Brothers and sisters, let us continue to pray for our Church and Archbishop Byrnes. Let us also follow in the footsteps of Christ who taught us to love and pray for those who persecute us. Let us not be ungrateful for the things given to us for God has worked many miracles in and through us. We are His witnesses. So, let us continue to be grateful and to be his legacy.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
April 4, 2019
PRESS RELEASE
Statement of Archbishop Anthony Sablan Apuron, OFM Cap. D.D.
I am deeply saddened by the decision of the Holy Father to confirm the decision of the court of first instance. I lodged an appeal against that decision last year because I am innocent and the sentence of the court of first instance had vindicated me declaring non credible the majority of the charges made against me: I believe that the facts and evidence presented demonstrated my total innocence. In addition to the pattern of contradictions evident in the accusations laid against me, my hopes for a successful appeal were supported by what I considered to be definitive new evidence which illustrated what I have always asserted to be a coordinated campaign against me.
The pontifical secret prevents me from litigating my good name in public, but I wish to take this opportunity to offer my deepest thanks to the many individuals who have privately and publicly come forward in my defense, despite threats and the climate of fear on my beloved home of Guam. This climate, - shown by the local media, - which hampered the work of the court of first instance, testifies to the presence of a pressure group that plotted to destroy me, and which has made itself clearly known even to authorities in Rome. Several persons have told me - with great pain and fear and asking me not to reveal their names - they had been asked to make allegations against me, even offered money.
Child sexual abuse is an abhorrent crime that cries to heaven for vengeance. The desperate need for justice and compassion for the survivors is fundamental. So too is the urgent need to fight this evil always and everywhere through a transparent and courageous search for the truth.
The sentence of the Holy Father concludes my search for justice in the canonical forum: I owe His Holiness my obedience as a bishop, priest and son of the Church. I totally submit to the judgment of the Holy Father as I thank him for allowing me to continue serving as a priest and archbishop without insignia. This sentence exiles me from my beloved Guam: a penalty analogous to a death sentence for me. I lose my homeland, my family, my church, my people, even my language, and I remain alone in complete humiliation, old and in failing health.
I offer this suffering for the Holy Father: may the Lord guide him at this difficult time at the helm of the Church; I offer my suffering to my accusers and to those who have plotted for my removal: may the Lord fill them with everything they want and pray - Father, forgive them for they do not know what they do.
I hope that one day new witnesses, who have been prevented from coming forward by the atmosphere of fear and intimidation, will yet fully vindicate my name. I also pray for my accusers and for those who have plotted against me. We will each meet before that final tribunal where the full truth will be laid bare before the Supreme Judge.
I pray unceasingly for the Holy Church and I look forward to the justice that awaits me beyond this valley of tears: when I awake I will be satisfied with your face, oh Lord.
Dear Diana, the weight of Pope Francis' decision will reverberate in the Catholic Church of Guam in the years coming.
ReplyDeleteDear Zoltan,
DeleteI'm sure many are wondering why he wasn't defrocked as Cardinal McCarrick was. I don't know what God has planned, but we only need to trust in Him.
Dear Diana,
DeleteOne possibility that has been suggested about why Archbishop Apuron wasn't defrocked like Cardinal McCarrick is because your organization had someone close to the Pope working on Archbishop Apuron's case. I've heard that Cardinal Filoni wanted to make sure that the Archbishop's sentence would not prevent him from ministering within the NCW. So it would make sense that he would not be defrocked.
As it is there's a lot of criticism about the fact that Archbishop Apuron wasn't laicized since he was found guilty of the sexual abuse of minors while McCarrick's victims were adults. People have challenged the Pope's Zero Tolerance Policy and have called it into question since Archbishop Apuron was the first US Bishop to be convicted of canonical crimes related to child sexual abuse. According to at least one source, the penalty for the Archbishop was decided even before McCarrick's.
God works in mysterious ways and this is really one of them.
Dear Not Wondering But Trusting,
DeleteYou stated: "One possibility that has been suggested about why Archbishop Apuron wasn't defrocked like Cardinal McCarrick is because your organization had someone close to the Pope working on Archbishop Apuron's case."
