 pm,

      That was already done. Unfortunately, that should have been done the moment the financial mismanagement was discovered, not three years after.

      Delete
    2. a priest who let a rapist and murderer in Church Grounds, and a priest who spend Church money like Donald Trump

      Delete
  15. Diana is right. You don't start a year of reparation by criticizing the former archbishop. Byrnes got in over his head. He was supposed to update the media on Apuron's canonical trial. It wasn't necessary to give his opinion on Apuron's return. That isn't his decision to make anyway. Byrnes only deepened the division with his negative criticisms of Apuron. So much for his year of reparation.

    ReplyDelete
  16. Perhaps, now AB Byrnes would look at his own leadership before criticizing another archbishop's leadership. His leadership to his year of reparation didn't start out on the right foot.

    ReplyDelete
  17. Diana, Archbishop Byrnes was talking about the situation and not the person. Where is the judgement? He said that if he comes back, it will be a mess in the island, (his personal opinion).

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Dear Anonymous at 1:28 am,

      Archbishop Byrnes stated, "I think it would be a disaster if Archbishop Apuron were to return as bishop of record."

      It is very clear from that quoted statement that he was criticizing Archbishop Apuron. If he was talking about a situation, the NAME of a person would not be mentioned.

      Delete