Victims are not only those who were sexually abused. Victims can also be those who were falsely accused. A civilized country is governed by the rule of law where the accused is presumed innocent until proven guilty in a court of law. A civilized country follows proper procedures to obtain impartiality when meting out justice. Unfortunately, there are mobs in our society who have already branded the person "guilty" without the due process of a trial. There are those who take the word of alleged victims without any substantial evidence and would rather forgo any investigation to find out the truth. Such groups would rather go back to the dark ages. Some of the alleged victims of Archbishop Apuron say they felt victimized all over again simply because the Archbishop proclaimed his innocence and offered his prayers for his persecutors. See the news report here. Imagine that. How is it that one feels victimized over such "words"? Where was Roy Quintanilla when Vatican Insider reported the following in their news report (the bold is mine)????
The ad appeared over the course of a month in every newspaper. After a few days, four people came forward, among them Roy Taitague Quintanilla, who alleged having been abused forty years earlier when, at the age of 12, he was an altar boy for Father Apuron who, according to his allegations, had taken him by night in his own home to rape him. However, Vatican Insider has learned that statements were made by multiple former altar boys to the tribunal who maintain that they had never seen Quintanilla in the parish and that the parish activities were always carried out in groups and never alone.Why didn't Roy Quintanilla come out then and express how he was victimized all over again when this information was published in Vatican Insider?
Thank you Pope Francis for seeing that a victim is not only those who were sexually abused, but can also be those who were falsely accused. According to the New York Times:
Pope Francis has accused abused victims in Chile of slandering a bishop who they say protected a pedophile priest, upending his efforts to rehabilitate the Catholic Church's reputation while visiting South America.
Francis told reporters Thursday there was not a shred of evidence against Bishop Juan Barros Madrid, who victims of the Rev. Fernando Karadima, Chile's most notorious priest, have accused of being complicit in his crimes.
"The day someone brings me proof against Bishop Barros, then I will talk," Francis said before celebrating Mass outside the northern Chilean city of Iquique. "But there is not one single piece of evidence. It is all slander. Is that clear?"
Bravo.......is that Clear Tim Rohr And the Jungle!!!
ReplyDeleteYou should even include Byrnes is that clear Byrnes do you hear that loud and clear Byrnes stop slandering our archbishop
DeleteDear God is one,
DeleteArchbishop Byrnes did not slander Archbishop Apuron. Taking a victim-centered stand is not slander.
He is slandering because remember he’s the one that started saying that word against Archbishop Anthony he was the one that said the d word
DeleteDear God is one,
DeleteArchbishop Byrnes did not slander Archbishop Apuron. When he said that Archbishop Apuron's return would be a disaster, that is not slander. That is a recommendation for exile. Basically, what he essentially did was exile his brother bishop into exile from his home, his family and friends, and from his people.
Same 'coward' technique used by the JW to distort facts, insinuations without proof and relentless misinformation in order to destroy the Catholic Church's authority and further undermine her moral role in the World.
ReplyDeleteThe same old Devil cloaked as an angel-of-truth... nothing has changed in 2000 years... the Church is STILL being persecuted.
-Just Helping
Tim R. has provided you with facts and all. Where are yours? This blog is a reactionist blog. Nothing substantial to exonerate AAA.
ReplyDeleteDear Anonymous at 8:18 am,
DeleteOn the contrary, Tim Rohr only twists the documents around. And when he got caught twisting the documents, he resorted to changing his story. A man who constantly change his story is a man who has something to hide. He has no substantial evidence to show. That is why he was constantly yelling "guilty" before the canonical trial even started. In other words, he took away the person's right to due process.
No Tim is just desperate because he already knows that archbishop is innocent and like how pope Francis said it just to slander our very own archbishop because when archbishop came out to say that he’s innocent what did Timmy do after he came out he was using Byrnes words which I’m not going to say
DeleteDear God is one,
DeleteTim is also blaming the accusers. He is now saying that he is not the one who accuse the Archbishop of sexual abuse. He does not want to take any responsibility.
Rohr only thinks about himself, and he will allow his friends to fall to save him own skin. This is a man who associated himself with SNAP. When he learned that SNAP was in a lawsuit, he put a distance between himself and SNAP and even criticized them. The same thing will happen with him and the alleged victims. In fact, it is already happening. According to Rohr:
"I didn't accuse Apuron of molesting anyone. John Toves, Roy Quintanilla, Walter Denton, Doris Concepcion, Roland Sondia, and Mark Apuron did."
Where my Comment ?