So, where did you get this information? Certainly not from any news report. You got it from the jungle. You also stated that Cardinal McCarrick was found guilty of sexually abusing only adults and NOT minors. Where did you get this information? Don't you read the news? Cardinal McCarrick was charged with sexually abusing MINORS and adults. According to news report:
"The Vatican laicized Theodore McCarrick, an 88-year-old former cardinal, the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith announced in February 2019. The top Vatican doctrinal office had investigated charges against McCarrick and found him guilty of sexual abuse of minors and adults, “with the aggravating factor of the abuse of power.”
https://www.christiancentury.org/article/people/theodore-mccarrick-charged-sexual-abuse
Now please use common sense rather than swallowing everything you read in the jungle. Ask yourself.....do you honestly think that Cardinal Filoni have more power than Pope Francis? What SUBSTANTIAL EVIDENCE does the jungle even have that the NCW had anything to do with the Archbishop's trial? Or are those rumors and assumptions concocted by the jungle to make the NCW look bad? Are these accusations against the NCW used to distract people from questioning who the REAL pressure groups are?
AB Apuron said that he will abide by the Pope's decision and I know he'll do that. In the end, all of us will face the last judgement anyway. God knows our hearts. He knows the truth.
ReplyDeleteI agree, Diana. Whatever God has planned, we only need to place our trust in him. He sees the bigger picture.
The decision is a blow on the Neocatechumenal Way of Gum.
ReplyDeleteDear Anonymous at 2:23 pm,
DeleteIs it? All the more reason to walk. After all, we were witnesses to the fruits and God's miracles during our walk. Didn't our catechists say that we are called to die so that others would be saved? This is our walk. We are the light of the world and the salt of the earth.
Dear Diana, by Pope Francis's word I feel overwhelmed and vilified. The decision tells me I have believed to the wrong person all along! I cannot accept that. I am walking because of my Archbishop at the fist place. Tell me, Diana please, what will happen to the communities now?
ReplyDeleteDear Anonymous at 2:47 pm,
DeleteHow long have you been walking? Haven't you learned that we walk for Christ, who has always been there for us? Have you already forgotten the fruits and the miracles God has shown us during our walk?
There were two kinds of people who followed Christ. The first were those who believed that Christ would free them from Roman oppression. The second were those who believed that Christ came to change our hearts so that we become the sons and daughters of God and manifest the light of Christ in us. Which one are You? Continue your walk.
@2:47 pm. When I first got into the NCW, it was cuz of an invitation that was given to me. I went to the catechesis, and since that time I started walking. It didn't have anything to do with Apuron. I didn't even know that Kiko was the founder of the NCW until later on in my walk.
DeleteI am thankful for Apuron for introducing the NCW to Guam. It has helped me and my family. All the years we lived here, we've never been to pilgrimages until the NCW was here. We've learned truly how to pray....and I really mean how to pray.
Ummm Diana, brother tony is forbidden to wear the insignia of archbishop. So basically he’s just a priest not an archbishop.
ReplyDeleteDear Anonymous at 3:15 pm,
DeleteAccording to an news article in Rome:
ROME—An archbishop in Guam who was found guilty of sexual abuse of minors by a Vatican court and permanently removed from his post remains a priest with the rank of archbishop, underscoring wide inconsistencies in the Catholic Church’s approach to abuse around the world........
In addition to those penalties, which had been announced after the lower-court verdict last year, the Vatican said Archbishop Apuron will be prohibited from using the “insignia attached to the rank of bishop,” such as a miter, pectoral cross, ring or “zucchetto” skullcap.
But he will still be allowed to refer to himself as an archbishop and there are no other restrictions on his movements.
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.wsj.com/amp/articles/vatican-allows-guam-archbishop-to-keep-rank-despite-child-abuse-verdict-11554387325
Yep. He’s still a bishop. It even says so in his letter, which Diana posted.
DeleteUmmmm, Diana, didn’t you say that brother tony was innocent and yet the Vatican upheld the verdict. So do you think he’s still innocent?
DeleteDear Anonymous at 11:11 pm,
DeleteI never said that. 🙄. I follow the rule of law. I have always stated that an accused person is presumed innocent until proven guilty in a court of law. 🙄
Well look at what the Vatican spokesperson said However "sacramentally and juridically he remains bishop", as explained by the ad interim Vatican spokesman Alessandro Gisotti.
DeleteGod is one you should look at EVERYTHING the Vatican spokesperson said:
DeleteThe 73-year-old member of the Order of Friars Minor Capuchin was ordained a bishop in 1984 and he “sacramentally” remains a bishop, Alessandro Gisotti, interim director of the Vatican press office, told reporters April 4.
However, Gisotti added, Apuron has been formally removed from the “office” of archbishop of Agana, where he was installed in 1986, and his removal from “ecclesiastical office” means he may no longer wear the usual “insignia” associated with it, such as a bishop’s ring, miter and staff.
This means Apuron is a Bishop WITHOUT A DIOCESE
Dear Anonymous at 9:38 am,
DeleteAnonymous 3:15 pm was the one who believed that Archbishop Apuron was only a priest and NOT a bishop. God is one was correcting Anonymous 3:15 pm, and God is one is correct. Archbishop Apuron is still a bishop.
God is always full of surprises. I still love Archbishop Apuron. In his 30 years as Archbishop of Guam, he has done lots and lots of good. Look up, dear Archbishop.
ReplyDeleteDiana, what Archbishop Apuron tells in the La Stampa is disheartening:
ReplyDelete"Several people told me - with great pain and fear and asking me not to reveal their names - that they had been invited to make accusations against me, even behind an offer of money."
Is this true? Money was paid to blackmail people to make accusations against an innocent person? Why? In that case, I reckon the Vatican decision could not be fair. I mean I do not blame the Pope. Probably he has never heard the truth. But, how could this be a fair decision then? If those guys offered money behind the back of the Archbishop to accuse him that would be extremely unfair. Not only to him, but unfair to the people of Guam. Who are these guys who make trade on other people's innocence?
https://www.lastampa.it/2019/04/04/vaticaninsider/guam-the-vatican-condemns-the-bishop-for-abuse-apuron-some-groups-wanted-to-destroy-me-V8Ix2OjwVRE3R5m94HMsnM/pagina.html
Anonymous @ 9:11 PM:
DeleteIt’s common knowledge that Apuron blames Tim Rohr for all this (and Diana probably agrees 100%). For some reason Apuron thinks Tim Rohr has such deep pockets and can pay to blackmail people to make the accusations. With all his children I don’t think Tim Rohr had that kind of money to spend on anyone but his family. Just saying.
BTW: If Apuron really wants to clear his name, why doesn’t he have his lawyer file a defamation lawsuit against the person he blames? Apuron doesn’t even have to be here. Guam has entered the 21st century where technology is concerned. Apuron can testify from wherever he is. Apuron should back up his words with action instead of always playing the Blame Game.
Dear Anonymous at 10:15 am,
DeleteTim only had two children to support. The rest of his kids are grown and financially support themselves. Furthermore, his ex-wife alleges that Tim have not been financially supporting them. According to KUAM news:
She maintains she is the "best and safest parent" for their minor children, noting Rohr hasn't provided financial support and ignores his children.
http://www.kuam.com/story/38146317/2018/05/Wednesday/junglewatch-blogger-accused-by-wife
Didn't you know that Archbishop Apuron has told John Toves to stop slandering his name otherwise he would be taken to court? John Toves was given a warning through the Archbishop's lawyer, but Toves continued to make those allegations. Yet, the Archbishop never followed through on filing a defamation lawsuit against Toves. He left it alone perhaps thinking that Toves would simply get tired of it. After all, what was there to gain from Toves who does not have a single dollar to his name? By not bringing a lawsuit against poor little John, Archbishop Apuron turned out to be the better man. And fortunately for John, it was good that he does not have a lawsuit to contend with. John now has a rare form of cancer, which requires his full attention. I pray for him.
Instead, the Archbishop chose to go through a canonical trial in Rome, hoping to clear his name. However, as he pointed out there was a pressure group determined to remove him at any cost, even at the expense of destroying our parishes.....hence the passage of a law, lifting the statutes of limitations.