ReplyDeleteDear Anonymous at 4:22 pm,
DeleteWhich comment would that be? If you had chosen a username, I would be able to tell you. However, if you were the one who made a comment, in which you inadvertently revealed the location of the Archbishop, it was not published. I do not think Archbishop Apuron would want his whereabouts published.
You're right Diana thanks for not publishing it
DeleteFrancis isn’t accusing the victims of slander over the allegations of sexual abuse itself. Quite the contrary. The Vatican found Fr. Karadima guilty of sexually abusing minors. He was ordered into retirement, to lead an isolated life of prayer and was to stay away from the victims. Far far away.
ReplyDeletePope Francis is not attacking the victims by accusing them of fabricating the sexual abuse, rather he is confronting those who accuse Fr. Karadima's Bishiop of having knowledge of the abuse yet turning a blind eye.
There is a clear distinction of what Pope Francis is saying as opposed to what you are attempting to correlate.
Simply, Pope Francis believes the accusations of abuse at the hands of the priest, but not the accusations of a deliberate cover up by his bishop.
Be righteous and honest by printing this clarification.
Dear To be clear,
DeleteYou missed the point. They were making FALSE accusations against a bishop without any substantial evidence.
Your just being desperate because like what’s going on here with our archbishop whose being slandered here on Guam because look at what’s happening deacon frank is being attacked because of his support for Archbishop Anthony and Byrnes already knows this and Byrnes is seeing the good that Archbishop Anthony is doing
DeletePope Francis, on the plane, on his way back to Rome, apologized for his remarks. The way he bluntly defended the Bishop was like a slap in the face to those who truly were sexually abused. He, however, believes the Bishop is innocent, and will continue to do so until proof is provided that the Bishop is not.
ReplyDeleteTruth is important. Lies, destroy.
On a separate issue, I bring up the issue of the alterations to the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass which the NCW follow, believing that they have been approved.
Here, too, truth is important. Here, too, there is no PROOF of approval for these changes . . . No mention in the approved Statutes of 2008, nor the approved Directories of 2010, no dubia, letter, etc. from the Popes. Here, too, lies destroy.
But, there is hope. Where one confesses of wrongdoing, and is repentant, a merciful Lord is there.
Dear Anonymous at 3:34 am,
DeleteCould you please create a username for yourself? First of all, this is what Pope Francis said according to news media:
""Here I have to apologize because the word 'proof' hurt them, it hurt a lot of abused people," Francis told reporters late Sunday aboard the papal plane on a flight from Lima to Rome. "I know how much they suffer. And to hear that the pope told them to their face that they need to bring a letter with proof? It's a slap in the face."
But the pope also added that he believed Barros was not guilty and that he had no intention of removing him from his post heading the Osorno diocese."
http://beta.latimes.com/world/mexico-americas/la-fg-pope-apology-chile-20180122-story.html
The Pope stands by what he says. In other words, he never retracted his remarks. He stands by them. His apology is only because the word "proof" hurt them. That is a similar apology Pope Benedict made to the Muslims. Pope Benedict apologized to the Muslims that his remarks hurt them, but he never retracted his remarks. He still stood by it.
There is an NCW in Rome. By May, they will be celebrating their 50th anniversary. And still no correction from Rome. If the NCW is really doing something wrong, Rome would have corrected them. The Cardinal who was on Guam celebrated the Eucharist exactly the way we had always done, and he was sent by the Pope to ensure that the NCW was following their statutes and directory. And there was no correction from him as well. In fact, he celebrated the Eucharist exactly as we had before Archbishop Byrnes changed it. The NCW in Guam have always followed the Bishop. We followed Archbishop Apuron. And when Archbishop Byrnes made changes in the Eucharist, we followed him as well. The fact that we have always followed the Archbishop of Agana is the proof. We are not here to follow YOU. YOU are not the Bishop. End of story.
Right on Diana!!!
Delete@ January 23, 2018 at 3:34 AM - Go to ROME and ask them yourself whether the Neocatechumenal way is approve or not? Include a 4 dead Popes which one of them is also a Saint. Funny 3;34AM smells like CCOG. Perhaps it is CCOG tone.
DeleteLuis L. Carino
The alterations that occur in the NCW community Eucharist are also available for anyone else in any other Eucharist with discretion of Priest and approval of the Bishop. The one and only allowance that the NCW received was that for the distribution of communion, the communicant remain in their place while the priest approaches them with the sacred species.
ReplyDeleteArchbishop Byrnes instructed the NCW communities to utilize a consecrated Altar during the regular Saturday night celebrations. This doesnt mean though that ALL Eucharists MUST be on a CONSECRATED altar from now on. The Universal Church continues to allow the Mass to be celebrated in different spaces, places where there is no consecrated altar.
The 1 year moratorium on the NCW is fast approaching its end and til this day there has been no news on the review from Deacon Steve Martinez. Is it because as we have always mentioned, we are Catholic and do not teach otherwise or anything contrary to what the church has taught through scripture and tradition.
The NCW isnt going anywhere. It is the responsibility of the Bishop to support and shepherd his flock. As long as Rome approves of it, it would create scandal for the Bishop to say otherwise. The circumstances are different, we are not asking him to allow the NCW into the Diocese, it already existed here way before he came. So he must support it. Supporting it does not mean that he must promote it. It just means that he must take into consideration its existence and avoid any decisions that may directly affect the members of the NCW.
For those of us who walk in the NCW, we may not agree with Archbishop Byrnes but we must remain obedient to him,and we have thus far.
I look forward to Archbishop Byrnes making the sacrifice to do what is right and just despite the pockets that control him at the chancery. It is very obvious.
Pas!
-Jokers Wild
Looks like Tim coming after to you Diane Tim the Saints who made the church lose its property
ReplyDeleteDiana re "The Cardinal who was on Guam celebrated the Eucharist exactly the way we had always done, and he was sent by the Pope to ensure that the NCW was following their statutes and directory."
ReplyDeleteUnfortunately, the Cardinal was mistakenly following the unapproved "proposed" Statutes of 2002 and not the approved Statutes of 2008. I don't fault him in this regard, he probably didn't even realize this. There was a lot of misinformation circulating and it would be very easy to get excited about a group who was bringing many to the Lord. Even the Popes were excited about this. The Popes, however, did expect compliance by the NCW to the approved Liturgical Books. Peace. May we all be one.
Another View
PS re your "We are not here to follow YOU. YOU are not the Bishop. End of story."
I don't expect you to follow me. I'm just providing you (as charitably as possible) with information (from the Popes) that no one in the NCW is passing on to you. It is then up to you to follow your own decision.
Dear Anonymous at 5:07 pm,
DeleteYou stated: "Unfortunately, the Cardinal was mistakenly following the unapproved "proposed" Statutes of 2002 and not the approved Statutes of 2008."
Did you see the cardinal follow the 2002 with your own eyes? Do you have a video tape of the cardinal following the 2002 statutes? Or is this a story you invented to suit your agenda? Where is the charity in that?
Any priest/bishop/cardinal who is celebrating the NCW Mass with all its alterations is PROOF that they are following the 2002 unapproved Statutes, albeit they made not realize it. The approved Statutes of 2008 do not contain any approval/permission for the many alterations that the NCW still insist upon. A matter of fact, the 2002 unapproved version of the Statutes is 'easily accessible' on the NCW Official Website, whereas the approved Statutes of 2008 is nowhere to be seen. This unapproved Statutes of 2002 is the proposed Statutes given to Rome for approval by the NCW. However, the only Statutes that were approved, was the "corrected" version by Rome in 2010.
DeleteDiana, in 2015 you blogged an article "Post Scriptum" from Giuseppe and Claudia Gennarini (NCW)in which Pope Francis himself apparently said, "The Neocatechumenal Way is the one that knows the most about the Christian Initiation. Consult them and if necessary, CORRECT THE CATECHISTS, THE COMMUNITIES.....BECAUSE TO CORRECT IS TO LOVE....BUT CORRECT WITH THE STATUTES IN YOUR HANDS."
It appears that Archbishop Byrnes is doing just that - correcting what is wrong in their Mass. The NCW should be overjoyed that the Archbishop loves the NCW that he does this FOR THEM (not against them.)
Furthermore,in 2010 upon the approval of the Directories, Kiko said "It has been revised by the Holy See and completed. It's correct. This is from the Church."
"The Directory," he said, "will be very important because now a parish priest who says something, we can say, "Look Father, what it says here on page 427, this was approved by the Church."
To date, the NCW has not, nor can it, show the pages and script in either the "approved" Statutes of 2008, nor the "approved" Directories of 2010 for the many illicit alterations in their Mass. This is not a story invented.
My agenda??? I don't have any but the words from the Instruction "Redemptionis Sacramentum" prepared by the Congregation for Divine Worship and the Discipline of the Sacraments (Cardinal Arinze) by mandate of the Supreme Pontiff John Paul II in collaboration with the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith (Cardinal Ratzinger), approved by the same Pontiff on the Solemnity of St. Joseph, March 19, 2004, and ORDERED it to be published and to be OBSERVED immediately by all concerned.... in which is stated:
(183) In an altogether particular manner, let everyone do all that is in their power to ensure that the Most Holy Sacrament of the Eucharist will be protected from any and every irreverence or distortion and that all abuses be thoroughly corrected. This is a most serious duty incumbent upon EACH and EVERY ONE, and ALL are bound to carry it out without any favouritism."