Dear Diana,
Deletethose people tried to steal the glory of God for themselves by using John Stoves as their surrogate. How meanful was that using someone who had already been afflicted by God? The payment of sin is eternal death. But Archbishop Apuron allowed this to be turned around by not bringing a lawsuit against poor little John. Thus, the glow of eternal life replaced eternal death. In humility, it was the Archbishop who manifested the glory of God by his action and not those who tried to steal the glory of God for themselves.
There's every implication that Apuron was set up. Let's start with the first accuser, John Toves. He said Apuron sexually molested his cousin. But said cousin never came forward and John admitted that he never spoke to his cousin. He never got the info from his cousin nor permission from his cousin to use his name. Then JW and Toves claimed that the cousin don't want to come forward cuz he's too traumatized and would rather forget. REALLY???? And HOW would any of them know how the cousin felt when even John admitted he NEVER spoke to his cousin. Then suddenly after that all these Apuron accusers coming out with the media behind them, reading their written testimonies.
ReplyDeleteDear Anonymous at 7:14 am,
DeleteThat was the reason the media stopped entertaining John Toves. He claimed that his relative was too traumatized to come forward. Then in the Jess Lujan show, John said he never spoke to his relative.
Dear Diana, you owe an apology to Archbishop Michael Jude Byrnes, who has been leading and crisis managing the archdiocese for the last 2 and a half years. You questioned him in your blog a year ago, when then guilty verdict in the case was first made known.
ReplyDeleteDear Zoltan,
DeleteAt that time, Archbishop Apuron made it known that he intended to appeal the verdict the moment the verdict was made public. Thus, his sentence did not take effect until after the conclusion of the Appeals. Nevertheless, Archbishop Byrnes immediately removed himself as "Coadjutor" and took Apuron's title for himself when the Appeals has not even begun.
Canon law specifically stated that a Coadjutor takes over as Archbishop of Agana after the seat has been made vacant either by the removal, retirement, or resignation of Archbishop Apuron. NOTHING in Canon law says that an Appeals make the seat vacant. Thus, I have a right to question his move in automatically taking the title for himself when the Appeals have not yet concluded.
Furthermore, the Vatican never specified what charges Apuron was found guilty at that time. The only thing known at the time was that of the six charges, Apuron was found guiltu of two. Therefore, I have a right to bring into question Byrnes' accusation when the Vatican never specified the exact charges at that time.
Diana, Archbishop Byrnes held a press conference. Here is a question he got:
DeleteREPORTER: "What is the archdiocese's response to Apuron maintaining his innocence?"
AB: "I'm sad. I don't think that's right."
REPORTER: "Were you surprised that he did not even apologize to the victims in Guam in general?"
AB: "Sadly no."
What does this mean? Would Archbishop Byrnes still blame Archbishop Apuron?
Dear Anonymous at 1:03 pm,
DeleteAbsolutely not. Now that the Appeals trial has been concluded and the verdict has been upheld, Archbishop Byrnes is entitled to his opinion. Previously, I had condemned him for making an unfair judgement against his brother bishop when the Appeals has not been concluded and the Vatican said nothing regarding the charges he was guilty of.
"Previously, I had condemned him for making an unfair judgement against his brother bishop."
DeleteThat is right. He was not right to say that. His brother bishop was considered innocent at the court of law until a final verdict has not been made. Everybody has a right to defend his good name, as his brother bishop tried to do! Is this too hard to accept for them? Nobody has a right to make judgment on his own before the final verdict was ever officially published.
Dear Anonymous at April 6, who are you to say what is right and what is not? Pope Francis has made a verdict and that is right! If someone is guilty, then that person was guilty then and has been guilty ever since then. Those who said he was not, were in error, need to repent and need correction.
DeleteDear Anonymous at 3:19 pm,
DeleteWho under this thread said that Pope Francis was wrong?
This press release is just beautiful. It shows the maturity of Archbishop Apuron. It is indicative of his faith in God. May God bless him always. This new law concerning the use of marijuana in our island would never have become operative if Apuron was still an Archbishop. Now that he has been removed, all the gates of hell has been opened. By the way, is it not sad also that the former RMS Seminary location is being sold for a pittance? Where are the financial advisors of the Archdiocese. Such a big building in such a prime location.... Sad. Sad. Sad.
Delete