Dear Anonymous at 2:21 am,
DeletePlease read correctly. I did not post the Post Scriptum for you to twist. The pope said those words to the priests and bishops. It is the bishop who has to correct the catechists, not YOU. So again, the NCW follows only the Bishop, not YOU. And if you think the bishop and cardinals are wrong, that is your problem. As I said, the pope assigned a cardinal to ensure that the NCW was in compliance with Rome and he celebrated the Eucharist with us using the 2008 approved statutes. We know because we were there and saw it for ourselves while you invented stories to suit your agenda. When Archbishop Byrnes instructed us to celebrated in front of a consecrated altar, we obeyed because he is the Coadjutor Bishop of Agana. And if Archbishop Apuron returns as Archbishop of Agana, the NCW will follow his instructions. We do not follow you.
Yet another vulgar analogy of you Diane posted in JW by Tim Rohr... the "Vulgarian"
ReplyDeleteCould it be a Freudian syndrome that every 'name-calling' Mr Rohr uses has to be vulgar in nature? What does that tell us about his character? Immature? juvenile? or more reflecting 'anger', 'vengeance', 'wrath'???
Whatever the source of his hatred we must pray for him and his family... he too is a son of God, albeit a very hateful one.
Dear Diana,
ReplyDeletere your "I did not post the Post Scriptum for you to twist. The pope said those words to the priests and bishops. It is the bishop who has to correct the catechists, not YOU....."
Dear Diana, it was not ME who corrected the NCW in regards to this Mass. It was Archbishop Byrnes. (He also was sent by Pope Francis.)
Re your "as I said, the pope assigned a cardinal to ensure that the NCW was in compliance with Rome and he celebrated the Eucharist with us using the 2008 approved statutes"
Sorry Diana, the 2008 approved and corrected Statutes had "deleted" the reference to the NCW-style of reception of Communion that the 2002 NCW "unapproved" Statutes proposed. Neither are the many other alterations in the Mass listed in the 2008 approved Statutes.
Dear Anonymous at 3:33 pm,
DeleteCould you please create a username? Archbishop Byrnes did not correct the NCW. All he did was appease the Junglewatch Nation in the hopes that it will bring unity. However, his appeasement did not work. CCOG is calling on Archbishop Byrnes to remove the NCW and the RMS priests from all parishes.
Dear Diana,
ReplyDeleteI previously used a username, but you still addressed me as anonymous; therefore, I will remain anonymous!
Please understand, the "corrections" Archbishop Byrnes gave to the NCW in regards to their Mass, would be the same corrective love he would give any parish he found altering what is found in the approved Liturgical Books.
Yes, correction, is a way that hopefully makes us one in Christ. That is why, I also believe, that he will not remove the NCW and the RMS priests from all parishes. I believe he wishes for each of us to accept one another truly as brothers and sisters in Christ. Therefore, those opposed to the NCW movement will need to acknowledge the good in the movement, praying for what needs to be changed to be graciously and gratefully accepted.
And, those opposing the NCW MUST ALSO graciously and gratefully accept correction and the decisions from Archbishop Byrnes.
This, with BOTH parties who love God and fear offending Him, can be done with His love, help and mercy.
Dear Anonymous at 2:17 am,
DeleteI must have missed your username. I would prefer that you create a username.
Don't you think you are being hypocritical? The NCW is already following what Archbishop Byrnes has instructed us to do, so why tell us to do what we are already doing?
You stated:"And, those opposing the NCW MUST ALSO graciously and gratefully accept correction and the decisions from Archbishop Byrnes."
REALLY??? I do not see anyone including Archbishop Byrnes correcting CCOG when they demanded the removal of the RMS priests and the NCW from the parishes. Furthermore, look at what you have capitalized. You capitalized, "NCW MUST ALSO". Don't you think you should have capitalized, "THOSE OPPOSING". Do not hide your malice with sweet words. It is unbecoming of a Christian.
And that end of story
ReplyDeleteDiana, how make user name
ReplyDeleteDear Anonymous at 3:15 pm,
DeleteBefore posting a comment, click on the arrow that says "reply as". Then choose name. Create any name you want for yourself. If you do not want to reveal who you are, do not use your real name. You do not need to type URL address. Then click continue and post your message.
No it don't say reply as.
ReplyDeleteDear Anonymous at 1:56 pm,
DeleteIf you are having problems, then simply write your username after your comment such as the following:
"No it don't say reply as.
- Chamorro Islander"
The username above is "Chamorro Islander."